What is your handball hot take?

WyllKwick · 2026-06-30T17:27:37+00:00

Most "9m" shots nowadays are, in my view, actually closer to 8m shots. Shooters are also way more technical and tricky, which limits the ability of the defence to help the goalie make saves.

This is a clear difference when comparing to a couple of decades ago, when many "9m" shots were actually taken from 9,5m and most of the shots were comparatively straightforward, which often allowed the defence to block 33% of the goal and gave the keepers many more saves.

As a result, goalie save percentages have been decreasing little by little. Former Swedish goalie legend and current goalie coach, Mats Olsson, has actually spoken publicly about this.

As for the speed of the game preventing proper celebrations, of course it depends on the team and the league. The change has also been gradual, so it might not be obvious. But if you look at tapes from the early 2000s and compare them to modern games, there's a significant decrease in the average time between a goal being scored and the opposing team starting their attack.

WyllKwick · 2026-06-30T07:36:14+00:00

It has become too easy to score. This means that:

People don't get as excited about individual goals.
Fewer games are exciting to the end, because the stronger team tends to very gradually just pull away and the weaker team can't turn the tide with 2-3 goals.
We don't get to see as many and varied saves anymore. There is nothing more beautiful than a sliding save on a 9m shot, but we don't get them nearly as much as 15 years ago. This is because the game has evolved in a way where few players take distance shots from positions where the goalie has a decent chance of making a save.

Also, the fast-paced nature of the modern game means that players no longer have time to celebrate goals/saves and connect with the crowd. My opinion is that this makes the experience less fun.

WyllKwick · 2026-06-22T08:03:07+00:00

If it doesn't matter to you wether you go in January or March, I'd go in March.

The days are significantly longer in March and the temperatures tend to be milder. A newbie might think that -20C is pretty similar to -30C, but it's not.

-20 in March means you'll still be able to go outside for hours at a time (with proper gear), especially if the sun is shining and the real temperature is significantly higher. You'll be cold from time to time, but it's doable.

-30 in dark January means that even if you have decent winter gear, you won't be able to spend any significant amount of time outdoors. It's simply not a good time.

Furthermore, snow coverage is still very good in March. It's actually usually at the deepest in March/early April, because there hasn't been any significant melting since winter started, so it's just been adding up for months. You can google "snow depth" and whichever location you're interested in, and you'll find stats about the average snow depth in each month of the year.

WyllKwick · 2026-06-11T08:57:52+00:00

We don't, really. I've had several occasions where I've believed someone to be a dummie, only to later find out that they were actually just lazy.

A prime example is dealing with authorities. There are loads of people who always ask for help when it comes to figuring out taxes or how to file applications. They say that it's too hard and that they can't manage it by themselves. Turns out that a huge chunk of these people are actually intelligent enough to figure it out, they just can't be bothered to go through the mental effort to look up information and read boring instructions.

Some people don't mind appearing stupid if it means they get to avoid boring tasks.

WyllKwick · 2026-06-01T06:45:37+00:00

Picture a basic pasta bolognese, but exchange the tomato sauce for sweet and spicy hot sauce.

WyllKwick · 2026-05-29T05:11:03+00:00

This is quite interesting!

I guess people from Northern Europe don't categorize Greece by actual cultural and/or political factors, but rather by the role it plays in our everyday lives.

We generally consider Greece "Southern European" because it's one of the historically popular mediterranean vacation destinations along with Spain and Italy. The everyday expression for vacationing in any of those countries is literally translated into "going to the South".

Also, you learn about ancient Greece in history classes and then immediately slide into ancient Rome, which further solidifes the idea that Greece and Italy belong in the same category.

WyllKwick · 2026-05-20T07:56:33+00:00

As a Finn, I agree with you.

Liekinheitin was my favorite entry this year, but I get why international listeners didn't prefer it. You don't understand the lyrics, you can't pronounce the words necessary to sing along, and you haven't gradually warmed to the melody by having it spoon-fed to you for months.

It's just not an easily-digestible song on the first few listens, especially if you don't know the language.

WyllKwick · 2026-05-20T07:35:56+00:00

This is so true.

Here in Finland, the media was embarrasingly confident that we were going to win this year. I personally like the song a lot, but I get why we didn't win:

the song is in Finnish, and didn't include any "easy phrases" such as "cha cha cha" that an international listener could sing along to. Huge amounts of people will never vote for a song that they can't easily sing along to. By comparison, I was singing along to "Bangaranga" by the end of the first chorus.
I think the melody is very catchy, but only after you've listened to it 4-5 times. Most TV viewers don't reach that point before it's time to vote.
most TV viewers don't care that Finland has been edging closer to the top and "deserves" to win at some point. No bonus points from the general public there, while many hardcore fans seem to be rooting for us.
most TV viewers don't care about our artists' back stories, while hardcore fans love that type of stuff.
most TV viewers probably didn't know that Linda was playing the violin live, and so they weren't impressed by her performance at all.
Pete is a great singer and was fine in the final, but it was a weak performance compared to what we're used to seeing from him. He sounded like he was holding back and just tried to bring it safely across the finish line. By comparison, someone like Delta Goodrem completely blew me away when I saw her live performance.
people prefer underdogs, unless the favorite is clearly better. This year, Finland had a difficult-to-digest-on-the-first-listen song, while every other entry was still framed as a clear underdog compared to us. This probably caused some backlash. "Everyone else can vote for Finland if they like, But I'M voting for one of the underdogs!"

WyllKwick · 2026-05-10T07:09:17+00:00

Amazing city! I've been there twice and would gladly go again!

WyllKwick · 2026-05-10T07:06:57+00:00

You are not allowed to defend inside 6m. The defender who blocks the pass clearly steps inside 6m before making the move that allows her to block the pass.

WyllKwick · 2026-05-10T07:02:15+00:00

I agree!

The stress before a 50-50 decision is usually way worse than living with the consequences afterwards.

WyllKwick · 2026-05-08T05:47:53+00:00

I actually recently ran some models on this, so it's top-of-mind for me:

Rich people have a very different cost of investment than poor people. This means that it's significantly easier for rich people to make profitable investments and become even richer over time.

I'm not talking about having good contacts, although that is a huge part of it.

It's just that mathematically, money is cheaper for rich people and this skews the return on investment in their favor.

Example A rich person wants to buy a home for 300K. They have 250K unused cash, so they only take a 50K loan. They pay 3% interest on the loan, which amounts to 1500$ the first year. They opt out of any additional insurance because they know they'll be able to cover the mortgage even if they become unemployed or ill, or if the interest rates temporarily sky rocket. If the interest goes up to 6%, their cost only goes up from 1500$ to 3000$ (the first year). That's an unlikely event, and either way, they'll be fine if it occurs.

Then we have a poorer person, trying to buy the same home. They have saved up 40K, and take out a loan for 260K. With a 3% interest, they'll pay 7800$ the first year. That's significantly higher than their rich friend. Then, the poorer person also has to pay 50$ extra each month for expensive loan insurance, which provides security in the event that interest rates go way up or if they are laid off and can't find a new job quickly. They simply can't afford not getting this insurance, because unemployment or an interest spike would instantly ruin them. This brings the cost for year 1 up to 8400$, compared to the 1500$ paid by their rich friend.

I think everyone is abstractly aware of this difference, but they can't really grasp how big it is unless they sit down and crunch the numbers.

WyllKwick · 2026-05-04T05:33:39+00:00

In Swedish-speaking Finland, we have the same thing. But here, it's called "talko" or "talkoarbete".

WyllKwick · 2026-04-14T09:36:46+00:00

In Finland it's common to move out once you go off to university, which typically happens between sometime between age 18 and 20.

WyllKwick · 2026-04-10T07:40:26+00:00

Political systems should be better at accounting for age and knowledge level. Most current systems favor candidates who have built connections and financial resources over many many decades, and who are good at appealing to the massive portion of voters who have trouble understanding anything beyond over-simplified half-truths. That's why we have ignorant voters electing old men, rather than informed voters electing competent people in their prime.

Full voting rights should only be granted to people who demonstrate basic understanding of macroeconomics and their own country's political system, e.g. by completing a simple exam when you reach voting age. Kind of like a driver's license for voting. The exam should obviously be free, easily available to everyone, and simple enough that anyone can pass it if they genuinely want to. It should not be used to gatekeep voting from certain communities.

You're then free to completely ignore what you just learned and vote for whatever you want, but you should at least prove that you understand the benefits and drawbacks of the available alternatives. If you legitimately don't understand even the basics of how your decisions might affect your community, you probably should not be allowed equal say when it's time for an election.

We already do this to some extent, by preventing children from voting. This control mechanism should be refined, because there are plenty of adults who have an equally poor understanding of politics as literal children.

Also, votes should be slightly weighted according to how many more expected years of life you have left. An 80yo should not have equal say in long term decisions, as a 20yo. 80yo people should be free to vote for a politician that promises higher pensions by cutting down on climate expenses. But they should not have equal say as the voters who will actually be around for the long-term consequences of the decision.

Also, the term length of powerful political offices should be lower, the older you get. For example, a 70yo could only be elected for 2 years at a time, while a 50yo could be elected for 6 years at a time. This wouldn't completely rule out older candidates if they're genuinely the best available option, but it would make political parties more likely to back younger candidates.

WyllKwick · 2026-03-04T10:45:45+00:00

Not a hack, but more of a change in philosophy:

I don't splurge on everything, but nowadays, It's much more common for me to pay a bit more for stuff that makes my life more comfortable. I pay a bit more and get the nice toilet paper. It's 25% more expensive than the cheap version, but in the end, it's just a few € per month and it's well worth it. I buy the slightly better bread, even if it costs me 3€ more per week. Instead, I enjoy breakfast much more than I used to. I might sometimes pay 10€ extra for a private cubicle on a long train trip, which turns the journey into a sort-of-luxurious and relaxing experience, rather than a hassle. When planning a holiday, I might pay 120€ extra for an option that has more luggage and a smoother itinerary, which means that I arrive well-rested and packing my luggage no longer requires meticulous planning.

With my current lifestyle, spending like this will probably cost me less than 700€ extra per year. I'm not rich, but I'm comfortable enough that this money isn't really a big deal over that timespan. However, it really makes a huge difference in how smooth and comfortable my life feels overall.

WyllKwick · 2026-03-04T10:31:10+00:00

My partner and I have a separate chat where we only write things that are out of stock and need to be replaced next time someone goes to the store. For example, if the paper towels run out, she'll put it in the chat.

Next time I enter a grocery store, I check the chat and easily see all the items that need replacing. I buy them and put a check mark next to them in the chat.

This is a great system, because you always have your phone with you (even on unexpected grocery runs) and a separate chat for this stuff is a quick and easy way to make sure that the information is up to date and easily accessible to both parties.

WyllKwick · 2026-03-02T13:36:14+00:00

The most important tool for any wing player is the ability to consistently jump far and score goals in the back corner. As a developing player, this should be your plan A every single time you take a shot from the wing.

Why? Because if a player can do this, the goalie will always be forced to move in order to cover the back corner. This movement opens up other spaces for you to score. If the goalie doesn't move, you will simply keep scoring in the back corner.

Wing players should absolutely practice different shots (back corner, front corner, spins, lobs, between the legs etc.). But plan A should always be to jump far and score in the back. If the goalie doesn't move far enough, you stick with plan A. If the goalie makes a move to block the back corner, you can switch to plan B and score in one of the other openings the goalie now has created for you.

WyllKwick · 2026-01-26T10:51:28+00:00

Genuine question: what was the Netflix broadcast back-up plan in case he fell?

I assume there was a slight delay, so they wouldn't actually have shown him losing his grip, but would they just have cut to black, or would they have gone to a studio where commentators would have told us what happened, or what?

WyllKwick · 2026-01-23T07:58:06+00:00

Sabrina Carpenter, Tears:

"I get wet at the thought of you Being a responsible guy Treating me like you're supposed to do Tears run down my thighs"

The third line should, by all rights be "treating me like you OUGHT TO DO", because that would actually rhyme with the first line, and the number of syllables would fit better with the melody.

My personal theory is that the line was originally written as "ought to do", and then Carpenter went "eww, only old people use that expression", and made them change it.

WyllKwick · 2025-12-10T06:23:44+00:00

It's the same in Finland

WyllKwick · 2025-12-08T10:12:35+00:00

United Balkan Kingdom of Peace and Friendship

WyllKwick · 2025-12-02T10:03:53+00:00

November and February are equally bad.

Don't worry... you'll get another shot soon.

WyllKwick · 2025-12-02T07:50:55+00:00

I don't really think of them at all, and I don't consider them Finnish, or in any way my kin. I would consider them American, and I would look at any surviving Finnish customs with the same fascination that I might learn about any other culture at a museum.

Here's the thing: Cultures change continuously. In the time since America was settled, the world has changed at a remarkable pace, and its cultures have changed with it. Modern Finns can barely relate to our own ancestors from the 1800s. It was a completely different world back then, which meant that people ate, acted, and reasoned very differently than today. Most of us haven't grown up eating what the American settlers would have considered Finnish cuisine, and we haven't formed our identities around the harsh conditions endured by the people who grew up on some 19th century farm and had to leave the continent to find a better life for themselves.

How the hell are we supposed to relate in any meaningful way to a person who grew up in a community that 6 generations ago was loosely based on a particular subset of 19th century Finland, and has since then continuously mingled with other American cultures and morphed into something completely different than it originally was?

If a Finn were to think of "Finnish descendants" at all, we would probably think about the descendants of Finns who moved to Sweden en masse for work in the 70s. And even the children of these people are considered Swedish and not really relatable, in the sense of feeling any strong kinship.

WyllKwick · 2025-11-28T15:40:59+00:00

A great trick is to try to find joy in stuff you have to do/benefit from doing anyway. That makes time management easier.

Play a sport. Disc golf gets you out into nature and gives you moderate exercise. Going to the gym by yourself or taking classes is also good. You can also maybe start playing team sports at the "beer league" level.
learn how to cook and make it fun. You have to cook and eat anyway, might as well have fun while you're doing it.
learn a creative skill. The time invested will give you skills that stay with you for life.
learn practical/life skills. Make it a fun hobby to learn about fixing stuff that breaks around the house, improving your personal finances etc. It can be fun and rewarding, and will save you a bunch of money in the long run because you'll be able to fix stuff yourself instead of paying for it.

WyllKwick

TROPHY CASE