MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4321354327 · doi:10.1353/nin.2023.0020

Swing and a Hit: Nine Innings of What Baseball Taught Me by Paul O’Neill and Jack Curry

2023· article· en· W4321354327 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anna R. Newton

Notice bibliographique

RevueNine · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueAmerican Sports and Literature
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLeagueArtCompetition (biology)PsychologyArt history

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Swing and a Hit: Nine Innings of What Baseball Taught Me by Paul O’Neill and Jack Curry Anna R. Newton Paul O’Neill and Jack Curry. Swing and a Hit: Nine Innings of What Baseball Taught Me. New York: Hachette Book Group, 2002. 247 pp. Paperback, $29.00. Paul O’Neill’s book is a clear, concise retelling of his baseball-player career. He played for Cincinnati from 1985 to 1992 and the Yankees from 1993 to 2001. He begins by describing the influence of his father “for every at bat” (2) of his major league career. He credits his drive and focus for playing well to his competition with his four older brothers for any playing time at all. While the book is purportedly a story in nine innings, the information quickly becomes rather repetitious across all the chapters. The authors thoroughly dissect the art and science of hitting as O’Neill understands and deployed it. Additionally, O’Neill discusses the impact of his personality in the dugout and on the team. Pete Rose describes O’Neill as “one of the most competitive guys I ever managed” (20), while Paul describes himself as playing with intensity and obsessive about being prepared (75). He is enthusiastic about his idols in baseball and spends a lot of time describing their approaches to the game. He singles out Derek Jeter, Bernie Williams, Randy Johnson, and Joe Torre. In his encounters with these heroes as well as teammates he describes his takeaway from his analysis of the player. He offers his opinions of other players’ skills, approaches to playing, and personalities. The “Extra Innings” final chapter covers O’Neill’s seven pieces of advice for young hitters. This is the most rewarding part of the book as he clearly describes his approach to his career in the form of advice for ballplayers. It is a rather humanizing aspect of his personality and impacts the value for the reader. This chapter is where we learn best what baseball taught Paul O’Neill. The book is a detailed retelling of his playing career. The nine plus one innings/chapters of the book could benefit from some larger context information [End Page 137] about the world of baseball and how it has morphed over the seventeen years that he played. His only reference to events happening outside baseball is a brief discussion of the impact of the 9/11 attacks on the New York fans, the schedule, and a short statement about being a “changed person” (211). In spite of his acknowledged tight focus and disciplined approach to playing as well as his outbursts on the field, O’Neill describes himself as a reserved person (198). He was genuinely surprised when the Yankees honored him with a plaque in their Monument Park in 2014. The last pages of his story where he describes his emotions on the day of the plaque presentation are the warmest and most human in the entire book. His stated reserved personality prevents his story from being as compelling as it could be. The book could be a richer story and have greater impact with more personal and worldview details about O’Neill’s larger world of baseball as a sport and the times during which he played; however, it does provide insight from one of the game’s more consistent players from the 1990s. Copyright © 2023 University of Nebraska Press

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,264
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,993

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0080,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,206
Écart entre enseignants0,198 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueNineMême sujetAmerican Sports and LiteratureTravaux en français237 207