Sport and the Nation in “Proceso Argentina”: Dictatorship, Media and the Rise of Guillermo Vilas and Carlos Reutemann
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1986, as the final game of the World Cup of soccer wound down, as Argentina emerged victorious for the second time in eight years, the economist and future Argentine foreign Minister Guido di Tella jumped to his feet. To a small group assembled in front of a television set he shouted, “you see! We are a great nation!” Di Tella’s euphoria was widespread in Argentina that day, but scarcely the first link of sport to ideals of nation. For decades, Argentines had tied soccer players, boxers, and other athletes to notions of modernity, tradition, and Argentine identities. Since the 1920s, for example, the archetypal Argentine soccer hero, represented in different players over time, had demonstrated the quintessential “Argentine” traits of high skill, grit, individualism, and a drive to win. During the proceso – the period of the last military dictatorship (1976-1982) – many Argentines found solace, escape, and inspiration in sports at a time of unprecedented political and military violence. At the same time, the military regime invested dramatic importance in the 1978 World Cup of soccer, staged in Argentina, as a marker for Argentine progress and as an event Argentine leaders hoped (in vain) would counter a mounting international chorus against human rights abuses in Argentina.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".