The “Winning” Mentality

A short essay by Damian Niolet

How many times have you heard the expression, “It’s not whether you win or lose but how you play the game”? Now think about how many times you’ve heard expressions like, “Winning isn’t everything; it’s the only thing,” or “2nd place is the first place loser.” Believe it or not both of these arguments are perfectly accurate in their assessment. The problem is: the “arena” in which these two opposing views contend against one another is not very often sufficiently defined – the boundaries not delineated, the rules not agreed upon, and the goal not in sight. What’s worse is when one of these views is carried off the field and acted upon outside of the sports environment, namely, in general life. In this short essay I'm going to break down what sort of human behavior (based off of my personal theories) underpins these two very conflicting perspectives on sports/life and give my opinion on which approach is truly the “winning” mentality.

I've either participated in or overheard a few heated debates between people on either side of this spectrum of thought. The arguments on either side were always compelling, but never conclusive. The reason I believe this to be the case is because certain premises were never clearly established from the outset; the arguments, therefore, consistently danced around each other. In order to address, once and for all, the issue of which mentality is preferable, in sports and in life, there are a couple of parameters that should be perfectly understood from the beginning.

The first parameter that requires attention concerns the environment in which the opening ideas are being enacted. There are two such environments, 1) a sports environment, and 2) life. I am going to begin by only looking into the sports environment and then later looking into the environment of life itself. Within the sports environment, there are two primary “arenas” in which the concepts at odds here could possible reside – a purely sport (just for fun) arena and a purely competitive arena. Purely sport (just for fun) arenas will only ever be amateur leagues. Obviously, purely competitive arenas are professional, minor, and college leagues, but could potentially also involve amateur leagues.

Herein lays the catalyst causing much undue clashing between the two ideals: when amateur leagues are created, very rarely is it emphasized whether the league is meant as a purely sport league or a purely competitive league. More often than not, the amateur league is going to be comprised of members on both sides of the fence – those who are just playing for the enjoyment and those who are playing to win – which is undoubtedly going to result in conflict, not between teams, but between teammates. To curb this complication, leagues should be created with one or the other purpose in mind and that purpose should be made clear when the league advertises. Subsequently, when arguments arise over which mindset is more appropriate, the “arena” should be articulated. Is the environment a purely sport arena or a purely competitive arena?

In a purely sport arena it is perfectly acceptable to possess a “must enjoy” standpoint. In this arena the object of playing could be just about anything, from camaraderie to tanning, but it will not ever be about winning. Players are “passively” participating in the sport in order to achieve some other more important thing. I hate to bring it up so early in this essay because “it” is

where most of the discord between the two mentalities is sewn, but “it” exemplifies the points I wish to make, so here goes: kids’ leagues, especially tike leagues, should never be about winning. There are way too many other things that are far more important for the kids to focus on at such a young age, such as just learning to control their bodies, learning rules and how to abide by them, learning teamwork, etc. Parents who treat kids’ leagues as purely competitive leagues have completely disorganized priorities as far as I am concerned. I will get into why I say this later in the essay. For now, I will say that once the kids are high school age, purely competitive leagues are feasible.

In a purely competitive arena, it is perfectly acceptable to possess a “must win” frame of mind. Vince Lombardi was right in asking, “If winning isn’t everything, why do they keep score?” In this arena the object of playing is to win, plain and simple. Players are “aggressively” participating in the sport in order to win. Concern grows when players demonstrate poor judgment while under the influence of the “must win” approach, which manifests in any number of ways, but all of which entail “overstepping abstract bounds” created by some collective, albeit shaky, sense of sports ethics. It is the instability of this collective sense of sports ethics that accentuates the contradiction between the two views. Rather than distinguish the collective sense of sports ethics, we just keep reciting the “golden sports rule” – “It’s not whether you win or lose, but how you play the game”. At this point I am going to attempt to solidify sports ethics by highlighting the other parameter, which people should thoroughly examine before discussing the opposing viewpoints in depth – sportsmanship.

Sportsmanship is about two very important things, and no, those two things are not, 1) refraining from gloating when you win, and 2) sucking it up when you lose. Sportsmanship is also not about playing by the rules. There's no choice in that matter; you either play by the rules or you don't play. Sportsmanship should be more about individuals choosing to prove they have character while on the field. How they best go about doing this is in two ways: 1) by turning an abundance of aggression into “precision,” and 2) amplifying a modicum of passivity into “respect.” In a gist, sportsmanship is the harmony of the two mentalities at the heart of this essay. Below you will find a graphic that explains the ideal of sportsmanship visually. I will use this graphic to further detail what sportsmanship really looks like.

A player in a purely competitive league is not necessarily wrong in calling upon some aggression in order to achieve the object – a win; however, as is often the case, players either cross a line by being too aggressive or by refraining from calling upon traits on the other side of

Sportsmanship

Sports

Pure

Com

petit

ion

Pure Sport

Aggression Passivity

Precision Respect

Must Win Must Enjoy

Ethically “Out of Bounds” Functionally “Out of Bounds”

the spectrum, namely passivity. A player in a purely competitive league is not necessarily wrong in calling upon a bit of passivity knowing the game is not all there is to life; however, players cross a line in a functional sense when they neglect to call upon traits on the other side of the spectrum, namely aggression, and ignore the objective – to win. In order to avoid crossing the line on either side, players should seek to infuse precision and respect into their game rather than aggression and passivity.

Precision is the player’s ability to choose during a competitive sporting event to elevate their own as well as their teammate’s game above their opponents’ by being critical of their performance. Respect is the player’s ability to choose during a competitive sporting event to embrace the absolutely enjoyment in being able to play by sharing in the camaraderie with teammates and opponents alike. Precision will always be kept in check by respect and respect will always be kept in check by precision. Aim to win the game and ensure you are able to walk out of the arena a respectable human being; that’s what sportsmanship is all about.

Now, all of the above concerns a purely competitive arena. What does sportsmanship look like in a purely sport arena? In a purely sport arena sportsmanship will lean more towards the “must enjoy” mentality; the object, after all, is the pure enjoyment of simply playing. Most amateur leagues, as stated above, tend to disregard the need to distinguish the league as purely sport or purely competitive. As a result, people on either side of the spectrum end up joining. This is when it is important for players to show sportsmanship and understand that the mixed environment is not the appropriate place to strive to raise their game above the competition by being critical of performances.

That closes out a discussion on how the two mentalities should be handled when the environment is “sports” oriented. But a bigger problem exists and must be addressed. The two mentalities of concern are very often applied to life in general and those who do apply the mentalities to general life are likely not aware that they are doing so, nor are they aware of the implications. I will attempt to solve these problems from here forward.

When someone says something like, "2nd place is the first place loser," what I hear is, "I tie my and everyone else's worth to rankings, and not just in sports, but in all of life." I say this because I do not believe that people are really that good at disassociating the value of persons or events from the outcome of a sport in which they participate. I believe that far too many people carry their personal baggage onto the sports field and carry the outcome of a sporting event off of the sports field. I believe this because I believe that most people are plagued by habitually acting on negative protectionist responses.

Negative protectionist responses are acts people perform based off of personal fears and/or selfishness in an effort to protect themselves from pain. When someone ties their self-worth, and thus, everyone else’s, to the result of a competition, they experience emotional pain when they lose and exhilaration when they win. The more often this happens the more they will grow accustomed to a "must win" mentality in order to bolster their self-worth. Negative protectionist responses are also affected by an individual’s ability to be cognizant of what is really driving their actions and the full scope of the situation at hand. Few people tend to be self-aware to the extent that they realize they are acting fearfully and selfishly. For instance, to go into detail regarding tike leagues, parents who push their young kids to be top-notch at a sport are very likely trying to make up for some past failures in their own lives. This is why I say their priorities are quite out of whack. All the while, people who are acting on negative protectionist responses

believe that they are doing what's best by them, for their protection. "No one else is going to look out for me," is the generally conception; therefore, everyone witnesses this egoism and tends to repay in kind and only look out for themselves. This notion lends itself to a "must win" mentality.

On the other hand there are positive protectionist responses. Positive protectionist responses are acts people perform based off of denying personal fears and/or selfishness privilege to rule their lives; the acts are based on fearlessness and/or selflessness. People who choose positive protectionist responses would never tie their or anyone else’s worth to the result of a competition. Everyone instantly receives the same utmost level of respect just for being alive. All the while, people who are acting on positive protectionist responses are doing what is best for everyone, and thus themselves, for everyone’s protection. “I’m choosing to look out for everyone else first knowing that it will benefit me in the end,” is the general conception; therefore, everyone witnesses this altruism and gradually learns to repay in kind. This notion lends itself to the “must enjoy” mentality.

These notions, which were spawned out of the original mentalities, and which are now being applied to general life, can be expressed graphically in the same manner as they were when they were applied to sports; however, some variations exist. You will notice in the graphic below that the arenas in which these two mentalities hostilely engage one another are “realism” and “idealism” vice “purely competition” and “purely sport.” Realists tend to be prone to a “must win” mentality; idealists tend to be prone to a “most enjoy” mentality. Like it or not, realists also tend to fall back on negative protectionist responses in seeking their individual agendas, while idealists tend to fall back on positive protectionist responses in seeking a more all-encompassing agenda. In the “game” of life, these responses are often converted into “egotism” on the realists’ side and “altruism” on the idealists’ side.

Now, when the environment is life, sportsmanship is akin to being “exemplary.” Being exemplary is about choosing positive protectionist responses, which, as noted above, are based on fearlessness and/or selflessness. Getting to an exemplary life is a rather easy hop, skip, and jump for someone who is already living as an idealist. Altruism is the essence of being exemplary, after all. However, getting to an exemplary life is not an easy matter for someone who is living as a realist. The reason is a simple one – life is not a competition, not in an official fashion, that is. When sportsmanship on the field becomes being exemplary off the field, that competitive side is shed. People will treat life like a competition, but there is no referee which

Exemplary

Rea

lism

Idealism

Must Win Must Enjoy Life

Neg Pro Resp Pos Pro Resp

Egoism Altruism

Rarely prudent Always prudent

has set the rules and who actively officiates the goings-on. (Caveat to those who believe in a creator: until such time as everyone agrees to the rules and no one can deny that the creator is actively involved in the “game” of life, there is no referee. Furthermore, even if there was a creator, the likelihood that the creator would intend that we be at each other’s throats is slim (and slightly sadistic), though some religions do already claim this.) (Caveat to Capitalists: Capitalism is based on competition, but capitalism is an economic system and not indicative of the totality of life.)

With all of the above in mind, the sports environment is a suitable place for mankind to alleviate some of the pent-up frustrations that come with simply living. Life is not a suitable place for mankind to alleviate those same pent-up frustrations. In either environment, it is imperative that “players” yearn to show exemplary traits. When people speak to the mentalities underpinning those traits, it is imperative that the environment be laid down as a foundation for further discussion. In a nutshell, when it comes to pure sport, "It's NOT about whether you win or lose NOR how you play the game;" and, when it comes to pure competition, "It's about BOTH whether you win or lose AND how you play the game." Once, everyone gets that straight, we can call, “GAME ON!”

The above was written by Damian Niolet, an aspiring entrepreneur who can’t seem to stop the flow of ideas. This particle essay is a test excerpt from an upcoming book he is working on called “Baseline Your Life,” more information for which can be found on his blog (link under name). Please let Damian know what you think of this article or of his other endeavors by visiting his blog, commenting wherever you’d like, or simply contacting him. Webmasters and other article publishers are hereby granted essay reproduction permission as long as this essay in its entirety, author's information, and any links remain intact. Copyright 2012 by Damian Niolet.