Goo 0847 - Steve Michalik

Kerry Odell | October 11, 2006
I dunno about anyone else, but I've yet to get this guy's name to pop up on a search, even when I know the answer LOL. Granted...I am still a noo-b at this, but I am by no means unfamiliar with search engines, computers (I'm at Tech Support Rep, Sr) or finding hard to get information off the net.

This was not the first stumper that I came across, but this was definitely the first I was upset at not finding. The guy looked somewhat familiar and I must have, no I did spend several hours (a couple a day) scouring the net for information. I found information on all kinds of body builders past and present, the pro's and con's of steroid use, classic bb's like Bill Pearl, Arnold's escapades as a youth, Mike Mentzer's troubled life, 'roid rage, Lyle Alzado's death which is touted by some to be the result of his steroid use, the break-off of some of the 'roid users to wrestling, the natural Olympia contests and even the body building blonde couple in trouble for killing someone. While all the names are now a jumble in my head, I've learned way more about body building than I ever thought possible.

I was so intent on finding the answer I found a site with a loooooooong list of names and links to their pictures and was going to go through them one by one, but alas I had to go to work the next morning so I hop-scotched around, but unfortunately for me I didn't click on Steve's name.

My gripe with this goo is twofold. First, is that I could literally spend hours searching and not come across a direct or indirect path to the answer. Although he happened to be on one of the final pages I found, there was no crumb trail to follow. I haven't spent as much time since the answer was revealed, but Istill in searching based on the clues and categories given, I see his name nowhere!

The second problem is that the biography listed for Steve is a 3 line wikipedia entry and yet the picture is from his own website that has an extensive and accurate biography. Given the recent inaccurate information posted to wikipedia that has caused harm against 2 men in recent weeks, why opt for the short entry as the link for the bio instead of the one from his site.

While we're on the subject....how are goo's rated? 0852 was rated the same as 0847 and a direct search on the clue lead to the correct answer in about 2 minutes or less. 0859 was also rated the same and with a little more effort is discoverable.

Oh well, pass this off as beginner's whining if you must...I just had to get it off my chest! ;o)

ko.

Mike Eberhart | October 11, 2006
I actually found this goo in about 3 minutes. I used google to look for it. My search criteria was "Mr. Universe + Steroids". This popped up an article about 3 or 4 down the list. His name was in the article.

As far as the ratings for the goos go, Scott will tell you himself that he has a hard time determining ratings. Ones that he thinks are hard, usually get a lot of guesses, then ones that he thinks are easy, don't get many guesses at all. I personally only use the ratings as a reference or starting point. After that, I just start breaking down the clue.

Kerry Odell | October 13, 2006
Hmmm...odd I used those key words and others in many combinations, but never with a plus sign. /:)

Yeah, I guess it's all subjective.

Thanks for the info! :o)

Scott Hardie | October 13, 2006
Sorry to cause you frustration, Kerry. I'm glad you at least enjoy the game enough to put so much effort into it. :-)

While the goo was still current, I watched another player research it and scroll right past the name in the list of results. Michalik isn't as famous as Schwarzenegger, just famous enough to be mentioned among other figures of the sport who burned out on steroids, and his anonymity was part of his intended difficulty. Sometimes I give a hint that helps you pick one figure out of the crowd, while other times, like this, I prefer to make it that much harder. The fact that his photo wasn't terribly distorted was help to those who could find it.

About the first part of your gripe: Part of the weird alchemy of this game is the disconnect between my thoughts when preparing goos and players' thoughts when researching them. That is to say, I could think about goos like players do, but I don't. Sometimes that turns out against you like with Michalik because it can make a goo almost unsearchable, but more often (to my own mild frustration) it works in your favor with goos like Grigori Perelman, where if I gave Google ten seconds I would realize how ridiculously searchable my oh-so-difficult goo actually is. It already takes me 15-20 minutes to create each goo, so I'm not especially eager to spend another 10 minutes per, trying different word combinations in the clue to see how they affect search results; my time is short these days and getting much shorter. Besides, I still cling to the foolishly optimistic principle that this game is about recognizing a celebrity with your own brain, not about how well you Google, so I generally try to make goos that are fun to "figure out" all on your own and not goos that are fun to search. I don't mind when players use Google as an aid to the game, but it does bug me when players instantly turn to Google without even beginning to think about it on their own; some days I may as well just put a Google search form right there on the page. :-|

About the second part: All the bio links point to Wikipedia by default, even for the celebrities so obscure they don't even have Wikipedia articles yet. In the past, for each goo I used to find a URL of a web page about the celebrity and paste it in when I created the goo, but I discontinued that practice for a variety of reasons: Wikipedia usually provides convenient summaries at the top of the article, for obscure celebrities I was already linking to Wikipedia anyway, I don't like to link to celebrities' official sites if I take a photo from there, and so on.

As for the difficulty ratings, Mike said it. I'm not good at predicting how hard goos will be since I never play the game. When other players griped about how inaccurate the difficulty ratings were, I suggested getting rid of them altogether (I don't like them anyway), but I was talked out of it by game enthusiasts because it's one more piece of information that can help you solve the puzzle. Since I don't test the searchability, I generally rate according to how helpful the clue is and how "recognizeable" the person is, which includes their level of obscurity. I hope that information helps you. You're doing pretty well so far for a n00b; keep it up. :-)

Tony Peters | October 14, 2006
oh yeah me too I was looking for Mr universe/america's that died specificly, not roids in general...poor searching on my part.. I'd say about 50% of the time I have a good idea who it is when I see the clue/pic. the rest of the time I have to work my google

Kerry Odell | October 17, 2006
Scott,

I wonder....did you manage to stifle your snicker when they passed up the answer?? LOL

I understand the original intent behind the goo game, yet I also find it to be equally as challenging in a different way. With the world literally at everyone's fingertips, I think it is difficult not to turn to the internet as a path to a goo that the user doesn't readily recognize.

We all grew up in the era of instant gratification, which has completely intensified in the past 20 years at an unbelievable rate with the advent of technology. Pay-per-view, movie rentals, net-flix, software purchased online by download, drive thru's at the pharmacy and pizza shop, internet porn and the list goes on. Even Disney and Universal have jumped on the bandwagon with the fast-pass and single rider lines. There's also vending machines with everything from candy to condoms, ticket purchasing online, pre-order for upcoming movies and TIVO/DVR. I'm quite certain that in the near future, you won't have to leave your house to go on vacation if you don't want to. What a shame that would be to become so dependent on technology that a person would prefer to put on a helmet rather than experience the sights, sounds, smells and beauty of exploring a new place.

At any rate, I enjoy the search for people I don't know or don't recognize for the clue. It gives me a gauge on how well I read the clue and scanned the information. Steve Michalik was a definite stumper for me, as was the one for the Oracle guy. That one went over my head and we use Oracle on site...go figure. The other aspect I enjoy is talking with a friend I got hooked on goo after we both have guessed and discussing the ins and outs of where we went wrong or why it was harder for one of us. That makes the game that much more interesting, especially since we have a lot in common and yet diverge on the goos. I also am learning about lots of new people and things, which is always good for trivial pursuit!

I personally use altavista more than google, although they both yield similar results in most cases. And for the select few I recognize right away, I usually verify the answers with an image search because first impressions aren't always correct impressions. What I find absolutely intriguing is to track down a goo like Harold Reynolds. I don't watch sports often and almost never on purpose, so most of the sports figures are at least an intermediate for me. I had no idea who Reynolds was, what scandal he was tied up in or what sport he played. I do, however, know what a baseball glove is so that's where I started. Finding several different teams in Alaska was enlightening on it's own, but combined with the fact that I stumbled on the right team from a sale of memorabilia (the same type of hat he had on) and had to sift through 30+ years of photos to find the correct uniform because they've had many different changes. I guess that's the same reason I like the shows like CSI (Vegas & Miami) and Criminal Minds and I like geocaching (see http://www.geocaching.com). At any rate, google or no google, it takes some thought to search, especially for ones like the Tunick guy that I also got stumped on.

I see from a time perspective, to wiki is quickest and most efficient way to link. Really and truly, if we want to know more we can go and find it ourselves...after all we do have the world at our fingertips.

I would rather have the ratings than not have them, for sure. At least that gives me some idea of how you perceive the goo and provides a starting point. I knew it in the back of my mind it was all subjective...but I figured I'd ask just in case.

Thanks for the goos (yes...even the stumpers that bug me) and the efforts.....maintaining a site like this can't be easy. ;o)

klo.

While we're on the subject...when does the actual competition begin? If I do make it through the first phase, I may have a vacation that disqualifies me (no internet in the middle of the deep blue sea, I'm guessing). Just curious.

Scott Hardie | October 22, 2006
No snickering here. :-) I want players to do well in the game, but I refuse to help, so I sit there silently and watch it happen – that is, when I get the chance to watch.

I've been thinking a lot about the American instant-gratification thing myself lately. It is ingrained into our society, from starting wars and expecting to leave the country weeks later, to having kids that we expect to become self-governing little geniuses before they reach puberty. I'm not quite sure what meaning this has for the goo game, except that I'd better hurry up and convert the guess form to Ajax so you don't need a pop-up window. And no, you don't need to know what that means.

The goo game is a weird barometer of pop cultural recognizeability made more weird by the fact that I choose most of the goos myself. I pick 'em both famous and obscure, but my easy is someone else's hard and vice versa. We can't even agree on whether Benicio del Toro is famous.

If everything stays on schedule, the Elimination Phase should begin on November 15th. Where's your vacation in the middle of the deep blue sea, if I may ask?

Kerry Odell | October 22, 2006
We're going on a cruise...my first....out in the western caribbean out of Tampa. We're probably going to drive over the night before and get a hotel. Who can rely on I-4 for reliable transportation??? ;o) My husband and his parents (no worries, my in-laws are great....i got lucky) have already been on cruises. I don't get motion sick on boats or rides like Mission Space, but I'll react to some of the PS2 games my son plays occassionally, so I don't know what to expect.

On a different note, I'm hoping to get a better camera before we go. I have a little Kodak CX7300 3.2 MP and I have to say it has been a fantastic first digital camera. I was inexpensive, easy to use and takes better pictures than the newer Kodak 3.2s we're using at work (have to get simple ones for the tech challenged). Originally, I was holding out for a digital SLR. The cameras have improved over the past 2 years since I've looked at the "enthusiast" types and now have decided on a Canon Powershot S3 IS. The cost is less and at 1/3200 shutter speed, it's not too far off the 1/4000 shutter speed of an SLR, which has been my pet peeve with the Kodak now for years. What good is a quality picture if your subjects have moved out of the frame??

Looks like we'll be gone, but maybe they'll have internet on the boat....LOL. ;)

Mike Eberhart | October 23, 2006
What ship are you going on? I'm going on a cruise leaving from that same port in Jan. And yes, they do have internet on the ships. It's just freaking expensive to use.

Kerry Odell | October 23, 2006
LOL...isn't everything??? :)

We're going on Carnival, the Inspiration I believe...taking the Cozumel (Calica) / Grand Cayman route. At least I think the ship name is right. My husband and his mom made all the plans.

My biggest concern at the moment is hurricanes staying out of the way. ;o)

Scott Hardie | October 25, 2006
Have a great trip, Kerry. If you want to share any of those photos and get rid of your mysterious question mark, just send 'em my way. :-)

Amy Austin | October 25, 2006
Yes... I am a hater of the big question mark, for sure! (But I suppose it's also about damn time that I updated my pic that's about 4 years old now myself!!! I'm working on it...)