Register

  • Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
    It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)

Competition

Putt for D'oh said:
Progress is the positive. Many aspects of progress as a result of different levels of competition in different scenarios.

Economic and ecological competition is no different other than your point of view and pre-formed bias. You are comparing a healthy ecosystem to what you believe is this countries' practices? So a healthy in balance system with something that is somewhat broken and doesn't show actual competition?

Economic competition... actual level playing field competition results in innovation, better pricing (hmmmm... also known as competitive pricing?) wider access to goods, services and technology. The problem with as its practiced in this country is not 'competition' but the greed and power plays where some entities are working to eliminate their competition, often through means outside of what would be that particular economic bubble. It would be similar to and ecological environment with outside influences where the natural competition turns the balance are out of whack. It isn't the competition itself. Just as I had pointed out about sports competitions and individual A-holes.

A healthy ecosystem by the way has plenty of separation between winners and losers. That is how progress (evolution) happens. Birds with the brightest colors get the chicks and the result is more generations with bright feathers. Bright feathered birds... talk about self absorbed deniers of reality... What about the lion cubs that get killed and eaten by rival adult lions taking over a pride? Pretty sure the lion cubs aren't really feeling to balanced and preserved. You are kinda focusing on the isolated negatives and isolated positives of competition in whichever scenario you are looking at. The same net good from a balanced ecosystem is present in sport, economics, table games, singles bars, etc...

Maybe rather than thinking disc golf competition divides winners an losers and (encourages self-absorption and denial of reality (honestly this statement I tried but I cannot respond in any constructive way, it is so f-ing off the rails)), maybe see how it can highlight those who perform at a higher level and encourage others to improve themselves, resulting in better all around play.
You had mentioned before something along the lines of apathy toward winning but are there no positive feelings for performing well? My daughter is an extreme example several pages ago when I mentioned her attitude that scoring goals and winning is what makes it fun, but is it really fun to go out and throw a frisbee without any idea where its going? For me throwing good throws and executing a round to the best of my ability is waaaay more fun than playing poorly. Competition helps my game progress.

Progress. Progress in individual performance, progress in technological advances, progress in diversifying opportunities, progress in passing along fit genes to another generation, progress in making the world a better place.

Look for where progress is moving backward and really look. Is it competition? Or is there something outside of that system that is actually stifling true competition?
Click to expand...

Respectfully, our ideas of progress are very different.

If I could eliminate one word from the English language, it would be that propagandic mainstay "innovation". Listen for it. It's in all the ads.

I do my best to do everything I do well. This is not competition. I enjoy playing well just as I enjoy working well and eating well and loving well. The fact that I may have done something better than someone else has never added one bit to my satisfaction.

Self absorption and denial of reality:
Surely you have seen players with earbuds in, or players who refuse to speak to their fellows. This doesn't mean that they are bad people, but why are they doing it? Because the primary value is competitive. They believe that they are more focused thus able to perform better, and so they are willing to sacrifice more important things like simple human interaction. How bizarre to walk around a woods all afternoon with three other guys and ignore them for the sake of your score...

Or what about the player who makes an excuse for every non-ideal throw? In other threads it has been claimed that this intellectual indignity is an important way for many elite atheletes to psychologically cope with failure. But this ignorance of reality is driven by competition. Without the need to be a "winner", the player would be free to accept the bounds of his own ability, and to live gracefully within them, even while seeking improvement.

I am not claiming the majority of players do these negative things, only that they are encouraged by competition.

The topics of economy and ecology are some of my very favorite. Since I have had the uncommon opportunity to live and work within relatively healthy examples of both, I find myself having uncommon values and perspectives that I would need many many words to fairly explain. Given my inability to communicate clearly, I will leave those words unwritten, at least publicly.
 
AP, you are not special but you are a spunky little bitch if nothing else.

When asked how to determine which ideology is objectively better than another, my communist friend replied, 'The one that wins'. I added, 'or the one that you personally hold'. Isn't that the paradox?

The point is that it's mighty arrogant to assume that your hierarchy of values is superior to others in any other way, much less chasten others for non-agreement, as your virtue shines forth like the light of God. Persuading us is your challenge, AP. We have your laundry list of competition's negatives (in the latest items, he projects his own assumptions for a behavior's motivations on others). Others have stated competition's positives, so why is your sum more compelling? If nothing else, you might hone your 'inability to communicate clearly' (perhaps a foot-stamping admission that others will not submit?)…Everyone accepts the reality of your views, which is no requirement for agreement.

AP apparently believes that every player is ignorant of the game's illusions, blissfully unaware that when they 'compete' they are in some way 'larping'. In addition, he must also believe that when the field plays there is no self-aware mutual agreement among the players about this group activity - we agree to play a game, playing our roles in a competition. When we are at work, say helping tally the last round's scores, are we not cooperating? Could it be that both are a requirement for a 'healthy, stable ecosystem'? Could it be that your reductive binary way of presenting the phenomena is inherently flawed?

AP is not the smartest guy in the thread, but perhaps the most disrespectful and snarky, because he competes without admitting it (debate), believing others cannot 'see' him doing so. His 'values and perspectives' are not so rare as he believes but represent a common type expressed throughout man's history. They have been dissected, exhibited, discussed and analyzed endlessly in other forums and forms and are better characterized as AP's lack of discernment, experience and depth.
 
Last edited:
I skipped quite a few of the pages in between, but just going back to the OP, his stated reasons for competition existing aren't even agreed upon reasons in the first place. Competition can be intrinsically fun because it gives a second layer of meaning to an activity one already enjoys.

In what other area of life is it expected that everyone is going to find all the same things enjoyable for the exact same reasons? That just isn't how people work. I'm certain I like to play tournaments for slightly different reasons than others. I don't necessarily expect to win every time, and I don't get upset when I lose. But it sure is fun getting psyched up and doing the best I can that weekend...
 
curmudgeonDwindle said:
AP, you are not special but you are a spunky little bitch if nothing else.

When asked how to determine which ideology is objectively better than another, my communist friend replied, 'The one that wins'. I added, 'or the one that you personally hold'. Isn't that the paradox?

The point is that it's mighty arrogant to assume that your hierarchy of values is superior to others in any other way, much less chasten others for non-agreement, as your virtue shines forth like the light of God. Persuading us is your challenge, AP. We have your laundry list of competition's negatives (in the latest items, he projects his own assumptions for a behavior's motivations on others). Others have stated competition's positives, so why is your sum more compelling? If nothing else, you might hone your 'inability to communicate clearly' (perhaps a foot-stamping admission that others will not submit?)…Everyone accepts the reality of your views, which is no requirement for agreement.

AP apparently believes that every player is ignorant of the game's illusions, blissfully unaware that when they 'compete' they are in some way 'larping'. In addition, he must also believe that when the field plays there is no self-aware mutual agreement among the players about this group activity - we agree to play a game, playing our roles in a competition. When we are at work, say helping tally the last round's scores, are we not cooperating? Could it be that both are a requirement for a 'healthy, stable ecosystem'? Could it be that your reductive binary way of presenting the phenomena is inherently flawed?

AP is not the smartest guy in the thread, but perhaps the most disrespectful and snarky, because he competes without admitting it (debate), believing others cannot 'see' him doing so. His 'values and perspectives' are not so rare as he believes but represent a common type expressed throughout man's history. They have been dissected, exhibited, discussed and analyzed endlessly in other forums and forms and are better characterized as AP's lack of discernment, experience and depth.
Click to expand...

I like your response. I am constantly, painfully aware of my lack of discernment, experience, and depth. Being of average intelligence, I have no doubt that everyone else is aware of them too. But it is not my goal to win an argument, no matter how stubbornly I try to defend my views. I do not want to be agreed with, but reasoned with. In fact, being proved wrong is very exciting for me, because it's revelation, discovery, learning.

My perspective, I reckon, is quite rare indeed. I don't want to tell my whole story here, but my life's context has been and is uncommon. I do not claim this as a virtue.

I do not believe that my values are superior. But I believe that right and wrong exist and that it is worth my time to try to see the roots and results of everything in search for clues of which is which.

I have made no comment regarding the awareness or motivations of every player, or even many players.

I do not what larping is.
 
*Elbow-patches fully engaged, throat cleared loudly and phlegmily*

LARPing is Live Action Role Playing. You probably don't need any more than that, sir.

I do not participate, but my wife and I did get engaged at the Renaissance Festival, so I cast no aspersions.

Carry on.
 
Armus Patheticus said:
Respectfully, our ideas of progress are very different.

If I could eliminate one word from the English language, it would be that propagandic mainstay "innovation". Listen for it. It's in all the ads.

*SNIP*


I am not claiming the majority of players do these negative things, only that they are encouraged by competition.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what to think about a different view of progress? A negative view? Like progress is a bad thing?

Innovation maybe an annoying corporate buzz word but that doesn't mean the thing that the word is for is a bad does it? Pretty sure innovation is good, that is why it is so over used as a corporate buzz word and cliche.


Negative behavior is not encouraged by competition, just that it happens to be a stage that it can be easily observed. Again you are blaming competition for A-holes showing their colors. If competition were the problem this would be behavior common and it would develop in people that do not exhibit this in other places of their life. The certain negatives you are associating with competition from the start of this thread is the old trap of correlation and causation. One does not define the other.
 
Putt for D'oh said:
I'm not sure what to think about a different view of progress? A negative view? Like progress is a bad thing?

Innovation maybe an annoying corporate buzz word but that doesn't mean the thing that the word is for is a bad does it? Pretty sure innovation is good, that is why it is so over used as a corporate buzz word and cliche.


Negative behavior is not encouraged by competition, just that it happens to be a stage that it can be easily observed. Again you are blaming competition for A-holes showing their colors. If competition were the problem this would be behavior common and it would develop in people that do not exhibit this in other places of their life. The certain negatives you are associating with competition from the start of this thread is the old trap of correlation and causation. One does not define the other.
Click to expand...

There is nothing about the definition of "progress" that implies a positive or a negative, so certainly progress could be a bad thing, but I was using the word as I felt you intended to use it, as a positive advancement. I doubt I would view as positives many of the same things you do.

The correlation/causation trap can be a tricky one to escape. Sometimes imagination as all we have to work with. I do believe that bad behavior is common (in many areas of life) and is often connected with competition. But I cannot prove this since while I live within some small freedom from competition, I've never lived in a large-scale world without it.

From personal experience, I don't think everyone who plays with earbuds and makes excuses is an A-hole.
 
Armus Patheticus said:
There is nothing about the definition of "progress" that implies a positive or a negative, so certainly progress could be a bad thing, but I was using the word as I felt you intended to use it, as a positive advancement. I doubt I would view as positives many of the same things you do.

The correlation/causation trap can be a tricky one to escape. Sometimes imagination as all we have to work with. I do believe that bad behavior is common (in many areas of life) and is often connected with competition. But I cannot prove this since while I live within some small freedom from competition, I've never lived in a large-scale world without it.

From personal experience, I don't think everyone who plays with earbuds and makes excuses is an A-hole.
Click to expand...

How did earbuds come into the picture? Some of us use the earbuds to block out the excuse making A-holes and stay in our own zone.
 
Armus Patheticus said:
Self absorption and denial of reality:
Surely you have seen players with earbuds in, or players who refuse to speak to their fellows. This doesn't mean that they are bad people, but why are they doing it? Because the primary value is competitive. They believe that they are more focused thus able to perform better, and so they are willing to sacrifice more important things like simple human interaction. How bizarre to walk around a woods all afternoon with three other guys and ignore them for the sake of your score...
Click to expand...

This is so off base that I have to wonder if maybe you're projecting or something :confused:
 
I imagine if I was on Armus' card, I would listen to earbuds as loud as I could stand.
 
Armus Patheticus said:
There is nothing about the definition of "progress" that implies a positive or a negative, so certainly progress could be a bad thing, but I was using the word as I felt you intended to use it, as a positive advancement. I doubt I would view as positives many of the same things you do.
Click to expand...

I guess specifics aside, yes I view progress as an overall net positive in most cases.

Armus Patheticus said:
The correlation/causation trap can be a tricky one to escape. Sometimes imagination as all we have to work with. I do believe that bad behavior is common (in many areas of life) and is often connected with competition. But I cannot prove this since while I live within some small freedom from competition, I've never lived in a large-scale world without it.

From personal experience, I don't think everyone who plays with earbuds and makes excuses is an A-hole.
Click to expand...

I wasn't really tying to classify earbud wearers as *******s, just the concept that what you have commented on, or seen as negative behaviors, are just an individuals personality traits. These things are there with or without competition.

Some behavior is negative, and it is highlighted or expressed more clearly during competition but that doesn't make competition itself a negative thing. It is simply a stage that allows an audience to see these behaviors.

So... some positive anecdotes from this week alone about leisurely competition.
Earlier this week I went to my home course for the singles weekly. Casual rolling start and saw someone I would say is a good friend. We chatted, he was just finishing up a round and wasn't going to play the weekly because he doesn't like the randomness of who he ends up throwing with. Fair enough. He then said if he knew he could play with me and a few others he named off (basically the local AM40 crowd) he would be all in.
I thought about this situation in relation to this thread. The reason he and I met and are friends is through leisurely competition. I was thinking about it and all of the guys he mentioned even our casual rounds we compete. Its not serious, only slightly more in sanctioned events. We congratulate each others good shots, express empathy or maybe light razzing about the bad ones or bad breaks. We are friends that only met through disc golf, and what I realized is closer friends BECAUSE we compete than I am with people I happen to just have a casual round with, maybe people I play with all the time but we never compare scores and sometimes don't keep score. Those are acquaintances, there is bonding that happens through competition.

This idea, the bonding through competition isn't that profound. Stories of developed mutual respect are common in sports history, athletes who are fierce competitors through a career but are, or become great friends. Often when this isn't the case it is not because of competition it is because those two simply have conflicting personalities and would never be friends.
A couple days later (last night) I was at my non-DG athletic hobby, one that is a higher priority in my life than DG and play pickup games usually twice a week. We are tight knit group. I have friends all over the world with this sport and all of them I met only because of the competing with them. The competition is something to bond over and some of these bonds are very very tight, and can thankfully overcome many other points we would disagree about. I was thinking about my home club and a couple of the guys I feel closest to I almost never play with but always against in our games. There is a mutual respect and we talk and laugh and joke about one of us besting the other and what we should have done or wanted to do to get the better of them.

I really believe that this is something tribal, instinctual and beneficial to community bonding.


I kind of get the impression Armus, that you are maybe part of a commune or something similar. A very controlled environment where cooperation is fundamental to everyone's daily life. I wonder if there is an idea that cooperation and competition are thought of as antonyms? I think in one aspect that could be seen as true, but I would very much disagree on that being a black and white line. They can exist together, competition does not mean conflict.
 
Competition in many B and C tiers is non existent in age restricted divisions where I live. A few people win them all because they like to play with friends instead of testing their abilities against players with similar skill levels. The irony is, some of these players play with friends every week casually. At least the people that play with them get a participation trophy aka players pack, lol.
 
filobedo said:
Competition...testing their abilities against players with similar skill levels.
Click to expand...

Caution: Thread drift !

Why are you (if I'm reading you correctly) inferring that competition can only exist when there are somewhat equals involved?
I'll show my hand by saying that that's about as competitive as flipping a coin (i.e. 1 day I win, 1 day you win, ad infinitum).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top