VOX scientifically confirms furpuck is the easiest sport

LUCKPUCK TAKES NO SKILL


AHAHAHAHAH

>Vox

>>>/leftypol/

this

>Leftypol
>Vox

Do people really not know the difference between center-left neoliberals and Marxists?

What they call "skill" in basketball is actually just being tall.

of course they dont lol

>vox

They're not wrong, it's why basketball playoffs are boring to watch, there's zero luck involved and with seven game series it's almost always obvious which team will win because the sport can actually be mastered and exploited consistently. Injuries are the only thing that can change a series.

>sport played by white normies is luck based
>sport played by niggers is skill based
>sport played by nerds who write for vox is the skillest

Ok.

as a former basketball player, football (soccer) requires much more skill
i mean, there are professional basketball players, playing in the best league in the world and paid millions that can't hit a decent free throw

being tall or heavy is not a skill

>nerds who write for vox

stupid dumb hue did you even watch the video
this wasn't a investigation by vox it's from a book

Curry isnt very tall. And many tall guys are shit at basketball.

>Baseball has more skill than Football

Haha eat shit NFL

According to Sup Forumsreddit American Democrats are left-wing.

lmao SEETHING

How do they explain Leicester winning the EPL last year?

And combat sports are so far to the right that they aren't even on the image

>EPL
>good

So is this based off who wins a championship (which I would understand)? Or an individual game(which makes no fucking sense)?

the ball has "premier league" on it.

Motorsports > Athletics >>> ball "sports"

You have like a 20% chance of playing in the NBA if you're born 7 ft tall in the US. It really helps to be tall. It really helps.

Watch the video dipshit

no

what video

How do you want quantify luck?

THE video dipshit

I didn't know 'the lottery' was a sport.

not real sports

>He paid for a pass since 2012
How embarrassing...

to be fair there aren't any links here

Vox are very left-wing. VERY left-wing. I guess they're not explicitly Marxist, although I'm sure they sympathise with those ideas.

>According to Sup Forumsreddit American Democrats are left-wing.
Of course they are you fucking idiot, they're the left-wing party.

You could call Hillary Clinton rather laissez-faire economically, but still the Democrats are the more socialist party of the two aren't they? Bernie is essentially a socialist and he ran for the Presidency on the Democratic platform didn't he?

Anyway I bet you're a commie faggot aren't you so fuck off

Go and support FC Pauli you fucking faggot

>He doesn't know the video
Faggot

>NBA
>blackest league
>requires most skill
>NHL
>whitest league
>requires least skill

nice try Vox

rofl handegg/luckswing/furpuck faggots just got BTFO
Football scientifically confirmed for best sport
(apehoop being too predictable)

That one video, the ultimate one

Stop playing like you don't know what video we mean

>basketball takes more skill than football

Everyone who is on the left sympathizes with Marxist ideals through the application of Critical Theory.
Critical Theory can create an oppressor/oppressed paradigm out of anything because it starts with the assumption that whatever is the most pervasive ethnicity, ideology, religion etc in society is oppressing all other alternatives and must be dismantled.
Whites were oppressive, so they're being ethnically replaced. Christianity was oppressive, so it is being replaced with other religions(Islam). Capitalism is oppressive, so it must be replaced with communism.

Marx was not a very intellectual thinker as opposed to men like Darwin. Marx lived in a pre-evolution/hard biological science world. He did not understand what he was advocating for, his ideals are unobtainable for many reasons.

look inside your heart user, that's where you'll find the video

>apehoop harder than EPL

no john, you are the demons

>it's another Sup Forums argues pop-politics like sub-50 IQ retards episode
Also Vox is dogshit tier. Sage.

...jesus fucking Christ, lmao.

this is absolutely correct, cause it says Premier League under the football, there's no skill there

implying Drinky and Vardz and all the boys don't have mad skillz and put it on another level.

>going 20MPH on a pair of knives and getting a small piece of rubber into a net guarded by a person in pads that parctically cover the entire net while 5 people physically assault you is the easiest sport

People who have never played hockey have no business commenting on it.

I'm willing to bet most NHL players can take a basketball, step on to a court, and make a shot. I doubt that most NBA players can put on some skates and take a half decent wrist shot

Watch the video dipshit.

...

I'm not giving you more clicks you blatant shill

>Bernie
>socialist

you try kicking a penalty if the goal was about the size of the ball
not that i don't think football takes more skill but for different reasons, free throws are easy but they aren't that easy

Do you seriously need to ask this?

Which vox found so convenient they even reposted it.
>british education

this lol

You obviously never played hockey. Its more than going out and slapping a puck around.

Of course he is. Anyway we probably shouldn't have this discussion on Sup Forums, because I've been banned for non-sports posts on Sup Forums before.

So let's just say that you sound like an FC St. Pauli fan, because that's a sports related comment. Whereas I would be more of a Lazio fan, or a Chelsea fan (I do like Chelsea actually).

This is true
No sport with 100 shots per goal where all goals come from deflections like hockey can be skill based

You guys are fucking retarded. Theyre not saying that basketball takes more skill to play than football or soccer, the point is that the outcome of games is based more on the skill of the players in basketball than in other sports, rather than luck.
'Best' teams usually win in basketball, in soccer it's far easier to get a lucky deflection or two and 'inferior' teams can win

>the easiest sport
The chart doesn't say that. though. All those factors you typed make it more luck-based than skilled-based.

Yeah, the playoffs can be exciting because of this for sure but it's also a very flawed sport in principal, barely watch anymore.

It's not easy but it's still a low talent sport. Few kids outside of Canada and a couple countries in Europe have access to play hockey and even fewer actually do, so the talent pool to choose from is very small relative to other sports.

Then why is chess first? White has a 56% win rate in pro matches, if you're black you have to force a draw.

This is one of the most delusional things I've ever seen.

You could take any 2 hockey teams, put them on a basketball court against each other, and bam, you could have some semblance of a competitive basketball game going on. Same with soccer.

But basketball & football players? LOL. Have those chimps put on skates and get on the ice, and you'd have nothing but pure chaos and garbage.

>nigga ball
>more skills
>vox media

>you'd have nothing but pure chaos and garbage.

no different from any ice hockey game then

That doesn't mean the game requires less skill than apehoop, divegrass, or football, you idiot.

>all goals come from deflections

Yikes.

Fight sports are the purest sports on Earth, you fucking pussy

No u fat nigger

>"Less people play it therefore it's a low talent sport"

You're a fucking idiot. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other.

Are you actually retarded?

No, clearly you are if you stand by that garbage logic.

Found the manlet

smaller talent pool means less talent, what do you not get about this?

>vox

>100 people play hockey
>20 are good at it

>200 people play basketball
>20 are good at it

This is within the realm of possibility you doofus. It's also possible that the most talented hockey player is more talented overall than the most talented basketball player. It's a retarded comparison to be making in the first place, similar to when basketball fags claim a team from one era could/couldn't beat a team from another era.

sure it's possible, but it's extremely unlikely to the point that it's not worth mentioning. The numbers aren't even close. Less than 2 million people worldwide play hockey, that's peanuts compared to any other major sport, the talent pool is tiny

It's a pretty silly statement to make I guess, it's not like the lack of talent in the NHL is evident, obviously those guys are the best of the best, the average person would never be able to do the same things. But statistically, unless you believe that Canadians are the most skilled athletes on Earth for some reason, NHL players are less spectacular compared to the average person than MLB, NBA, NFL or top european soccer league players.

It's also retarded to compare talent between different sports obviously but that's not what I was doing.

The most talented hockey player ever, Gretzky, dreamed of playing for the Detroit Tigers when he was kid. Don't know if that says anything significant about the talent level of the two sports, probably not, but it's interesting.

baseball requires the most skill. everyone knows this. how is being tall a skill? how is being a speedy manlet a skill? how is being a sumo-sized pile of meat a skill?

>handegg is more luck based than luckswing

Are those two groups not basically linked at the hip now and basically belong together, cmon get real

Well I guess a cpu can do it perfectly so....

On that note, when can we replace Lebeta with robots and have AIHoop instead of ApeHoop

have u ever seen a black person try and skate?
every one can run 1/100 can skate
1/1000 can skate good
nice try

neo liberals and marxists couldn't be more opposed to each other

Theoretically you'd think so but you'd be surprised

>It's a "pseudo-intellectuals on Sup Forums try to distinguish ideologies and identify political groups despite knowing nothing" episode

mods, please ban everyone in here. The cringe is too strong with this thread

They all need skill (except top left). What they meant is how much the outcome of the game depends on luck. Basketball has too many points and scoring and thats why luck doesnt plays a big factor while ine the less scoring games (like football and handegg) where only one goal/career (or whatever the fuck you do that gives you points) gives you the win. That scoring chance could be given by a rebounded ball that just happened to fall at your feet/hand. But you still have to be skillful to capitalize on it. I guess hockey has too many collisions and spagetti slipping.

>tfw you didn't even notice this

I guess I'm free now.

The video wasn't even bad. Their final math was probably pretty shit but some principles they mentioned were new to me and obviously worthwhile.

Their rating is of how well a "game measures skill". Pretty on point wording they've got too.

t. a nazi sympathizer who isn't blind to reality

>average NBA height is 6'7
>skill
ok