Anti “High Five”

 “What kills a skunk is the publicity it gives itself.” Abraham Lincoln

epic-high-five-batmanOne of the qualities that I find most endearing in a man is humility, a modest view of his own importance.
And that’s why I have such a strong dislike of the commonly named “High Five”.
That childish practice in which two people slap each other’s palms in a gesture of self-congratulation.

Everything that is overused becomes a worn out prop for people who lack imagination.
When you cannot come up with an original idea, you start stealing somebody else’s shtick. You start aping those dubious sports figures bulging with steroids, and those individuals are not exactly shining examples of propriety.

In a world swarming with sycophants, a man needs to remain grounded.
When accomplishing something slightly above average, he could acknowledge his satisfaction with a modest hand gesture or a slight bow, but definitely not with a low-class High Five.

The High Five is not even a distant cousin of humility. It basically says: I just did something exceptionally good and I deserve applauds for it!
Bollocks! as our British friends would politely say.

Only spectators are licensed to pass judgment. If they deem your actions meritorious, they will applaud you. If not, it is definitely not up to you to pat yourself on the back.

Nothing is more unpleasant than showing off, and High Fives are tangible signs of hubris.

On the pétanque field or anywhere else, it would behoove you to avoid these childish displays of narcissism and stick to more restrained forms of jubilation.
It would be greatly appreciated.

Alain
[contact-form][contact-field label=’Name’ type=’name’ required=’1’/][contact-field label=’Email’ type=’email’ required=’1’/][contact-field label=’Website’ type=’url’/][contact-field label=’Comment’ type=’textarea’ required=’1’/][/contact-form]

When No means Yes

We are all familiar with the “No” word because since early childhood it is one the first human utterances that we heard and learned to obey.
But “No” doesn’t always mean no. Sometimes it means maybe, and sometimes (with some persistence) it can eventually morph into a “yes”.

I use Comcast (the firm that people love to hate) as an Internet provider. I also make use of their services for cable TV and telephone.
Even though most of the people recognize that Comcast does a decent technical job, the company’s high-handed pricing tactics puts many people off.

Over the years my monthly fees have steadily gone up and my last statement showed another unwelcome increase. That was the drop that spilled the cup.

Most customers accept increases resignedly, but some when angry enough will attempt to fight back.
But before getting into a brawl, one needs to gather facts and figures and it is a good idea to start your rebellion by gleaning details on the Internet.
After your facts gathering campaign, you can call Comcast and seek an understanding negotiator.
And the Force has got to be with you.

Very often, after crawling under the barbed wires of their answering system, you will come across a robot-like human being who has been programmed to quash rebellions and repel insurgencies.
These creatures will listen to you (yawn), but they will usually turn you flat down.
Their hands are tied they say; they cannot do anything to improve your lot.
The angrier you get, the more entrenched they become.
And that’s what happened to me when I first called Comcast.
I ended the conversation hanging up on the humanoid.

I placed a second call to ATT.
This outfit is always on the lookout for Comcast defectors, and they always seem very sympathetic to your woes.
They will dangle very enticing offers in front of you and urge you to defect.

But before rushing into the unknown, you should scrutinize their fine prints.
The first question that you should ask is: “How long is this offer good for?”
The second question should be: what happens after this initial offering expires?
Are you going to hit me with rates similar to your competitor?
There could be a small embarrassed silence.

Armed with figures, you call Comcast back.
If you are lucky, you will reach a knowledgeable human being sympathetic to your predicament.
And fortunately, that’s what happened to me.

You would like to stay with Comcast you say, but your rates are too high.
What can you do do to retain a loyal customer?

Unbeknownst to you many companies have billing plans not listed on the Internet.
If you are a good customer who pays his bills in a timely fashion, Comcast can play nice and give you a break.
But they also want to tie you down with a two years contract guaranteeing your ever-loving fidelity.
But that’s OK for life is always a matter of give and take.

To make a long story short, after a prolonged negotiation I ended end paying $30.00 less per month with, as a bonus, free access to HBO, Starz and Encore.
This proved to be a wise move for Comcast for it is better to make a small concession and keep revenues flowing, rather than being hard-nosed and lose a disgruntled customer who would (not doubt about it) strive to tarnish further Comcast’s dour reputation.

Sometimes, with a little persistence, a haughty “no” can bloom into a smiling “yes”.

Alain

 

August 11, tournament

Yesterday, La Pétanque Marinière hosted the 2013 Northwest Regional Select Triples tournament.
This tournament was sanctioned by the FPUSA and carried very generous purses.
As the name indicates, participating players were allowed to pick their teammates and the outcome of the tournament hinged largely on the caliber of the selected players.
And yesterday there was an abundance of very good players.

Fifteen (15) triplettes registered to compete and were as follows:

  1. Ed Porto/Mike Cooper/Bleys Rose
  2. Jean-Michel Poulnot/Bernard Passmar/Paul Koss
  3. Jean-Claude Etallaz/Carolina Jones/Etienne Rijkheer
  4. Henry Wessel/Calvert Barton/Hendrik Idzerda
  5. Paul Moua/Ly Pao Nhia Yi/Poe Lee
  6. Alain Efron/Francois Moser/Christine Cragg
  7. Pao Lee/Chan Yiong/Kue Lee
  8. Narin Garrett/Erin Mc/Barbara Hall
  9. Mickey Coughlin/Nicole Coughlin/Holly Sammons
  10. Alain Gusella/J-C Bunand/Mireille Di Maio
  11. Gilles Karpowicz/Carlos Couto/Pierre Palaneado
  12. John Morris/Marie-Ann Curley/Pierre Bremont
  13. Mona Lee/Bee Moua/Phominik Lee
  14. Yor Lee/Lee Lee/Kao Lee
  15. Patrick Vaslet/Hans Kurz/Kevin Evoy

The tournament was run by Verena Rytter.

Three thirteen points (mercifully timed) games were played before lunch to separate the hotshots from the average players.

Eight teams qualified for the Concours, and seven teams for the Consolante.

My own team was composed of Christine Cragg, Francois Moser and myself and I am sorry to say that we didn’t do very well.

We lost our 1st game 8/13 against Yor Lee/Lee Lee/Kao Lee
We ignominiously lost our 2nd game 2/13 against Alain Gusella/J-C Bunand/Mireille Di Maio. Such a miserable score is always difficult to swallow.
We barely lost our 3rd (timed) game 11/12 against Gilles Karpowicz/Carlos Couto/Pierre Palaneado after leading 11/9

We ended up in the Consolante.

On our first (and last) Consolante game we barely lost (11/13) against Paul Moua/Ly Pao Nhia Yi/Poe Lee and we were out of the tournament.

We played better (or were luckier) in our last 2 games, but losing four consecutive games in a row is a rather demoralizing experience and I never pretended to be a good loser.
Losing also tends to emphasize fatigue and after our last defeat I decided to go home and like Achilles, brood in my tent.

I left the field around 3:30 p.m. and didn’t bother to take any pictures. Sorry about that.

FINAL RESULTS provide by Verena Rytter

Concours

115_1598 - Version 2

1st place: Gilles Karpowicz/Carlos Couto/Pierre Palaneado – $70 for each player
2nd place: Pao Lee/Chan Yiong/Kue Lee – $50 for each player
3rd place: Mickey Coughlin/Nicole Coughlin/Holly Sammons – $30 for each player

Consolante

1st place: Paul Moua/Ly Pao Nhia Yi/Poe Lee – $30 for each player
2nd place: Jean-Claude Etallaz/Carolina Jones/Etienne Rijkheer – $20 for each player

Please excuse my uncertain spelling of all the Asian names.

Alain