Steph Curry - One of the Best Players of All Time

Yes I mean it...one of the best of ALL TIME.
Is it an exaggeration? Hardly.

I am not a Warriors bandwagon band (a sudden fan when the team starts to do well...like increasing number of Bulls fan during the 90s), and my team is still the disappointing Knicks, but Stephen Curry is the player whom I truly admire.

We all love an underdog story. Yup, Curry is kind of one.  He had a 'petite' physique in high school in comparison to other varsity players; did not get scholarship from his NBA father's alma meter; did not attend a top NCAA basketball college (yet led the school to the Elite Eight). Despite all of these, he was good enough to be an NBA draftee.  But almost no one (especially scouts) would expect that he would improve so much over his career years to become one of the best players we see today (and in history).

For more about Curry, read more at How Stephen Curry Became the NBA’s Best Player

Curry's 3-point percentage is just much higher other NBA players, and this figure is inclusive of all the 3-pointers he made way outside of the 3-point line.  Even for 24+ft 3-pointers with an opponent guarding him closely or with seconds left on the clock, his success rate is still as good as or even higher than other players shooting right at the 3-pt line without the pressure from opponents or the clock.

Distance between a player vs guarding opponent and success rate is often correlated, where the closer the guard, the lower the success rate is; the same is true for 'seconds remaining on the clock and success rate. But by including Curry onto the data, he would distort the correlation coefficients.  Milliseconds to the buzzer and defense mean little to him as they simply cannot stop him. And this is Curry's deadly weapon,

For more statistics on Curry, read more at Stephen Curry Is The Revolution

I'm a quasi-number geek and believe that the numbers don't lie (even though they can be misinterpreted), but the steady improvement of Curry's statistics is a strong support that he deserves all the attentions and recognition over the years; he will continue to improve and is here to stay for a long time.

Watch below for Curry's 3 pointers compilation:

I really enjoy the snippets of his great deep (ultra long, even as far as half court) 3 pointers.  He made them so effortlessly from anywhere and showed a devil-may-care attitude toward the distance of those 3-point ranges. This isn't only about knowing where he is, having a good sense of the distance, and adjusting his aim accordingly.  His great improvement and success story would require a combination of many driving factors. It would actually be best explained by the concepts in the book Outliers by Malcom Gladwell - where his physical attributes, passions, and most importantly, the hours of practice that made him an NBA sensation and an unexpected outlier.  Each 3-pointer success is a result of the hours he has put into practicing (think of practicing 3 pointers from every angle plus distance to the rim), and practicing with goals, disciplines and tenacity. His effort pays great dividends at the court.  To me, he is truly an inspiration, and a good reminder for us, even though we might not be basketball players, that success is rarely achieved by accident or luck.

Bonus: Half court shots

Thoughts on AlphaGo vs Lee Sedol - What does Artificial Intelligence mean to our future?

I followed the recent matches of AlphaGo (by Google DeepMind) vs Lee Sedol, and even though I am not a Go player nor a computer scientist, I was genuinely intrigued by the complexity of the game, the intensity of the battle, and the capability of machine learning. AlphaGo is a prototype program that was created 2 years ago, it learned to play Go by playing against top players and itself over and over in order to learn from its mistakes. Since last year, it had defeated Fan Hui, a European Champion Go player, with five straight wins. Before that, computer programs had little success in defeating human players because of the large number of possibilities in the game and the finite playing time. Thus this is a well-anticipated battle to show the improvement and advancement in the latest development of machine learning. Lee, a Korean 9-dan (highest ranking - Divinity) Go master, was often regarded as one of the best players in the world today, played 5 matches against AlphaGo. He had faced tremendous pressure during each game and did not feel like he had any lead at all at any point. By the end of the game 3, he was losing to AlphaGo 0-3. The result caused a lot of emotional responses from the public, which some believed that it is about time that AI is more intelligent than us, and that it will eventually rule the world. Most people started to root for Lee and hoped that he would defend us human beings against machine, and when he won game 4, the world cheered. This got me thinking, is this really a battle between human and machine? Are we trying to draw to a black-and-white conclusion here that the winner (machine) reigns supreme?

After giving it some thoughts, and understanding how powerful machine learning is and what it can do, it is still probably too soon to be worried that AI will take over our world. However, its capability is a wonderful tool for us as it can empower us in an innovative way, and I think this is rather the meaning behind these games.

First of all, the battle is merely in the game of Go. It is only meant to demonstrate the capability of machine learning, and how it is capable to improve itself by learning from others and itself. Then in combination of its uncanny speed in calculating probabilities in each possibility, would be able to solve complex problems and complete very difficult tasks - to the point that it can be better than humans.

However, in real life, there are so much more complex tasks that would still require human inputs in order to be carried out and accomplished. For example, think of our roles in creating arts, performing arts, negotiations, relationship buildings etc. Even though AI can have very high intelligence quotient in solving problems, it lacks emotion quotient (EQ), and this is what makes human input/interaction meaningful and crucial. A lot of times connections and emotions are the keys to getting the jobs done. For example, doing business requires solid relationships/partnerships - people like to do business with those they feel comfortable with and are able to feel connected to; performing the Chopin concertos require deep emotional understanding of the composer and the meaning of the masterpiece etc. All of which would not be achieved without the human part. Our civilization is much broader than just 'intelligence': there are emotions, values, virtues, manner, morale, spirits, religions etc, those are essential part of the civilization which AI does not possess (at least not today).

Furthermore, with the discovery and advancement of machine learning, we should utilize it as a way to assist us to look into things that we might have missed. As the developers in AlphaGo stated, machine learning might even be able to assist the healthcare providers in some day, by identifying problems that we have neglected to observe from individual incidents and cases, and by enough repetitions that translate to learning, coming up with information and ideas on what we should pay further attention to in order to reduce errors and improve the quality of healthcare.

So after all, although there was a clear 'winner' in the battle, it is not a competition between human and AI, but a demonstration of the possibilities and capabilities in machine learning. What can we do instead, is to take this opportunity to reflect on ourselves as human being, on how we can make the best out of AI. We need to have a solid understanding of what we are doing, what we are capable of, and then determine what are the things that we can delegate to AI to make our life easier. We can optimize the strength of AI as a way to make us better human beings by allowing us to achieve more than we could do before with better awareness or resources; then maximize our uniqueness (the human aspect) to innovate, to change, and to accomplish more great things for the world.

Another takeaway from the success of AlphaGo is its ability to "learn and master" the game by playing itself over millions of times through trial and error. It is a good example and a reminder for us that the old saying "Practice Makes Perfect" is still the key to success. Although we might not be able to do the same things a million times, with failure and willingness to succeed, we will gain wisdom and our possibilities are still endless.

Youtube recordings of the 5 matches played by AlphaGo vs Lee Sedol

Have you ever paid attention to the performers in the public?

This is surprising! Wish I were there to experience it!
_____________________________________________________________

A man sat at a metro station in Washington DC and started to play the violin; it was a cold January morning. He played six Bach pieces for about 45 minutes. During that time, since it was rush hour, it was calculated that thousands of people went through the station, most of them on their way to work.

Three minutes went by and a middle aged man noticed there was musician playing. He slowed his pace and stopped for a few seconds and then hurried up to meet his schedule. A minute later, the violinist received his first dollar tip: a woman threw the money in the till and without stopping continued to walk. A few minutes later, someone leaned against the wall to listen to him, but the man looked at his watch and started to walk again. Clearly he was late for work.

The one who paid the most attention was a 3 year old boy. His mother tagged him along, hurried but the kid stopped to look at the violinist. Finally the mother pushed hard and the child continued to walk turning his head all the time. This action was repeated by several other children. All the parents, without exception, forced them to move on.

In the 45 minutes the musician played, only 6 people stopped and stayed for a while. About 20 gave him money but continued to walk their normal pace. He collected $32. When he finished playing and silence took over, no one noticed it. No one applauded, nor was there any recognition.

No one knew this but the violinist was Joshua Bell, one of the best musicians in the world. He played one of the most intricate pieces ever written with a violin worth 3.5 million dollars.

Two days before his playing in the subway, Joshua Bell sold out at a theater in Boston and the seats average $100.

This is a real story. Joshua Bell playing incognito in the metro station was organized by the Washington Post as part of an social experiment about perception, taste and priorities of people. The outlines were: in a commonplace environment at an inappropriate hour: Do we perceive beauty? Do we stop to appreciate it? Do we recognize the talent in an unexpected context?

One of the possible conclusions from this experience could be: If we do not have a moment to stop and listen to one of the best musicians in the world playing the best music ever written, how many other things are we missing?