Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

[beninho]

First topic message reminder :

https://officiating.worldrugby.org/?module=3&section=36&subsection=129&language=en

"It is not mandatory for the team receiving the challenge to face it."

How many effing times. If they don't face it up silently and respectfully they get massive media criticism.

No they don't!

This is getting crazy!

[McLaren]

Aren't the Japanese and South Koreans into baseball?  Seem to remember one of them doing ok when baseball was in the olympics.


I would also argue that F1 is a global sport in terms of where the events are held but most drivers are from wealthier nations in Europe.

[Soul Requiem]

When you take into account the god like status Cricket has in India it is in fact the second highest viewed sport in the world.

[McLaren]

When you take into account the god like status Cricket has in India it is in fact the second highest viewed sport in the world.

Do you have a source for that?

[Soul Requiem]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-watched_television_broadcasts#History

[George1507]

I love the fact that baseball has a 'world series' and they are the only one in it.

I think about a third of the players in MLB are not USA natives, so it is kind of the best of the world. There's no team outside of the US capable of playing to that standard, so the "World Series" sort of is a world series.

[super_realist]

I love the fact that baseball has a 'world series' and they are the only one in it.

I think about a third of the players in MLB are not USA natives, so it is kind of the best of the world. There's no team outside of the US capable of playing to that standard, so the "World Series" sort of is a world series.

Didn't a team from Canada win it last year, or was that hoopball?

Baseball does have a separate world championship though.

[super_realist]

When you take into account the god like status Cricket has in India it is in fact the second highest viewed sport in the world.

Do you have a source for that?

Surprised you even doubt that Mac.
A lot of Yanks would have you believe that the Super Bowl is the biggest TV audience but its miles away.

[JAS]

Thought this was interesting. And wow Tiger was making a lot of money, Phil too at one point.

A video graph of highest paid athletes 1991 to 2019.

https://twitter.com/TheKendallBaker/status/1204456119524937729

To be fair that is a fascinating watch Mac, a few observations
1. Boxers earn shed loads!!
2. What did Jack and Arnie do circa 1994?
3. Tigers commercial value and rise to worlds highest paid sportsman was quite well illustrated. I suppose that helps the understanding of why there was so much hoopla surrounding him.
4. Surprised at the rather subdued appearance of Fed, Nadal & Djokovic. Yes Fed makes a half decent appearance for a little while, Nadal just about scrapes on and Djokovic nowhere. A bit odd for a trio who have been utterly dominant in a major global sport for the best part of 2 decades.

In summary I suppose it’s not about how dominant you are, it’s about how appealing you are to affluent marketing peoples target audience.

[McLaren]

Jas

Tennis doesn't really have a very wide appeal, how many people watch it outside wimbledon or US open?

[super_realist]

Tons Mac. It's a massively popular sport.

I'd love to see where The Presidents Tinpot Cup ranked in global viewing.

[McLaren]

On Palmer and Nicklaus it is a bit weird that they both reappeared around 94, does anyone have any decent theories for why that might have happened?

Didn't the golf channel start around then, did they both get signed up for that? Or maybe big golf architecture projects.

[McLaren]

Super

No one watches tennis. Have you ever met someone who has watched tennis outside a major?

[super_realist]

Super

No one watches tennis. Have you ever met someone who has watched tennis outside a major?

Mac, if people only watched outside Majors, then why is it so highly paid when it isn't a major? Being a wum plank again.
Theres tons of big events outside the Majors.
It would be like saying no one watches golf outside of the Majors, but we know that's not true

[super_realist]

On Palmer and Nicklaus it is a bit weird that they both reappeared around 94, does anyone have any decent theories for why that might have happened?

Didn't the golf channel start around then, did they both get signed up for that? Or maybe big golf architecture projects.

Internet Mac. It all started around then. If they'd copyrighted their image rights then they'd be quids in.

[McLaren]

Super

Relative to the bigger sports, no one watches golf. So yes, I am saying no one watches tennis outside the grand slams. It would come as no surprise if tennis had lower viewership than the lower end ET events. Tennis is a niche interest.

[super_realist]

Depends where you decide what figure is considered "a lot of people"
Tennis is far bigger than the lowly ET events. Look at the level of interest in tennis players compared to ET players.
Just sounds like you don't watch tennis, and consider it lower in public appeal than it is.

There's a lot of events in a lot of sport that no one really watches, I. E. League Cup, doesn't mean football isn't popular

[McLaren]

Super

The discussion was around why Tennis players didn't feature more prominently in the highest paid athletes data. I am putting forward the idea that the main reason is that tennis has very low viewership and public interest outside the grand slams. With probably a big drop off even between Wimbledon and the rest of them.

For whatever reason the top golfers seem to attract more sponsor money than the top tennis players.

[Soul Requiem]

Super

The discussion was around why Tennis players didn't feature more prominently in the highest paid athletes data. I am putting forward the idea that the main reason is that tennis has very low viewership and public interest outside the grand slams. With probably a big drop off even between Wimbledon and the rest of them.

For whatever reason the top golfers seem to attract more sponsor money than the top tennis players.

Top golfers are American while the top tennis players are European, there's your answer.

Although Federer is 5th overall for the decade above every golfer.

[super_realist]

Its certainly an interesting question, but then we don't really know from where they've drawn their data, a question I always have in mind when I see this sort of graphic that seems to have permeated everywhere. How reliable are the sources?
I would say that Roger Federer for example is more well known globally than Botox Woods, as SRequiem says, many of the top earners in sport have been Yanks regardless of their global appeal Most of the world would never know any of the high earning NFL, NBA and other minority American centric  sports people who make up that list if they walked past them in the street, but most would know Federer, Djokovic or Usain Bolt if they walked past them.
The biggest earning female tennis player by a million miles is the revolting Brat Serena Williams, do you think she would earn that money in endorsements if she came from The Congo? Being American has a lot to do with your earning potential in regards to sponsorship.

[kwinigolfer]

Super

No one watches tennis. Have you ever met someone who has watched tennis outside a major?

That's because supes has never met me.

I go to the Masters event in Montreal every other year and it's a fantastic event, great tennis, very accessible for the fans, and well organised - better than the US Open in my opinion.
You should come with us sometime Mac, you might even enjoy it.

[George1507]

I love the fact that baseball has a 'world series' and they are the only one in it.

I think about a third of the players in MLB are not USA natives, so it is kind of the best of the world. There's no team outside of the US capable of playing to that standard, so the "World Series" sort of is a world series.

Didn't a team from Canada win it last year, or was that hoopball?

Sorry I should have said 'no team outside of N America...'. Toronto have won the WS a couple of times.

[kwinigolfer]

I don't know what the criteria is for the well-paid athletes, but many golfers have built huge business empires, Nicklaus, Palmer, Norman etc., many being loosely connected with golf but Palmer, for instance, owned one of the biggest chain of Cadillac dealerships.
Most of the athletes mentioned haven't created their brand beyond their sport.

[super_realist]

Palmer sticking to what he knew best. Coffin dodgers cars.

[dynamark]

Got to give Palmer some credit back before sponsorship was invented.We went to the Arnold Palmer golf range in the 70s he was well in front of the curve.
Over here the likes of David Gower and Lineker got well into it through a guy called Jon Holmes who go them all sorts of deals.

[westisbest]

I’d say Tennis is pretty well watched all year round, no matter what tournament.

Davis Cup draws a good crowd. Can be exciting to watch.

[pedro]

Tennis is huge both as a male and female sport. Can’t say that for golf, football or any other sports.

[JAS]

I don't know what the criteria is for the well-paid athletes, but many golfers have built huge business empires, Nicklaus, Palmer, Norman etc., many being loosely connected with golf but Palmer, for instance, owned one of the biggest chain of Cadillac dealerships.
Most of the athletes mentioned haven't created their brand beyond their sport.

Indeed Kwini, then there’s the drinks empire as well, is that still going? The Arnold Palmer (iced-tea/lemonade mix in a can). Then of course you can add a vodka and call it a John Daley.

I’m guessing that the 94/95 resurgence of Arnie & Jack coincided with the course building boom and they absolutely raked it in through their course design & build activities.

[JAS]

Its certainly an interesting question, but then we don't really know from where they've drawn their data, a question I always have in mind when I see this sort of graphic that seems to have permeated everywhere. How reliable are the sources?
I would say that Roger Federer for example is more well known globally than Botox Woods, as SRequiem says, many of the top earners in sport have been Yanks regardless of their global appeal Most of the world would never know any of the high earning NFL, NBA and other minority American centric  sports people who make up that list if they walked past them in the street, but most would know Federer, Djokovic or Usain Bolt if they walked past them.
The biggest earning female tennis player by a million miles is the revolting Brat Serena Williams, do you think she would earn that money in endorsements if she came from The Congo? Being American has a lot to do with your earning potential in regards to sponsorship.

Another thing I’d throw into the mix contrasting tennis & golf is that equipment manufacturers have a lot more to gain in golf than tennis. Putting aside participation levels (although they would be interesting to know) just tot up how much it costs to purchase all the required equipment, clothing etc to play golf, then do the same for tennis. So with more to be gained in terms of sales of equipment and clothing it does seem logical that more sponsorship money will be thrown at golf. (Obviously that comparison and argument wouldn’t work between golf and boxing) :-p

[George1507]

Tennis players need clothes too, and a bag to put the racquets in, and balls and so on.

They don't need waterproofs or an electric trolley, but they need at least two racquets, and that's going to be £400.

Racquets need to be restrung, and then replaced, so whilst it isn't quite as expensive as golf, the cost does mount up.

[navyblueshorts]

Super

Relative to the bigger sports, no one watches golf. So yes, I am saying no one watches tennis outside the grand slams. It would come as no surprise if tennis had lower viewership than the lower end ET events.  Tennis is a niche interest.

Would tend to agree w/ this. Woods' riches were due to him transcending the sport while being black in a 'white man's sport'. Mickleson et al rode his coat tails quite nicely.

[super_realist]

Super

Relative to the bigger sports, no one watches golf. So yes, I am saying no one watches tennis outside the grand slams. It would come as no surprise if tennis had lower viewership than the lower end ET events.  Tennis is a niche interest.

Would tend to agree w/ this. Woods' riches were due to him transcending the sport while being black in a 'white man's sport'. Mickleson et al rode his coat tails quite nicely.

He had an influence, but money has gone up in all major and mainstream sports over the same period of time and you can't credit one player with that . I think it's as much to do with new ways of consuming sport offering more opportunity for sponsorship rather than one particular player in any sport.
The Internet and satellite TV has had a far bigger influence. The audience has gone up exponentially because of it.

[McLaren]

Super

Did nothing sink in for you during the many times we have had the Tiger effect discussion on here. You have been given many sources over the years showing Tiger elevated the finances in golf.

[super_realist]

Super

Did nothing sink in for you during the many times we have had the Tiger effect discussion on here. You have been given many sources over the years showing Tiger elevated the finances in golf.

Mac, I'm not saying there wasn't an effect, but it has more to do with the Internet and new TV availability as evidenced by similar upsurge in prize money for other sports. You seem to ignore that as do all your sources. They make a correlation on one observation and ignore all other contributing factors.
How did Botox lift money in tennis, F1, football, rugby, cricket, athletics etc which enjoyed rapid rises in money at the same time. You never answered that before.

[navyblueshorts]

Super

Relative to the bigger sports, no one watches golf. So yes, I am saying no one watches tennis outside the grand slams. It would come as no surprise if tennis had lower viewership than the lower end ET events.  Tennis is a niche interest.

Would tend to agree w/ this. Woods' riches were due to him transcending the sport while being black in a 'white man's sport'. Mickleson et al rode his coat tails quite nicely.

He had an influence, but money has gone up in all major and mainstream sports over the same period of time and you can't credit one player with that . I think it's as much to do with new ways of consuming sport offering more opportunity for sponsorship rather than one particular player in any sport.
The Internet and satellite TV has had a far bigger influence. The audience has gone up exponentially because of it.

Sure, but I thought you said golf was a minority watched sport? How do you explain Woods' stratospheric earnings increase from, say, 2000 to ~2009? I suggest that it's to do with his ridiculous performance at his chosen sport, the fact he was black in an essentially white sport and because those endorsing him knew he reached a huge market; one not normally remotely interested in golf.

Re. role of satellite TV, you think removing golfing Majors in UK from terrestrial to Sky has increased those watching? Only ~8.5 million households take Sky cf. 12 million for terrestrial alone (https://www.barb.co.uk/tv-landscape-reports/tracker-uk-households-by-tv-platform/). That 8.5 million Sky subscribers doesn't breakdown those that have, or have not, got the sports package, so almost certainly less than 8.5 million have Sky Sports and how many of them watch the golf?

Internet pretty much established by period above too.

[super_realist]

The Internet was pretty much nothing around 1996 when Woods came around, but it grew massively in the subsequent year, as did media outlets like Sky Sports.
People don't watch golf on terrestrial TV anyway, that's why the BBC got rid of it.

[dynamark]

Golf for the average joe is now a pretty cheap sport secondhand set of bats for £75 and every golf club offering a deal .Some shoes nothing else special required and off you go.
I think what has changed is the desire to join a club for social /prestige reasons has largely gone rightly or wrongly but that's where we are.
Tennis always a niche for probably the better off from my experience need to join a David LLoyd or similar a pay for tuition if yo u want to progress

[navyblueshorts]

The Internet was pretty much nothing around 1996 when Woods came around, but it grew massively in the subsequent year, as did media outlets like Sky Sports.
People don't watch golf on terrestrial TV anyway, that's why the BBC got rid of it.

Please look at what I posted. I was specifically talking of ~2000 to ~2009 re. Woods, which was the period when his 'earnings' went through the roof on the graphic Mac posted and that started this.

Re. lack of watching golf on terrestrial when it was there - . I guarantee there were more golfers who watched on terrestrial than who now watch on Sky - are you trying to suggest otherwise? BBC "got rid of it" because Sky outbid them.

[Soul Requiem]

Golf for the average joe  is now a pretty cheap sport secondhand set of bats for £75 and every golf club offering a deal .Some shoes nothing else special required and off you go.
I think what has changed is the desire to join a club for social /prestige reasons has largely gone rightly or wrongly but that's where we are.
Tennis always a niche for probably the better off from my experience need to join a David LLoyd or similar a pay for tuition if yo u want to progress

So golf is going to cost an average Joe a couple of hundred at least whereas Tennis it's the cost of a racket and some balls which can be as little as £30 but the cheaper option is a niche for the better off?

[dynamark]

Still going to need to find a tennis court to play the game on so presume some sort of fees involved.The only courts close to me are a David Lloyd at about £70,a month( and its very good) or a private club with a couple of covered courts at a cost.
I'm not quite getting your point.Folk I know who play tennis are members of a tennis cluib and need to pay for it.Great game though

[super_realist]

The Internet was pretty much nothing around 1996 when Woods came around, but it grew massively in the subsequent year, as did media outlets like Sky Sports.
People don't watch golf on terrestrial TV anyway, that's why the BBC got rid of it.

Please look at what I posted. I was specifically talking of ~2000 to ~2009 re. Woods, which was the period when his 'earnings' went through the roof on the graphic Mac posted and that started this.

Re. lack of watching golf on terrestrial when it was there - . I guarantee there were more golfers who watched on terrestrial than who now watch on Sky - are you trying to suggest otherwise? BBC "got rid of it" because Sky outbid them.

It's also the period where the majority of mainstream sports saw a massive rise in income. Of course Botox Woods had an influence in golf, but it was only one factor in a sea of factors.
Many people seem to think that Botox Woods is tje only reason for a rise in money, I don't think that's true, otherwise other sports money wouldn't have risen in tandem with golf.

[super_realist]

Still going to need to find a tennis court to play  the game on so presume some sort of fees involved.The only courts close to me are a David Lloyd at about £70,a month( and its very good) or a private club with a couple of covered courts at a cost.
I'm not quite getting your point.Folk I know who play tennis are members of a tennis cluib and need to pay for it.Great game though

Tennis is cheap regardless of the view that it is elitist. You can join a club as an adult with a great surface, and not just painted concrete for less than £100. Then all you need is a racket and balls. I don't know where this view that tennis is a snobs game has come from. Virtually every village has a tennis club.
Same as rowing. That's also cheap despite the view it is elitist.

[beninho]

Most councils have tennis courts, usually in or near local parks. I know you are in Leicester, dyna it says six courts, and you can sign up for £42 per year.

I'm not really into tennis, I was a a kid, but its definitely cheaper then golf. Just generally a racket and balls. You dont need any different footwear, if you own trainers.

[Soul Requiem]

Still going to need to find a tennis court to play  the game on so presume some sort of fees involved.The only courts close to me are a David Lloyd at about £70,a month( and its very good) or a private club with a couple of covered courts at a cost.
I'm not quite getting your point.Folk I know who play tennis are members of a tennis cluib and need to pay for it.Great game though

There are multiple free to play courts around the country, you certainly don't have to be paying to play.

[JAS]

Here’s a situation that got the blood boiling earlier this week...My eldest Granddaughter who will be 3 in May, very healthy but ever since she’s been potty trained it’s obvious that she’s been rather “loose” in terms of bowel movements. Because she’s also in the bottom quarter of the growth curve the health visitor picked up on it and referred her to check for things like lactose intolerance and Coeliac. Now all of that was perfectly fine and sensible, all the tests came back negative so all good except for the fact that her iron level was a little bit low. So in their wisdom they referred her to a dietician. I thought it was a bit of overkill as my daughter does provide her an well balanced diet, infact she probably eats a higher percentage of fruit and veg than anyone. Well, along comes the dietician who appeared to be much more concerned about her weight than her iron levels. After hearing what she has to eat in an average day/week youll never guess what the dieticians recommendation was, and this is not a wind up!!... “Give her more cake and chocolate instead of fruit” I mean WTF?? No wonder this country is heading headlong into an obesity crisis if that is “expert” advice.

[Soul Requiem]

Why bother with health professionals if you dismiss their advice, a balanced diet doesn't mean entirely healthy.

[navyblueshorts]

Here’s a situation that got the blood boiling earlier this week...My eldest Granddaughter who will be 3 in May, very healthy but ever since she’s been potty trained it’s obvious that she’s been rather “loose” in terms of bowel movements. Because she’s also in the bottom quarter of the growth curve the health visitor picked up on it and referred her to check for things like lactose intolerance and Coeliac. Now all of that was perfectly fine and sensible, all the tests came back negative so all good except for the fact that her iron level was a little bit low. So in their wisdom they referred her to a dietician. I thought it was a bit of overkill as my daughter does provide her an well balanced diet, infact she probably eats a higher percentage of fruit and veg than anyone. Well, along comes the dietician who appeared to be much more concerned about her weight than her iron levels. After hearing what she has to eat in an average day/week youll never guess what the dieticians recommendation was, and this is not a wind up!!... “Give her more cake and chocolate instead of fruit” I mean WTF?? No wonder this country is heading headlong into an obesity crisis if that is “expert” advice.

Chocolate has a minor constipatory effect for some people for one thing and who cares if an active, healthy 3-year old has some chocolate and/or cake?

How low was her iron? Borderline, or significantly under? How much fruit/veg does she eat? Please tell me she's not on a vegetarian/vegan diet!!!???! You say "...infact she probably eats a higher percentage of fruit and veg than anyone..." - has it occurred to anyone that this might be linked to bowel movements and iron? Aside from diet and loose bowels, is she lively? Healthy (as in, active etc)? Does she burn a lot of calories?

I wouldn't worry over much about it. Just keep an eye on her.

[JAS]

Here’s a situation that got the blood boiling earlier this week...My eldest Granddaughter who will be 3 in May, very healthy but ever since she’s been potty trained it’s obvious that she’s been rather “loose” in terms of bowel movements. Because she’s also in the bottom quarter of the growth curve the health visitor picked up on it and referred her to check for things like lactose intolerance and Coeliac. Now all of that was perfectly fine and sensible, all the tests came back negative so all good except for the fact that her iron level was a little bit low. So in their wisdom they referred her to a dietician. I thought it was a bit of overkill as my daughter does provide her an well balanced diet, infact she probably eats a higher percentage of fruit and veg than anyone. Well, along comes the dietician who appeared to be much more concerned about her weight than her iron levels. After hearing what she has to eat in an average day/week youll never guess what the dieticians recommendation was, and this is not a wind up!!... “Give her more cake and chocolate instead of fruit” I mean WTF?? No wonder this country is heading headlong into an obesity crisis if that is “expert” advice.

Chocolate has a minor constipatory effect for some people for one thing and who cares if an active, healthy 3-year old has some chocolate and/or cake?

How low was her iron? Borderline, or significantly under? How much fruit/veg does she eat? Please tell me she's not on a vegetarian/vegan diet!!!???! You say "...infact she probably eats a higher percentage of fruit and veg than anyone..." - has it occurred to anyone that this might be linked to bowel movements and iron? Aside from diet and loose bowels, is she lively? Healthy (as in, active etc)? Does she burn a lot of calories?

I wouldn't worry over much about it. Just keep an eye on her.

The iron was borderline Navy, she’s lively and active and no her diet is not Vegan. The fact is yes, she can have cake and for how active she she’ll burn it off. I don’t have any concerns about her whatsoever and was surprised she even got referred. Post the results where they said the iron was a bit low my daughter did research on what iron rich foods she could up or introduce. Pretty sure if she was retested now she would be fine.
The toddler diarrhoea has also subsided somewhat so she’s fine. I was just making the point that I found it strange that a qualified dietician would advise a parent to give her child rubbish calories. Whatever the theory behind it I just don’t see it as a healthy option, will it do her any harm, probably not, would it do her any good, probably not, so why advise that way.
Can just imagine some parents getting that advice, taking it as doctrine and pump their kids full of cake for the next decade.

[McLaren]

Jas

Just take her to the local witch doctor or Chinese medical practitioner, they will pretty much "prescribe" whatever they think you want.

[navyblueshorts]

Here’s a situation that got the blood boiling earlier this week...My eldest Granddaughter who will be 3 in May, very healthy but ever since she’s been potty trained it’s obvious that she’s been rather “loose” in terms of bowel movements. Because she’s also in the bottom quarter of the growth curve the health visitor picked up on it and referred her to check for things like lactose intolerance and Coeliac. Now all of that was perfectly fine and sensible, all the tests came back negative so all good except for the fact that her iron level was a little bit low. So in their wisdom they referred her to a dietician. I thought it was a bit of overkill as my daughter does provide her an well balanced diet, infact she probably eats a higher percentage of fruit and veg than anyone. Well, along comes the dietician who appeared to be much more concerned about her weight than her iron levels. After hearing what she has to eat in an average day/week youll never guess what the dieticians recommendation was, and this is not a wind up!!... “Give her more cake and chocolate instead of fruit” I mean WTF?? No wonder this country is heading headlong into an obesity crisis if that is “expert” advice.

Chocolate has a minor constipatory effect for some people for one thing and who cares if an active, healthy 3-year old has some chocolate and/or cake?

How low was her iron? Borderline, or significantly under? How much fruit/veg does she eat? Please tell me she's not on a vegetarian/vegan diet!!!???! You say "...infact she probably eats a higher percentage of fruit and veg than anyone..." - has it occurred to anyone that this might be linked to bowel movements and iron? Aside from diet and loose bowels, is she lively? Healthy (as in, active etc)? Does she burn a lot of calories?

I wouldn't worry over much about it. Just keep an eye on her.

The iron was borderline Navy, she’s lively and active and no her diet is not Vegan. The fact is yes, she can have cake and for how active she she’ll burn it off. I don’t have any concerns about her whatsoever and was surprised she even got referred. Post the results where they said the iron was a bit low my daughter did research on what iron rich foods she could up or introduce. Pretty sure if she was retested now she would be fine.
The toddler diarrhoea has also subsided somewhat so she’s fine. I was just making the point that I found it strange that a qualified dietician would advise a parent to give her child rubbish calories. Whatever the theory behind it I just don’t see it as a healthy option, will it do her any harm, probably not, would it do her any good, probably not, so why advise that way.
Can just imagine some parents getting that advice, taking it as doctrine and pump their kids full of cake for the next decade.

Good to know not a major issue.

Re. highlighted bit, above, not shooting at you JAS, but this is part of the national problem. Cake and chocolate are NOT unhealthy per se or "rubbish calories". Cake and chocolate in excess is unhealthy. Sugar per se is not evil - in fact, your brain is almost completely dependent on it. The food/diet industry is a monster as is the lack of understanding re. food/nutrition. It's a simple equation - eat a generally balanced diet and do some exercise. More calories in than out = weight gain.

I have more concerns these days w/ kids and so-called smart devices/social media etc. For one thing, there's a negative correlation between their use and active exercise and evidence is beginning to accumulate re. impact on mental health as well.

[super_realist]

But don't you know its always someone else's fault Navy? If you're fat, it's not your fault. It's the food companies and the government.

I wonder how much muscle/skeletal issues are being stored up through bad posture from using devices. Going to be a lot of hunchbacks around in 25 years.

[Sponsored content]