MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Programmes of frivolity on ice? Hockey, business, diasporic identity and apartheid in South Africa, 1936-1992

2020· article· en· W3119526563 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hendrik Snyders

Bibliographic record

VenueHistoria · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIce hockeyBoycottPoliticsPolitical scienceEconomic historyEconomyHistoryLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

South Africa has a surprisingly long history of the sport perhaps most usually associated with the northern hemisphere: ice hockey. Ice skating was first introduced in the country in the last decade of the nineteenth century as a commercial venture. Entrepreneurs built ice rinks for profit-making purposes and brought showmen from overseas to demonstrate the sport. An ancillary activity was the establishment of ice hockey clubs in 1936 and beyond. Given the strong profit motive, personal and tactical differences between the chief investors and sports administrators inevitably left its imprint on the sport. The extensive involvement of German, Canadian and Swiss immigrants throughout the twentieth century also co-determined the eventual character of the sport. From its inception through to 1991, ice hockey practised racial segregation, operated within apartheid laws and remained an exclusively white activity. Unsurprisingly, the apartheid ice rink also became embroiled in global politics, became a target of the worldwide anti-apartheid sports boycott and was excluded from all international competition from the late 1960s until 1991. This article reclaims some of ice hockey's neglected history in South Africa and investigates the interplay of sport, ice rink entrepreneurship, imperial and foreign identity, and apartheid politics during the twentieth century.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.729
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistoriaSame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207