Anesthesiologist dies during Mexico vacation

[deleted162650]

Hell, we're about to lose a World Cup bid

Oh the horror!!

I like how people in this country pretend to give a crap about soccer once every 4 years.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Twiggidy]

Oh the horror!!

I like how people in this country pretend to give a crap about soccer once every 4 years.

I do admit I'm a bit of a bandwagon soccer fan. I didn't watch any NFL (I wont get into why on this thread because I think that can be found elsewhere on this forum) so I needed something to fill the void on Sat/Sun morning and started watching Premier League and got hooked. The only US soccer team worth a damn are the ladies so I don't think the men will be missed over in Russia this summer. We'll never be a men's soccer power because our elite athletes play the "Big 4" sports. Imagine what our teams would look like if the likes of Lebron, OBJ, and Gronk grew up with soccer as the main sport. We'd be unbeatable.

 

[deleted162650]

We'll never be a men's soccer power because our elite athletes play the "Big 4" sports.

I though it was because all of our good actors end up in Hollywood.

 

[parcus]

Hosting the World Cup and Olympics is probably the most effective way for a nation to get poorer. Money goes to corrupt officials and politicians, people pay the bill and are left with useless stadiums with massive upkeep costs. The state here that got both “investments” is now chaotic.

 

[pgg]

Check out this surf trip feature to "Cartel Land" for some interesting perspective:
Cartel Land

That was a cool read.

Back in the 80s my older brother spent his winters working the lifts and cats at ski resorts (free season pass for employees) so he'd have money to support summers living on the beach in Mexico.

The only hassling he ever got was from US border guards on the way home, because obviously this guy with the homebuilt camper on a flatbed was smuggling weed.

He didn't go to college or med school like his other two brothers but I think he might be the smartest of us.

 

[deleted162650]

He didn't go to college or med school like his other two brothers but I think he might be the smartest of us.

It is very possible, but it kinda depends - what's he doing now?

 

[pgg]

It is very possible, but it kinda depends - what's he doing now?

Building a dune buggy with his dog. Got this picture today. (Can't figure out how to inline an image on my phone from my phone so I'll try as an attachment.)

 

[Wiscoblue]

Yeah and my brother in law is from Sheffield England and his family says the same thing is going on over there. Less guns more knives/cars/bombs. Crazy world we live in

Add to that Bradford, Halifax and Leeds. One thing is common in all of Yorkshire and it ain’t the pudding.

It’s not just the numbers. Even in cities like Birmingham and Coventry, Glasgow and Leicester, people are afraid to go out at night. It’s not the same as it was 20 years ago.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[PlutoBoy]

Really? You don't have to provoke anyone to be a victim of assault. Especially in places like Mexico. Isn't it one of the deadliest countries in the world?

No.

 

[PlutoBoy]

Really AcidBase? America is not exactly safe compared to other first world countries. In fact, by comparison it's probably the most dangerous one. Are you really going to compare the US to the Middle East? And quite frankly some Middle Eastern countries, like the UAE, and Qatar are very safe. Let's not lump them all into one.

Not to mention that some Latin American countries have a lower homicide rate than America. Anyone that dares visiting St. Louis, Baltimore, or New Orleans should not be afraid to visit most Latin American cities.

 

[JOHNBROCHILL]

If I'm visiting St Louis, Baltimore, or New Orleans I would not be afraid. This is because to an American familiar with American cities it is rather obvious where bad areas are located. I would have a car to easily get around, I would have reliable cell phone service with reliable credit cards and no communication barrier. It is a far cry to compare this with a foreign city.

 

[PlutoBoy]

If I'm visiting St Louis, Baltimore, or New Orleans I would not be afraid. This is because to an American familiar with American cities it is rather obvious where bad areas are located. I would have a car to easily get around, I would have reliable cell phone service with reliable credit cards and no communication barrier. It is a far cry to compare this with a foreign city.

I understand your point but all things being equal you should not be afraid.

Following your train of thought, you should conclude that most non Americans should stay away from Baltimore. For example, a Mexican from Mexico City should be really afraid of visiting the Baltimore/DC area since it is crime ridden and crippled by third world communicable diseases. I'm just probing your thoughts for consistency.

 

[JOHNBROCHILL]

Sure however these cities don’t have a reputation for snagging unsuspecting tourists. No one from Baltimore is going to hold a Mexican for ransom. A bit different than a pale white guy wandering Brazil.

 

[acidbase1]

Check out this post in the Mexico vibe: "Playa del Carmen: Mexico Travel Alert Issued By U.S." Playa del Carmen: Mexico Travel Alert Issued By U.S.

Ahem

 

[deleted171991]

I think that westerners who spend their vacations in third world countries, especially those with high crime, are asking for it. One can go to some resort and hope that nothing bad will happen there, and maybe it won't. But to ignore local crime, and envy, and getting despised simply for being a rich ignorant American is just asking for trouble.

I have been living in the US for a couple of decades, but you can't pay me enough to go to Mexico (and many other countries). I did come from a developing country and I visited some in the past, and, while some are relatively safe overall (especially for the locals), being and looking like a "rich" or ignorant or arrogant westerner will paint a target sign on your head if you encounter criminals. Extra points for being an American, due to our foreign policies in the last 70 years. So big cities will probably be safe, but I would not venture away from the beaten path. Think like you're on a safari, or in Jurassic Park.

 

[deleted171991]

I understand your point but all things being equal you should not be afraid.

Following your train of thought, you should conclude that most non Americans should stay away from Baltimore. For example, a Mexican from Mexico City should be really afraid of visiting the Baltimore/DC area since it is crime ridden and crippled by third world communicable diseases. I'm just probing your thoughts for consistency.

One cannot compare the US with Mexico. We are not a failed state, as some of their local governments seem to be. Not even in Baltimore etc. I am sure we have our share of corrupt officials but we are light years less corrupt than any developing country. And nothing breeds crime more than corruption.

 

[PlutoBoy]

One cannot compare the US with Mexico. We are not a failed state, as some of their local governments seem to be. Not even in Baltimore etc. I am sure we have our share of corrupt officials but we are light years less corrupt than any developing country. And nothing breeds crime more than corruption.

We cannot compare them as a whole. We are one of the most advanced countries on earth. Of course we are more developed.

However, it is true that Baltimore's homicide rate is higher than Mexico City's homicide rate.

2017 sees highest murder rate ever in shrinking Baltimore

If you are afraid of being killed, you are better off in Mexico's capital (4.27 homicides per 100,000 people) than in Baltimore (upwards of 50 murders per 100,000 people).

CDMX registra la tasa más alta de homicidios

If your main fear is getting killed while on vacation, may I suggest a tour of El Zocalo instead of Baltimore's Inner Harbor?

 

[deleted171991]

I don't go to Baltimore for vacation. When I visited it, it was during daytime, on the safe beaten path, and I probably looked like a local. My chances of being attacked were the same as of the many people living there.

I wouldn't go to a place with high criminality if I couldn't at least blend in with the locals. Most Americans don't realize that they are bad at blending in, first of all because they don't speak the local language, and they don't keep their mouths shut in public.

My main fear is actually getting kidnapped, or imprisoned for some made-up offense (same thing, just different criminals).

 

[spacegun]

I am sure "official" (if you trust "official") murder, rape, and other crime rates are lower in Riyadh or Pyongyang than Baltimore or St. Louis, but lower crime rates don't mean you live in a democratic society!

 

[PlutoBoy]

Interestingly, this was published today:

The 50 most dangerous cities in the world revealed | Daily Mail Online

Hmmm...

 

[Southpaw]

Interestingly, this was published today:

The 50 most dangerous cities in the world revealed | Daily Mail Online

Hmmm...

If you wanna travel to any of those places, go right ahead. Let me know how your trip goes. FFP is correct, it's pretty easy for an American to stay safe in Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore, or NO, unless they're a complete idiot. That same principle doesn't apply once you leave the country.

 

[Wiscoblue]

I wonder if you’re safer if you ‘look like a local’ on the south side of Chicago?

 

[PlutoBoy]

If you wanna travel to any of those places, go right ahead. Let me know how your trip goes. FFP is correct, it's pretty easy for an American to stay safe in Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore, or NO, unless they're a complete idiot. That same principle doesn't apply once you leave the country.

I understand your point. I don't really have a dog in this fight. All I'm saying is that millions of people visit Mexico every year without any issues.

If you find yourself in Mexico City you are unlikely to face any issues if you exercise the same caution you do when you are in Baltimore, which has a much higher murder rate. Pretty much don't do drugs, don't go to the ghetto, don't stay out late at night on your own, don't get drunk, don't solicit prostitutes.

I wouldn't go to Caracas or Tegucigalpa. The murder rate is over 100/100,000, IIRC. However, being scared of getting killed in a city with a murder rate of 4/100,000 while not being scared in a city with a murder rate of 56/100,000 is not rational.

Having said that, we all have different comfort levels and not all of our decisions need to be "rational."

 

[spacegun]

Why has no one mentioned Cleveland the best place for vacation in the entire country?

 

[acidbase1]

What an absolute failure Baltimore, NOLA, St. Louis, and Chicago are... it’s embarrassing. All democratic run entities I might add. You’d think with our resources we would have a solution to the problem.

 

[Twiggidy]

I wonder if you’re safer if you ‘look like a local’ on the south side of Chicago?

Why are you being a tourist in the south side of Chicago?

 

[Twiggidy]

What an absolute failure Baltimore, NOLA, St. Louis, and Chicago are... it’s embarrassing. All democratic run entities I might add. You’d think with our resources we would have a solution to the problem.

the discussion is much deeper than what you see on the surface but i dont think this forum is ready for that talk....sadly

 

[pgg]

What an absolute failure Baltimore, NOLA, St. Louis, and Chicago are... it’s embarrassing. All democratic run entities I might add. You’d think with our resources we would have a solution to the problem.

I do not view the elected leaders of those cities with any particular love or favor. I disagree quite strongly with some of their efforts and rhetoric. I have what seem to be irreconcilable differences with the Democratic party concerning 2nd Amendment rights.

Democrats have run these cities forever, sure. But look at who's been in charge of these states where Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, St. Louis, and New Orleans are located:

Source - ballotpedia.org

Unfortunately the grids only go back 25 years, and I don't have the time or patience to take it back further.

Maybe, just maybe, it's not all the Democrats' fault.

And honestly, what do you think Republicans would do to fix these cities? Get tougher on crime with some more minimum sentence or "three strike" laws to reassure the suburban soccer moms in the gerrymandered red districts that don't even have a crime problem in the first place? Cut some education and social programs? Give some more milsurp armored personnel carriers and black tactical gear to the police? Privatize some more infrastructure? Ramp up the War On Drugs another couple notches? Someone's in the news this week talking about the death penalty for drug dealers.

The economic demographics, segregation, and poverty that begat the crime in those cities has 150 years of history behind it. I don't think the Democrats have the answer, but I don't think it's their fault either.

 

[deleted162650]

the discussion is much deeper than what you see on the surface but i dont think this forum is ready for that talk....sadly

Dude, you’ve made that same comment at least a handful of times now. Either start the conversation or don’t.

 

[Twiggidy]

Dude, you’ve made that same comment at least a handful of times now. Either start the conversation or don’t.

This is a pretty good start......

The economic demographics, segregation, and poverty that begat the crime in those cities has 150 years of history behind it. I don't think the Democrats have the answer, but I don't think it's their fault either.

And there’s plenty to talk about if people are ready for hard truths and not get offended.

 

[deleted162650]

This is a pretty good start......



And there’s plenty to talk about if people are ready for hard truths and not get offended.

Any time you start a discussion that involves race, SES, and politics, people are gonna get their feelings hurt. But, if you think it’s that important, then who cares. Stop pussyfootin’ around already.

Don’t worry, I’ll still like you.

 

[Twiggidy]

Any time you start a discussion that involves race, SES, and politics, people are gonna get their feelings hurt. But, if you think it’s that important, then who cares. Stop pussyfootin’ around already.

Don’t worry, I’ll still like you.

*fist bump*

 

[chocomorsel]

This is a pretty good start......



And there’s plenty to talk about if people are ready for hard truths and not get offended.

Let it go Chile. It will not be welcome here! And you already know this!!!

 

[chocomorsel]

Maybe I am wrong.

 

[deleted171991]

Maybe I am wrong.

Maybe you are. You won't know unless you try.

 

[acidbase1]

Iowa family of 4 died of gas asphyxiation at resort in Mexico, authorities say

 

[Drangue]

The 50 Most Dangerous Cities
Rank City Country Homicide Rate (Per 100,000)
1 Caracas Venezuela 130.35
2 Acapulco Mexico 113.24
3 San Pedro Sula Honduras 112.09
4 Distrito Central Honduras 112.09
5 Victoria Mexico 84.67
6 Maturin Venezuela 82.84
7 San Salvador El Salvador 83.39
8 Ciudad Guayana Venezuela 82.84
9 Valencia Venezuela 72.02
10 Natal Brazil 69.56
11 Belem Brazil 67.41
12 Aracaju Brazil 62.76
13 Cape Town South Africa 60.77
14 St. Louis United States 60.37
15 Feira de Santana Brazil 60.10
16 Barquisimeto Venezuela 59.38
17 Cumana Venezuela 59.31
18 Campos dos Goytacazes Brazil 56.45
19 Salvador Brazil 54.71
20 Cali Colombia 54.00
21 Tijuana Mexico 53.06
22 Guatemala Guatemala 52.73
23 Culiacan Mexico 51.81
24 Maceio Brazil 47.89
25 Baltimore United States 51.14
26 Mazatlan Mexico 48.75
27 Recife Brazil 47.89
28 Joao Pessoa Brazil 47.57
29 Bracelona Venezuela 46.86
30 Palmira Colombia 46.30
31 Kingston Jamaica 45.43
32 Sao Luis Brazil 45.41
33 New Orleans United States 45.17
34 Fortaleza Brazil 44.98
35 Detroit United States 44.60
36 Juarez Mexico 43.63
37 Terresina Brazil 42.84
38 Cuiaba Brazil 42.61
39 Chihuahua Brazil 42.61
40 Obregon Mexico 42.02
41 Aparecida de Goiania Brazil 39.48
42 Nelson Mandela Bay South Africa 39.19
43 Armenia Colombia 38.54
44 Macapa Brazil 38.45
45 Manaus Brazil 38.25
46 Vitoria Brazil 37.54
47 Cucuta Colombia 37.00
48 Curitiba Brazil 34.92
49 Durban South Africa 34.43

I remember getting frustrated as an undergrad and medical student when residents, fellows, and attendings didn’t return calls/texts/emails prompty or at all. Now I totally get it. The amount of requests I get for just “3-5 minutes” of my time is staggering, and often overwhelming. The really important stuff get’s responded to on post-call days and weekends, the rest gets forgotten or ignored.

Congrats on matching- I’d just moved on.

Detroit is on there!?!?!? NOOOOOOOOOO!

 

[chocomorsel]

Iowa family of 4 died of gas asphyxiation at resort in Mexico, authorities say

That was my first thought as soon as they said no signs of trauma were found.

 

[EyesInMyVeins]

I must say that I do not fully believe that list above with top 50 cities for crime. My CRNA buddies and I have visited at least 12 of the top 25 cities (we like to take tri-annual vacations to South America) listed on there, and I must say our experiences could not be more different. All of the places we visited were MUCH, MUCH safer than any major metropolitan area I have ever been to in the USA. So something is obviously off about that list.....













*jk I'm a measly MS3 applying to anes this fall, but wanted to grind some gears of my elders in this field that frequent this forum btw I appreciate all the arguments, jokes and jabber that happens on this forum. Makes it very lively... hope I can contribute more as I earn more cred in this field

 

[GigiBuffon]

I do admit I'm a bit of a bandwagon soccer fan. I didn't watch any NFL (I wont get into why on this thread because I think that can be found elsewhere on this forum) so I needed something to fill the void on Sat/Sun morning and started watching Premier League and got hooked. The only US soccer team worth a damn are the ladies so I don't think the men will be missed over in Russia this summer. We'll never be a men's soccer power because our elite athletes play the "Big 4" sports. Imagine what our teams would look like if the likes of Lebron, OBJ, and Gronk grew up with soccer as the main sport. We'd be unbeatable.

No, the US wouldn't be "unbeatable." There is a lot more that goes into the strength of a national team than the size and athleticism of its players (by the way, with their center of gravity so high up, they'd likely be terrible handling a ball with their feet on the ground ).
Also, it has little to do with the number of available players as you can witness watching tiny Wales trash China 6:0 just a few days ago.

The problems of US soccer are well known: it is lacking a solid foundation of organized amateur leagues, it is missing a multi-tiered professional system with relegation based on performance over each season. The college system needs to go and instead young talented players should join the pros at age 18. The MLS franchise system may work well for a national sport such as American football, but in general, it does not work well on a global scale such as is the case with soccer.

At the highest international level, tiny tactical nuances and technical abilities make the difference between top teams and good teams, and for now the only way for US soccer to stay afloat is to have as many of its own players exposed to that highest level in Europe. Who knows when- and if- the MLS can attract the best players at their prime (not Zlatan or Beckham post-prime) so that it would make sense for young American players to mature next to world class players IN America?

 

[Psai]

No, the US wouldn't be "unbeatable." There is a lot more that goes into the strength of a national team than the size and athleticism of its players (by the way, with their center of gravity so high up, they'd likely be terrible handling a ball with their feet on the ground ).
Also, it has little to do with the number of available players as you can witness watching tiny Wales trash China 6:0 just a few days ago.

The problems of US soccer are well known: it is lacking a solid foundation of organized amateur leagues, it is missing a multi-tiered professional system with relegation based on performance over each season. The college system needs to go and instead young talented players should join the pros at age 18. The MLS franchise system may work well for a national sport such as American football, but in general, it does not work well on a global scale such as is the case with soccer.

At the highest international level, tiny tactical nuances and technical abilities make the difference between top teams and good teams, and for now the only way for US soccer to stay afloat is to have as many of its own players exposed to that highest level in Europe. Who knows when- and if- the MLS can attract the best players at their prime (not Zlatan or Beckham post-prime) so that it would make sense for young American players to mature next to world class players IN America?

Wtf does this have to do with an anesthesiologist dying in Mexico

 

[Twiggidy]

Wtf does this have to do with an anesthesiologist dying in Mexico

he doent like the fact that i mentioned if the US’s best athletes played soccer that we’d be a power house.....which we would be. He hasnt thought that concept through

 

[Twiggidy]

No, the US wouldn't be "unbeatable." There is a lot more that goes into the strength of a national team than the size and athleticism of its players (by the way, with their center of gravity so high up, they'd likely be terrible handling a ball with their feet on the ground ).
Also, it has little to do with the number of available players as you can witness watching tiny Wales trash China 6:0 just a few days ago.

The problems of US soccer are well known: it is lacking a solid foundation of organized amateur leagues, it is missing a multi-tiered professional system with relegation based on performance over each season. The college system needs to go and instead young talented players should join the pros at age 18. The MLS franchise system may work well for a national sport such as American football, but in general, it does not work well on a global scale such as is the case with soccer.

At the highest international level, tiny tactical nuances and technical abilities make the difference between top teams and good teams, and for now the only way for US soccer to stay afloat is to have as many of its own players exposed to that highest level in Europe. Who knows when- and if- the MLS can attract the best players at their prime (not Zlatan or Beckham post-prime) so that it would make sense for young American players to mature next to world class players IN America?

you’re making the assumption that if the US’s best athletes, the Lebrons, the OBJs, the Gronks, the Westbrooks, would not be skilled at soccer if they had played it all their life, which os ridiculous. International soccer is better than US becasue thats all that’s played. Here we have other options that make you more money if you’re good. Europe has picked up on that and thats why they’re getting better at basketball (ie Spain, Lithuainia, etc) I wont believe form a second that if top US athletes grew up playing soccer we wouldnt be dominant, becasue we’re better at just about every other major sport

 

[nimbus]

Wtf does this have to do with an anesthesiologist dying in Mexico

Soccer is popular in Mexico. He was probably indebted to Mexican bookies because of bad soccer bets.

 

[GigiBuffon]

Wtf does this have to do with an anesthesiologist dying in Mexico

Nothing, genius.

 

[deleted171991]

you’re making the assumption that if the US’s best athletes, the Lebrons, the OBJs, the Gronks, the Westbrooks, would not be skilled at soccer if they had played it all their life, which os ridiculous. International soccer is better than US becasue thats all that’s played. Here we have other options that make you more money if you’re good. Europe has picked up on that and thats why they’re getting better at basketball (ie Spain, Lithuainia, etc) I wont believe form a second that if top US athletes grew up playing soccer we wouldnt be dominant, becasue we’re better at just about every other major sport

It's not only about money. Soccer is very easy to play anywhere one has a small area of flat land, four rocks and a ball, with no risk of serious physical injury (at amateur level). That's why it's played by everybody, and that's why everybody watches soccer and soccer players make a lot of money. It's incredible fun to play when compared to any of the traditional American sports (nothing comes close).

We'd better be among the best at all major sports, since we are the biggest developed country in the world. Right? Of course we would be among the best if soccer were as popular as American football, and every boy would grow up playing it. Just look at how good the American women are at it.

"The United States women's national soccer team (USWNT) is governed by United States Soccer Federationand competes in CONCACAF (the Confederation of North, Central American and Caribbean Association Football). The team is the most successful in international women's soccer, winning three Women's World Cuptitles (including the first ever Women's World Cup in 1991), four Olympic women's gold medals, seven CONCACAF Gold Cup wins, and ten Algarve Cups.[1] It medaled in every single World Cup and Olympic tournament in women's soccer history from 1991 to 2015, before being knocked out in the quarterfinals of the 2016 Olympics.

After being ranked No. 2 on average from 2003 to 2008 in the FIFA Women's World Rankings,[2] the team was ranked No. 1 continuously from March 2008 to November 2014,[3] falling back behind Germany, the only other team to occupy the No. 1 position in the ranking's history. The team dropped to 2nd on March 24, 2017, due to its last-place finish in the 2017 SheBelieves Cup, then returned to 1st on June 23, 2017, after victories in friendlies against Russia, Sweden, and Norway.[4] The team was selected as the U.S. Olympic Committee's Team of the Year in 1997 and 1999,[5] and Sports Illustrated chose the entire team as 1999 Sportswomen of the Year for its usual Sportsman of the Year honor.[6]"

 

[GigiBuffon]

you’re making the assumption that if the US’s best athletes, the Lebrons, the OBJs, the Gronks, the Westbrooks, would not be skilled at soccer if they had played it all their life, which os ridiculous. International soccer is better than US becasue thats all that’s played. Here we have other options that make you more money if you’re good. Europe has picked up on that and thats why they’re getting better at basketball (ie Spain, Lithuainia, etc) I wont believe form a second that if top US athletes grew up playing soccer we wouldnt be dominant, becasue we’re better at just about every other major sport

US soccer wouldn't be dominant. The US is only dominant in sports that nobody else plays. But there it is again, that typical American arrogance when it comes to sports. Whatever. Enjoy watching the World Cup.

 

[GigiBuffon]

It's not only about money. Soccer is very easy to play anywhere you have a small area of flat land, four rocks and a ball, with no risk of serious physical injury (at amateur level). That's why it's played by everybody, and that's why everybody watches soccer and soccer players make a lot of money.

We'd better be among the best at all major sports, since we are the biggest developed country in the world. Right?

LOL.. yes, eeeexactly!

 

[Twiggidy]

US soccer wouldn't be dominant. The US is only dominant in sports that nobody else CAN plays. But there it is again, that typical American arrogance when it comes to sports. Whatever. Enjoy watching the World Cup.

There. I fixed it for you. The world loves to shove soccer in the US's face because it's all they have on us (well, that and Winter Olympics). If Soccer were the only option in the US and they paid multi millions of dollars for athletes to play it, you better believe we'd start collecting World Cups. Don't kid yourself. You're basically saying US kids can't learn to play soccer, and as FFP just said, our women prove that's we can. It's not arrogance. It's logic.

 

[EyesInMyVeins]

Well, now that this thread has turned to talk about soccer:

Ironic as it may seem, the fact that we are indeed the "biggest developed country" in the world may be impeding the skill and quality of play amongst our soccer players, even despite all the other major sports that dominate our market and public interests. The fact that young boys and girls in America have to pay exorbitant amounts of money to play and receive formal coaching in this country places soccer as a sport that is more easily accessible for wealthier families. On top of that, the future of a promising soccer player in this country is rather limited, unless he has the potential to be recognized by some of the European clubs (Pulisic). Most promising high school studs end up as another D1 player who may/may not play in the MLS, a league that is far inferior to the talent of other worldwide leagues. Yes, part of this is popularity. But, also look at our training programs.

The dogma of formal training in this country for this sport that relatively favors utmost mastery of technique and foot coordination over sheer athleticism alone emphasizes progressing from softer, smaller soccer balls and smaller fields/goals to "age-appropriate" incremental increases. Meanwhile, around the globe, kids are running around on full sized pitches kicking adult-sized soccer balls since they were 8 or 9. It is no wonder why 15, 16 year olds in some of those countries are running toe-to-toe and are displaying ball IQs similar to their 10-20 year older pro teammates. This kind of mindset to this sport also limits the potential of our players, as well as the popularity. Compare this to our traditionally popular sports like basketball or football. The rim height and basketball size that club 10-year olds play with are identical to the dimensions of the NBA (despite the slight court size/3 point differences). In both of these sports, the biggest progression from the youth to pro level is mainly the size/strength/athleticism of the athletes themselves.

Tennis is a good example of how systemic changes in training methodologies can ruin a sport despite the relatively popularity of it (in fact, tennis is the fastest growing sport in the US in terms of participation/popularity in the 21st century). Just about 20 years ago, the US was rampant with generational tennis talent. You had Sampras/McEnroe/Agassi/Chang/Lendl/Navratilova/Seles/etc. Ever since the USTA sparked this BS idea of 10-and-under tennis (using smaller racquets and foam balls at a young age for kids to master the fundamentals in an "age-appropriate" way), you saw a decline in the number of American athletes reaching the top 50. Since the 2000s, you had Roddick reach #1 momentarily (trained before this) and Sock/Isner making some noise. Ofc, you had the Williams sisters but their training via their father was also was completely unique and kind of mental from a young age. Like in soccer, the equipment and facilities needed for proper tennis training require $$$. But you did have a generation of greats that trained in conditions of the same accessibility. Whereas now, 10 year olds are running around on undersized courts with undersized rackets hitting Nerf tennis balls whereas 10-year old Nadals, Federers and even Agassis was beating grown men in their respective circuits.