The Medieval Bestseller
I read it somewhere on the Internet...
Friday, March 23, 2007

I fully admit that I am very competitive.

This is probably why I seek Yahoo Fantasy Sports dominance. Last year I came in first in my Fantasy (American) Football league (I don't want to hear anything about unfairness, Tyler) and came in third in my Fantasy NASCAR league last year (I was in first for a good poriton of the season but lost it in the last few races). This year's Fantasy NASCAR is off to a good start - thanks to some deft driver maneuvering whilst I was in Scotland (just one reason why finding wireless internet was important), I have moved from third place to first place.

My competitive nature is also probably why I love playing and watching sports of all sorts (especially close games--there's nothing more exhilarating than a tie) and also love playing board and card games not as much. My brother and I grew up playing various games and, being the older sister, my intent was always to squash him in strategy and intellect. Which is probably why I'm not as big of a fan of video games - my brother can run circles around me in video games...there is no contest. In card games and board games, however, it's not as clear-cut and we still put up a good fight. He's probably my most favorite person to play games against, probably because I can trash-talk all I want (I love trash-talking) and because he gets fairly nasty and overconfident - in other words, we don't hold out and be polite to each other.

It's not that I like to be truthful, winning is a fairly inconsequential outcome to me. Sometimes I even view winning as a bit anticlimactic. What I love is the process of the game: the competition, the stress, the pressure of thinking quickly on my feet, the scheming, etc. Winning is just proof that I did well, but I don't need to win in order to think that I did well. (Although if it's a game of trivia, I do have to admit that I feel a little more impulsion to win.) In fact, and this is just so stupid, when I used to play tennis fairly regularly, sometimes I would let the other person win if I felt that the other person cared more about winning because beating someone in tennis was super inconsequential to me.

So being competitive is just part of who I am. However, I have tried to tone it down in the past few years with people other than my brother, as Shane told me about five years ago that he didn't like playing games with me simply because I was so competitive. Because I was floored by his comment (and am so glad he had the nerve to tell me), I have tried really hard to tone down my competitive nature and I think I have made considerable progress in the past half-decade. I definitely do not trash talk (unless I know that the others I'm playing with enjoy trash talking) and I sort of make myself more reserved and try to be able to just sort of play without being consumed by strategizing.

Case in point, last night I played Canasta with Penny, Joy and Donna. Since it is my card game, I was the only one who had ever played it before so I had to teach them how to play. I was fair in reporting the rules (even when it was a disadvantage to a hand Penny and I were playing) and freely dispensed with strategic help to the opposing team. It was Penny and I versus Joy and Donna and, of the four of us, Penny and I are much more competitive than Joy and Donna. However! Penny and I were calm, cool and collected during the entire game, even when we were losing by over 1,000 points (Joy and Donna were a smidge nasty when they were winning and got a bit nastier when they started losing), and kept ourselves in check and eventually won the game with minimal competitive oomph.

Anyway, I have finished putting my Scotland pictures into a set. You can see them here.

My opinion of LOST Episode #13, The Man from Tallahassee: (aka, UK readers stick your fingers in your ears and say "la la la")

My three most favorite characters on LOST are probably Ben, Locke and Sun (Desmond and Sayid might round-up the top five and I'd throw in Juliet as the sixth). (Incidentally, my least favorite characters that are still alive--I can only offer praise for the ones they've killed--are probably Michael, Claire, Bernard and Kate.)

So, when I heard the episode this week was Locke-centric and would reveal how he got into his wheelchair, I was stoked. I am torn, though, becacuse in the last few episodes, I feel that Locke has been a complete idiot. I feel like he's acting really out of character and it's not only confusing to me, but also annoying. I was IMing with my brother and he thinks that Locke is not acting out of character at all, that he is a "man of faith" and that the rest of the Losties just don't get him. I don't agree with that. I feel that Locke has been more violent and seems to be hiding something...what, I'm not sure. Anyway, regarding the episode, I thought that it was so obvious at the end that Locke's "dad" would be in the room at the end. Something I didn't pick up on that Adam has noted was that long ago during a Hurley episode when there's a guy falling out of a window behind him, we find out this episode that it is Locke. Weird. Since the show deals a lot with torture and the idea of good/bad and how it's really unclear whether anything is all good or all bad, I wonder if they're going to have Locke torture his "father." Also, I think that the physical therapist at the end helping Locke with his wheelchair was perhaps the meanest physical therapist ever.

Although I'm not a huge fan of Jack, I'm really interested in what is going on with him at the Others' compound. Is he developing friendships? What's the deal with him and Tom? And with him and Juliet? Was Jack sincerely going to leave the island? Being such a control freak, I don't think I can really believe that he would leave the rest of the Losties on the island, but maybe he's given up after Kate's decision to be with Sawyer.

I really miss the hatch.

I also love this show.

- Jenny, 3/23/2007 06:35:00 AM

Blogs I Read Manually
Blogs I Read Via RSS
End of an era?
Contact Me
Weblog Commenting by