Thoughts on Uncompetitive Sports

Eh.


I'd like to see a balance of the two, were it possible. But if in not keeping score kids are having more fun, therefore more likely to continue engaging in it, therefore more likely to get exercise - I can't complain.

 

Depends. Personally I like the idea because I don't do things to be the best at them, I do them because they are fun. That's why I won't take a competitive martial art (or if I do, I won't train as hard as a lot of others will).

On the other hand obviously if that IS your thing I think you should go for it. Competition certainly shouldn't be BANNED, but I think you should have to choose it...

I mean you get a lot of children forced into competitive things, they get in trouble for not trying hard enough when they just want to enjoy the activity. Not to mention you then have those who DO want to win making them feel bad for not being good enough and you can see WHY it's a problem...

 

Well, it certainly doesn't encourage kids to give 110%.
I don't like it. Some people simply aren't talented at certain things, and protecting them from that fact will only set them up for failure further on down the line. Sometimes a kid just needs to experience the disappointment of defeat to motive them to worker harder.

I'm reminded of this commercial, especially at 0:45:
[YOUTUBE]uwISnZwYihk[/YOUTUBE]

 

I am extremely competitive... and tho I try not to pass that along to my daughters.. it happens.
To me, and this is just my opinion, what's the purpose of having an organized league if its not competitive?? To me, that's just a high dollar "play date" that wastes a lot of time and money

 

I think it depends on how you approach it. Firstly, I don't think it's ok to perpetuate everyone is a winner attitude as it is inconsistent with real life as when kids grow up they will be entering a competitive world. If you don't encourage them to take part competitively (it can still be friendly) just to save their feelings, then when they grow up they will be ill equipped to deal with the inevitable losing or failing at something.

What I say is that it is important to win but ok to lose. Furthermore losing should not be seen as a set back, but rather an opportunity and motivation to strive to work harder and train harder in order to achieve that sweet victory. Every time I've been beaten at something, I've always gone away more determined and prepare myself for the next time.

If you look at the great achievers out there not all of them won everything from the start. It's through hard work and struggle that we get better at things and achieve our full potential. These people didn't get to where they were with a "it's the taking part that counts" attitude.

As long as the competition is fair and friendly, with gracious winners and determined losers then I'm all for it.

Happy days

 

The world is competitive. Therefore, kids need to learn that they must do their absolute best and strive for victory. That doesn't mean they can't have fun while doing it, but if they get the mindset that anything less than excellence is just fine, they're going to have a hard time getting into college or holding a job.

 

For like toddlers sure, uncompetitive. But I whole hearted lay believe in teaching kids that the world is competitive. To an extent however, things still need to be fun

 

Cushioning kids from the fact that we live in a competitive world won't prepare them very well for life; however, I don't support those parents that stand on the sidelines of 5 year old's soccer games screaming intensely. You can teach kids to be competitive without being overaggressive about it.

 

I have some thoughts definitively to the contrary of what I'm reading here, yet I feel like it would be a lost cause to attempt explaining them.


So instead of striving for "victory" over the opposing viewpoint, I'm just taking my stuff and going home. :lol:



(Actually, I've got homework for classes that will lead me to an engineering degree, but I couldn't resist).

 

^^I'd encourage you to explain. I never meant to say there's no merit in sport purely for the sake of enjoyment or that losing is the worst thing ever, just that healthy competition has its place.

 

Sheltered children have a harder time later in life.
If we teach them to compete now, it will let them develop a skill set. Sports also keep kids fit, which is another plus. Yes, fun should be important, too, and we shouldn't force kids to do sports that they dislike, but competition(in general) is a good thing.

 

So, the argument that competitive sport prepares children for a competitive world. I would actually argue that it conditions children to maintain competition in the world.

It has to be asked whether competition is a good thing for the world and the species. Yes, it drives technological advancement, but it also drives exploitation of people and resources, and it drives an unnecessary competition for resources that deprives the vulnerable. And since we are using 'competition' as an analogy for 'get as much money as possible and keep it', I'd say it conditions children to overvalue money at the expense of more meaningful things in life.

I'd also want to note that sport at school was an absolute misery for many, including myself. Why do we have to torture kids in order to teach them about the world? They'll find out on their own, in their own time. I've since come to appreciate a couple of forms of sport, neither are competitive in nature, and I'm much happier that way.

 

I would argue differently from the rest of you. It is true that striving is important, and there is a certain requisite level of competition in the world. That doesn't mean we have to glorify it, lionize those who are competitive, and extol our children to be competitive.

What I think we need to do is encourage our children to put effort into things they care about, just as a matter of course. If there is a child who is afraid to lose, I'd rather see her in the casual intermural league where they don't keep score than not on the field at all.

So, my view is that we shouldn't be saying, "no, this is a bad idea, and we're sheltering children." We should be saying "this is an innovative way to expose the most timid children to fun and rewarding activities."

Obviously, there's less risk, and less gain.

But at the same time, it is an unfortunate fact of the matter that some competitive people are incredibly dysfunctional, and I don't want children thinking that "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em," which is to say, cheat, lie, and steal their way to winning. I mean, there's a reason at least in the United States why we have this incredible problem with homophobia and sexism in sports; the culture is "try hard, and get what you want; period."

 

It's okay to an extent. I play in a highly competitive sport (academic bowl), but I don't really feel that bad if our team loses a match. I only feel bad when we lose games we probably should have won. But I am probably like the most lax academic bowl team captain ever

 

I don't know. When I did sports as a child I wasn't good at all, but I enjoyed it and stayed fit (I was still fitter than the 50% of kids who didn't really sport) and I liked to make personal goals. However it became more and more competitive each time I went to a more senior group, and more and more attention went to the winners and at the end I didn't enjoy it any more.

Now why do we sport? It's healthy (in moderation), enjoyable and can be a nice way to socialize.

Do you wish to take those benefits away from kids who are less good physically with extreme competitiveness and let them become less healthy and happy?

I like to sport again nowadays. But I don't take part in competitions.

 

WAAAaaa my kid lost!! The purpose of sports is to have fun and maybe learn a few life lessons along the way. One life lesson often learned from sports is the you don't always win and things don't always go the way you want them to, but it isn't about winning it's about trying your best if you do that you may fail today, tomorrow and the day after that, but if you keep trying you will eventually succeeded.

Hell I played baseball starting around age 10. My first year we went 1-11 dropping the first 11 games in a row. The game we won? The last game of the season against a team that finished 11-1.

I continued to play until I was 16. After that there was no summer league. The school was going to have a team but half the guys I grew up playing with went to the neighboring school so we only had 9 people show up wanting to play. Coach wouldn't let us have a team because there wasn't enough people wanting to play. We argued pleaded that a baseball team only has 9. He said "what if someone misses school that day?". We replied we'll take an out every time the 9th batter comes up, leave center empty and play the corner outfielders closer to center. He wouldn't go for it. We even pleaded to the softball coach! All we need was someone to sit in the dugout wearing the coaches hat. We had been playing together for 6-7 years and knew who could pitch and who needed to play where. Hell half the time in summer league we were on the lines moving the runners anyway! Still no luck.

We had learned that it was more about trying than winning... That and by that time we probably would have won several games playing with 8 lol. At age 10 there were 7 teams by age 16 we couldn't field one yet, those of us who kept trying, were in a position where we would have a chance to succeed.

 

Competition can be healthy, especially when maintained only to its appropriate area (the football game happens on the field and rivalry should leave after the game), but forcing competition on kids with no other alternative isn't going to "prepare them for the world," just prevent many from not joining and encourages players to be negative at defeat and arrogant in victory if you put so much value in it.

It's not healthy to tell kids that those with the luck to be better at something are worth more, which is what competition too often results in kids believing and perpetuating that arrogance/defeatism in later life.

 

Two points:

First, competition is the whole point of sports and games. Competition is motivation for giving it your all. The end goal in a sport or game is for someone to win. To score points and prevent the opponent from scoring points. That's how it's designed. Even single player stuff, like solitare, is designed so that you are trying to win.

A game without competition is boring and pointless. I'm not gonna run around after a ball for the sake of running around after a ball. Without competition, I simply cannot care about the game. It will not be fun.

Second, you may not like that the real world is competitive, but that's the way it is. That's what makes the real world productive. What is important is the attitude towards losing. If you can raise a child to lose with dignity, to be content with having tried, but to also win with dignity, and not be a dick about it, that child will grow up to be a man of character, and not a whiny bitch or smug asshole.

If you want your kid to grow up without competition, sports is not the place. Have your kid do artsy crap and sing, dance, act or paint or whatever. If you want the kid to exercise without competition, try jumprope or have him do yard work and build a damn work ethic!