Winning - Important or Irrelevant?
- Thread starter Champ-Pain
- Start date
- Status
Exactly! Or this fellow:
Kwame Nkrumah-Acheampong. Born in Glasgow, raised in Ghana. He went to the Vancouver games, where he was the first person from Ghana to ever participate in any Winter Olympics!
He finished 53rd out of 102 participants of whom 54 finished. (Thanks Wiki!) That's triumph. You can see it in his eyes.
Tez, there's a petition circulating for he and his dad to light the Olympic Flame for the London games
http://www.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/redmonds2012
OP
Champ-Pain
Blue Belt
- Thread Starter
- #85
Yeap. Very different from a M/A event - Judo, Bjj, Boxing, Grappling, etc.
OP
Champ-Pain
Blue Belt
- Thread Starter
- #86
A recreational activity that keeps score and has winners and losers.
OP
Champ-Pain
Blue Belt
- Thread Starter
- #87
There are definitely many momorable moments in sports, where winning was not the motivating factor, at all. A few have been mentioned above, by other members. All are wonderful and inspirational stories that actually go far beyond the sport itself. I completely agree that sometimes, on rare occations, these stories are heart warming and take presidence over the sport involved and the actual winner of such event. It does happen. However, these cases are NOT the norm, they are the exception to the rule. Playing a sport/game should be fun for the player/competitor. Winning said events should be, and in fact IS important to most of them, as well.
I've played plenty of sports and not bothered keeping score and enjoyed it. I think about the guys I spent how long skateboarding with. No one competed. We challenged ourselves all the time. I haven't bothered to learn the new point system in Badminton. When I play on occassion, I don't follow score. I'm not interested.
I enjoy the adrenalin rushes, I enjoy getting to the point where I've practiced enough so it flows naturally. I like the focus and feeling my muscles work.
I know plenty of women that aren't interested in competitive sports. They'll go to yoga, aerobics classes, jogging, swimming, etc.. I put up with competition. But I'd rather not. If the only point to MA/sports is competition, I can see why they lack women. Women can be competitive. But in the culture I see around me, I don't see many competitive women.
I enjoy the adrenalin rushes, I enjoy getting to the point where I've practiced enough so it flows naturally. I like the focus and feeling my muscles work.
I know plenty of women that aren't interested in competitive sports. They'll go to yoga, aerobics classes, jogging, swimming, etc.. I put up with competition. But I'd rather not. If the only point to MA/sports is competition, I can see why they lack women. Women can be competitive. But in the culture I see around me, I don't see many competitive women.
And there are, indeed, less Competitive Women.
A; You are one of them.
B; They are not the Overall. There are Competitive Women. Just not as a Majority.
C; This Statistic cannot be Generalized to Sports, Overall. One Female Participation in Competitive Aspects of Competitive Sports.
And the "Only Point" to MA and Sports are not Competition. MA are Hostile by Nature, even if theyre Defensive. There is a Theme of Will to Victory, no matter what you Practice. Sports are Competitive by Nature. Some choose to Ignore that Aspect. And they are the Minority.
Even Non-Sportists; Look at the SHEER NUMBER of Football (Of the American or Australian Variety, incase Soccer pops into your Head for some reason) Fans. Cheering and Brawling over who will Win. And having a Good Drink and a Good Time. And thats just One Sport. With ALOT of Participants.
OP
Champ-Pain
Blue Belt
- Thread Starter
- #90
I don't think anyone here is saying that you're wrong - for not keeping score, not learning the point system in badminton, or not competing. Please, don't tell me that I'm wrong for being competitive and having the belief that winning is important in whatever sport I choose to participate in. What works for you, may not work for me, and visa versa. We have opposing views on this topic - it doesn't make one right and the other wrong - just different.
Not the norm, eh? How many people ran a 5K race this weekend? Or a half-marathon? 1 winner each race, everyone else went home defeated? Migosh what a depressing view of sports.
That is nonsense and psychologically damaging nonsense at that, given that nearly everyone in the world does not 'win' in a competitive environment that does not allow for success to be measured in more 'human' terms. To not counter that mind-set in your students is setting them up to be ill equipped for when 'real life' comes calling.
Maybe you should get some Kobra-Kai tee-shirts printed? {that would be a joke by the way, just in case my tiredness is making me less than transparent}.
What rank did you say you were again? What organisation? The art is TKD tho', right? I mean no confrontational nastiness, I'm just too tired to go seeking for it now and the answers will amend my perceptions accordingly.
Actually, no, I shall be stern with myself, match-sticks in the eye-lids and have a look back through the thread
. Oh, the art is Judo {smacks own forehead hard as the clue is in the username and profile :lol:}. I am surprised in some ways, altho' I suppose the 'sport' background is similar to TKD, in the sense of the 'testing ground' being a competitive venue.EDIT: Just noticed your post No#90 earlier. In the context of that, I do think you are wrong. Maybe not for yourself, for that is your own choice. But as I noted above, your are teaching others, who are very young, martial arts and it sounds like you are leaving out some key elements that are more to do with philosophy than physical 'success'. I was in a school with such an attitude back in my Lau Gar days, where victory in competition (for the trophy cabinet) was all important. That probably accounts for my unsympathetic view in these early hours
.
Last edited:
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
You know what, I'm a little bored. So I figure I'll throw something different in here....
Considering you (JC) have decided to post this in the "General Martial Arts" section, rather than the "Competitive Arts" section, I'm going to say that, in regards to competition and sport, sure, winning is the aim and therefore important (note: not all-important, but it is still what you strive towards... whether than means winning each time, or just improving and getting closer to the elusive win, the aim is to get to the top there, it's really how they're set up), however in martial arts, absolutely not. Martial arts have nothing to do with competition, winning, losing etc are not concepts that have any real place in their context.
I'll see if I can explain where I'm coming from here.
I have a background in a form of Karate that was developed specifically to win tournaments, as well as a form of TKD, which focused on a more competitive training approach; I've won and lost tournaments. And none of it has anything to do with what martial arts actually are. All they are, really, is the application of technical methods taken from martial arts in a competitive environment.
One big difference is in the mind set. It's not uncommon to hear, in competitive forms, that you need that "killer instinct", and that sounds all martial art-y, doesn't it? After all, martial arts are methods of violence and killing, aren't they? So you could hardly have a martial art without this "killer instinct", could you? Actually, yes. In fact, a "killer instinct" approach takes you away from a martial approach. It is limited, as it is only designed for a single approach, it is overly aggressive to the detriment of other options, and removes the other legitimate strategic approaches that any martial, or military methods require.
What's actually needed, when dealing more with the older, traditional martial arts, is not a "killer instinct", it's a "killer intention". Essentially, I don't give a damn about winning or losing, I care about killing you. My only intention is to kill you. My aim revolves around killing you. The only important thing is, you guessed it, killing you. When I come in as an attacker in my training, I am aiming to kill my partner (with control, but without remorse or concern for them on an emotional level that way). When I am the "defending" partner, I aim to kill my partner in the same way.
"Winning" is thoroughly irrelevant if discussing martial arts. And yes, I know the context that you have been using it in, but as we are in the General section, perhaps a broader understanding could help you here.
Considering you (JC) have decided to post this in the "General Martial Arts" section, rather than the "Competitive Arts" section, I'm going to say that, in regards to competition and sport, sure, winning is the aim and therefore important (note: not all-important, but it is still what you strive towards... whether than means winning each time, or just improving and getting closer to the elusive win, the aim is to get to the top there, it's really how they're set up), however in martial arts, absolutely not. Martial arts have nothing to do with competition, winning, losing etc are not concepts that have any real place in their context.
I'll see if I can explain where I'm coming from here.
I have a background in a form of Karate that was developed specifically to win tournaments, as well as a form of TKD, which focused on a more competitive training approach; I've won and lost tournaments. And none of it has anything to do with what martial arts actually are. All they are, really, is the application of technical methods taken from martial arts in a competitive environment.
One big difference is in the mind set. It's not uncommon to hear, in competitive forms, that you need that "killer instinct", and that sounds all martial art-y, doesn't it? After all, martial arts are methods of violence and killing, aren't they? So you could hardly have a martial art without this "killer instinct", could you? Actually, yes. In fact, a "killer instinct" approach takes you away from a martial approach. It is limited, as it is only designed for a single approach, it is overly aggressive to the detriment of other options, and removes the other legitimate strategic approaches that any martial, or military methods require.
What's actually needed, when dealing more with the older, traditional martial arts, is not a "killer instinct", it's a "killer intention". Essentially, I don't give a damn about winning or losing, I care about killing you. My only intention is to kill you. My aim revolves around killing you. The only important thing is, you guessed it, killing you. When I come in as an attacker in my training, I am aiming to kill my partner (with control, but without remorse or concern for them on an emotional level that way). When I am the "defending" partner, I aim to kill my partner in the same way.
"Winning" is thoroughly irrelevant if discussing martial arts. And yes, I know the context that you have been using it in, but as we are in the General section, perhaps a broader understanding could help you here.
...People actually use the Competitive Arts Forum? *Dashes Off To The Boards Menu*
Also, Complete Agreement. Ill just add that in.
Exactly! That is a hugely relevant point! Winning the 1st prize and trophy is the aim for many competitors and but not all are capable of being number 1 for one reason and another. And so competing for them is not about the trophy.
I do not think it is any kind of "new thinking" if I were to suggest that victory over oneself if often the biggest motivation to compete at any level. Perhaps that entails beating a personal best and finishing in the highest position for oneself - and that is irrespective of winning the actual trophy.
Also, sometimes the biggest and baddest opponent is oneself or the defeat of one's apportioned physical or mental limitation. I have helped athletes with disability and to suggest to them that because they have not won they are losers (in any sense) is frankly absurd and verges on a derisory condescension that I despise. This applies to any competitor who has tried their best.
My son and moreover, ANY student of mine in ANY discipline, martial arts or no, I will say to them - your best is ALWAYS good enough for me.
OP
Champ-Pain
Blue Belt
- Thread Starter
- #97
OP
Champ-Pain
Blue Belt
- Thread Starter
- #98
I don't really understand much of your post - a lot of rumbling.That is nonsense and psychologically damaging nonsense at that, given that nearly everyone in the world does not 'win' in a competitive environment that does not allow for success to be measured in more 'human' terms. To not counter that mind-set in your students is setting them up to be ill equipped for when 'real life' comes calling.
Maybe you should get some Kobra-Kai tee-shirts printed? {that would be a joke by the way, just in case my tiredness is making me less than transparent}.
What rank did you say you were again? What organisation? The art is TKD tho', right? I mean no confrontational nastiness, I'm just too tired to go seeking for it now and the answers will amend my perceptions accordingly.
Actually, no, I shall be stern with myself, match-sticks in the eye-lids and have a look back through the thread
EDIT: Just noticed your post No#90 earlier. In the context of that, I do think you are wrong. Maybe not for yourself, for that is your own choice. But as I noted above, your are teaching others, who are very young, martial arts and it sounds like you are leaving out some key elements that are more to do with philosophy than physical 'success'. I was in a school with such an attitude back in my Lau Gar days, where victory in competition (for the trophy cabinet) was all important. That probably accounts for my unsympathetic view in these early hours
Judo, JiuJitsu, No-Gi - Sandan, USA Judo certified instructor/coach (intercontinental). I run a very competitive M/A school, among the best jr teams in the USA. A combined 28 medals last year (2010) at the jr Olympics (8 GOLD) & jr US Open (7 GOLD) - more than any other team in the US. I also have the distinct honor of having the only "pure Judo" school, to win the BEST team award at any NAGA event. All with students 13 years old or younger. I don't advertise, yet my classes are full. Why? Because my students win at competition - and when others see good results, they want to be part of that winning team, as well. I love what I do, and I enjoy doing it. Having a successful team, with students that win consistently - makes it fun, as well.
OP
Champ-Pain
Blue Belt
- Thread Starter
- #99
Chris: I have already explained (several times) that I only teach the competitive aspect of M/A - (Sport M/A) - NOT the ancient, traditional M/A - where you fight to the death. I run a busuness - NOT the armed forces.
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
JC, I'm more than familiar with your approach, both from here and from MAP, however you put forth a thread asking if winning was important, or irrelevant, in the General Martial Arts section. Therefore, honestly, what you teach is only relevant to your own perspective on martial arts, not on anyone else's. To that end I was putting forth a view based on a far broader understanding and range of experience in martial arts. Kay?
- Status
