The World Baseball Classic: the production and politics of a new global sports spectacle
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The number of global sport spectacles has risen significantly in the last part of the twentieth century and into the twenty-first. These monolithic forms of sport-related mega-events purport to bring together the world’s practitioners of a particular sport or, in a more festival-style organization, a plethora of sports all celebrated in one massive spectacular display. The first such events established themselves in the early twentieth century but only truly gained worldwide recognition after World War II. Among them are the all-toofamiliar FIFA World Cup and the Olympic Games. Others are more recent inventions, such as the Rugby World Cup and the World Baseball Classic. While the Rugby World Cup is no more than three decades old, the World Baseball Classic has not even existed for one. Having discussed the Rugby World Cup elsewhere (Carter 2011: 21-2), thischapter examines the World Baseball Classic (WBC). The WBC is the premier international baseball tournament and features the best players in the world competing for their home countries and territories. More than 1.5 million fans from all over the world have attended the tournament games, held in March 2006 and 2009. The next World Baseball Classic will be played in March 2013 and thereafter the tournament will be held every four years. The WBC is a 16-team international baseball tournament. Participation for the first two Classics was on an invitation-only basis. Organized into four regional groups of four teams, the preliminary round is a round-robin series of three games between four teams in which the top two then proceed to a single elimination stage. These initial round-robin games are held simultaneously in four locations scattered around the world. The single elimination rounds begin with eight teams, two from each regional group, and whittle their way down until a champion can be declared. In the 2006 Classic, the sites were Tokyo (Japan), San Juan (Puerto Rico), Anaheim (California) and Lake Buena Vista (Florida) for the round-robin games, with the single elimination games played in San Diego (California). The 2009 Classic incorporated a number of changes. These included a double elimination framework after the round-robin play to determine the final four teams. The final four then played single elimination games to determine the champion. The sites of the round-robin phase included Tokyo and San Juan, as in 2006,but moved to Toronto (Canada) and Mexico City (Mexico). The double elimination brackets were played in San Diego (California) and Miami (Florida) and the final four teams played the single elimination bracket in Los Angeles (California). As in 2006, games were played the same day at multiple sites. Thus, the WBC is truly a global competition in that its games take place in several locales on the same day. As the various changes make clear, the WBC did not just magically becomethe most important international baseball event. It took considerable effort for the formation of this global sport spectacle. Clearly, the formation of any global sport spectacle is not a straightforward exercise and is rife with numerous stakeholders with different, potentially conflicting, agendas. These competing agents and their motivations form the central aspect of this chapter. A theoretical overview of the interrelated concepts of spectacle and global sport provides the analytical framework for understanding the machinations behind the emergence of the WBC. The history of the globalization of baseball and the politics involved in the initial production of the WBC are then discussed. The chapter concludes by looking at the current issues faced by the WBC organizers as the 2013 Classic rapidly approaches.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,009 | 0,008 |
| Communication savante | 0,017 | 0,009 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,009 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,041 | 0,004 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».