The trouble with Quidditch

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 168887

--- Bart Lidofsky <bartl at ...> wrote:
>
> All the talk about Ginny playing Quidditch has reminded
> me of something I figured out years ago:
> 
> ...
> 
> But there was one problem with the game, and it showed
> a basic problem with Quidditch, as well. I ... It is a
> single factor in a game that is so overwhelming that it
> takes over the game. In Quidditch, it is the Seeker. 
> 
> ...
> 
> The basic problem in Quidditch is that there are just 
> too damned many points for catching the Golden Snitch.
> It is admitted that the team that catches the Golden 
> Snitch is almost never the loser. A logical strategy 
> would be to ignore the Chasers, and have the Beaters 
> go against the opponent's Seeker. ...
> 
> My best guess: JKR wanted to make the Seeker the most
> important player on the team, and didn't bother to do
> the math to see that he was the ONLY important player
> on the team. 
> 
> Bart
>

bboyminn:

A very good point, but not one that has not been 
addressed in the wizard world. If you think back to
the beginning of Quidditch when the Snitch was
introduced, we find that exactly as you predicted,
scoring was ignored and everyone concentrated on 
the Snitch.

As the story goes (from memory) some wizard thought
the game was a little dull, and decided to add a 
little bird with a 150 galleon bounty to the game.
Naturally, everyone forgot about the game, and 
concentrated on catching the Snitch, on the typically
human assumption that a bird (and 150 galleons) in 
the hand is better that any amount of points in the
bush (or on the scoreboard). 

So, the rules were changed. Cash was no longer a
reward, to keep things focused on the game, points
were substituted for cash. Further, only the Seeker
could catch the Snitch. Which meant the rest of the
team forgot about chasing the Snitch and went back
to the regular team jobs.

Further, if all the emphasis is placed on stopping 
the other Seeker, and not on scoring points, it is
very possible for the other team to score sufficient
points to make catching the Snitch irrelevant. So,
that aspect of the game can't truly be ignored.

It is the job of the rest of the team to keep scoring
under control (making your own and preventing the
other team) while the Seeker seeks out the Snitch. 
Again, if scoring in not controlled then catching the
Snitch doesn't matter.

But I do agree that 150 points is excessive. Still the
150 points is based on something that happened in 
history. By the time they worked out that it was 
excessive, it was already entrenched in the game. Some
things stand on tradition more than logic.

Further, wizards aren't the most logical of people. I
think magic corrupts the thought processes of the 
masses, very much the way modern technology does for
muggles. Why engage in deep analysis when you can just
wave a wand and accomplish what you want? For muggles,
any half-wit can drive a car, but can they fix one,
build one, or more importantly create one? I think not.
Any muggle can use a computer, but can they fix one,
build one, or more importantly create one? I think not.

As wizards rely on magic, and muggles rely on technology,
we actually make ourselves more helpless. Remember the
early creators of automobiles and planes, build their 
machines from scratch; they even cast the engines in sheds
in their back yards. In the wizard world, certainly there
are the deep thinking geniuses who create new magic, but
the more we rely on geniuses to create the world around
us, the more helpless we become as individuals to manage
that technology. Most of us, as is true of wizards, are
helpless when the technology around us breaks down. 

Just a few thoughts.

Steve/bboyminn