Rhino wrote:
This is probably getting into hair splitting but I still see speed of recall as a valid metavariable in measurement of knowledge. Think of it this way: regardless of competitive setting, who would you say has a deeper and more secure knowledge of, to pick a recent Topix, the Indian campaign of Alexander the Great; the person who can rattle off the dates, opposing generals, and mortality stats in chronological order within seconds and flawlessly, or the one who given a few minutes and a pencil and eraser could get to the same info, especially if helped by clues and time to consider them? Speed Freaks takes away the clues and much of/most of the time to consider them (assuming you are playing against even passable competition). Thus the first person with the surer recall will prevail, as they should. This is not a question of competition being the end goal, but of competition more closely measuring actual ability.
The opposite is true of, say, the Pyramid Round in SD, where immediate recall that comes from certain knowledge is rewarded no more than the gambit to play slowly, eliminate the distractors and discuss the rest and go for the best option. Which player/team really has the most knowledge of that trivia datum?
So you consider the ability to recall knowledge a type of knowledge?
Is that like being in love with the idea of being in love?
I consider recall a simple skill set. An amazingly complex and wonderfully hard to define simple skill set.
As to your example, in a competition where speed is a necessity, the first player, for that question set at least, is the best choice.
Without any sort of competition involved, I would have no preference for either. That was the crux of my original post.
My original post was made as a general statement because I thought that was how you were responding to liljol.
If you were foolishly trying to stay on topic
and your reference to trivia competitions was assumed, then what the heck am I doing here?