jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (24 posts)

What is the point of playing sport if there are no winners or losers?

  1. grumpiornot profile image70
    grumpiornotposted 5 years ago

    What is the point of playing sport if there are no winners or losers?

    I've recently heard that schools have sports days in which prizes are awarded to all children, just for taking part. What is the point of that?
    Children need to learn that in life, there are winners and there are losers... in college, sport, life, business. Surely, it is better that kids are prepared for this reality, rather than brushing the harsh reality under the carpet?

  2. lburmaster profile image83
    lburmasterposted 5 years ago

    By enjoying to play the game. I hated playing games where coaches focused on if we won or lost. It was just like being picked on at school which made me more hardened, hateful, and wanting to harm those who were mean to me, including dreaming about beating the coach to a pulp. Why create frustrated and hateful children by making winners or losers? I'd rather let students be nice and enjoy the ride.

    1. grumpiornot profile image70
      grumpiornotposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I wonder to what degree the coaches of younger kids have grown more responsible, especially for the less successful, reluctant sportspeople are.
      I imagine that some kids want to just enjoy, while others want to compete. Room for both types?

  3. MickS profile image74
    MickSposted 5 years ago

    Ah, well, the poliicaly correct nannies have got their fingers into all sorts of pies.  Their cry is - 'we don't want to upset the poor little dears, so we'll make it so that nobody loses.'  This inane policy takes away all the drive and competition out of children, and eventualy the adults they become.

    1. profile image0
      Garifaliaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Dearest friend, were hubpages to take away your badges, would you stop writing? I dare say no. You would continue to write for the love of it. It would not take away your drive or desire, would it?

    2. MickS profile image74
      MickSposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I don't give a damn about petty little electronic medals, I don't write for them, I write for money, when I get copy published, it means I have won that place in the mag, I don't write to lose. I play sports/games to win.

    3. profile image0
      Garifaliaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Whatever makes you feel good. That's what it's all about. Congratulations on your published work.

  4. Rosana Modugno profile image83
    Rosana Modugnoposted 5 years ago

    I agree with you.  There are winners and losers.  They should watch the Olympics to see what that means.  I have a problem with flower passers who dilute reality for children in order to make them feel good.  That's just denial and teaching them passivity.  That will get your butt kicked in some schools.

    If these schools are giving out prizes just for taking part, then I don't see a problem with that because it encourages children to try and be involved.  But....the prize shouldn't be the same as the winner.  Trophy for number one and ribbon for trying.  There needs to be an obvious difference, so they see that trying harder always gets you more.  Life.

    1. grumpiornot profile image70
      grumpiornotposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      It seems there must be a way to make it less harsh for the losers. But that softness cannot overlook reality and shelter kids.
      Real life lessons can be learned through sport, and sometimes, those lessons will hurt a bit.

  5. profile image0
    Garifaliaposted 5 years ago

    I suppose it is meant to promote positive sportsmanship and deter hatred, bullying and the too high ego. I'm sure children know that in reality one team is the winner and I'm sure the awards to each (winner-loser) are different. I am also certain that even though the losing team is also awarded a prize for participation, the winners still feel special about winning. When children are at the tender ages between 6-12, it IS a good idea to cultivate sportsmanship and solidarity. Do you see my point? After all, the point in school is LEARNING not winning a trophy.

    1. MickS profile image74
      MickSposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, aspects of learning are learning how to be competative and in so doing learning the laws of how things are done without cheating, competivness does not mean win at all costs.

    2. profile image0
      Garifaliaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Exactly my friend. And I'm sure the award given to the losers is to enforce feeling good about taking part. You might find the following interesting:
      http://www.alfiekohn.org/parenting/tcac.htm

    3. MickS profile image74
      MickSposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Giving awards for losing is in no way teaching about being competative, so play the game, if you lose hard luck, you get nowt, must try harder, is the lesson of the day.

    4. profile image0
      Garifaliaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Agreed about the lesson, however, we are not talking about adults but children who must learn to compete in a positive way and become graceful losers. We're not talking about adults like yourself.

    5. grumpiornot profile image70
      grumpiornotposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I understand your point Garifalia.
      My suggestion is that part of learning how real life treats us, is learning to win graciously and lose honourably. In life, you cannot always be the winner, but at what age can that lesson be learned...

    6. profile image0
      Garifaliaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I believe if what you mentioned above is done in primary school then that's just dandy. Then in middle school and high school it should be the regular way because by then children should know how to behave in a better way whether they lose or win.

  6. profile image0
    huckelburyposted 5 years ago

    Sports primarily teaches the benefits of effort and helps instill the discipline needed to exert that effort, even in a losing cause. Certainly, humans tend to be goal directed, but the effort required to reach a specific goal is often more valuable than attaining it. If you look at collegiate athletics, for example, you will often see mismatched teams because not every team in a specific conference has the same amount of talent. And yet those kids at the "inferior" schools play their hearts out with low expectations of winning. Again, it's the discipline and effort needed for the survival of the species that is most impressive, not the numbers in the win-loss column.

    1. grumpiornot profile image70
      grumpiornotposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Possibly the less sports-inclined kids can enjoy the game, while the natural athletes can be tested against each other.
      Should coaches play a role in this by selecting which kids follow which route?

  7. mikejhca profile image92
    mikejhcaposted 5 years ago

    The point of playing sports if there are no winners or losers is to have fun while learning something.  I saw a kids baseball game that was like that.  It was good for the kids that did not know what they were doing but bad for the kids that were doing well.  Children should practice playing a sport before they become competitive.  Once they know what they are doing they should have winners and losers.

    It is better to have winners and losers.  Losing helps people improve.  If they have been playing the sport for more than one school year there should be winners and losers.  They just need to organize the teams so they are as evenly matched as possible.  While one team wins and another loses they should be taught that they are still winners if they try their best and have fun.  If the point is to exercise, have fun and become better at something you can't lose if you try your best.

    1. grumpiornot profile image70
      grumpiornotposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      What do you think of my comment to hucklebury below? Not repeating the whole comment so hub doesn't get funny with me...

    2. mikejhca profile image92
      mikejhcaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      The coach should select players based on their ability and how hard they try so the teams are fairly evenly matched.  That could mean separating the good from the not so good or having mixed teams.

  8. IDONO profile image82
    IDONOposted 5 years ago

    If there is no winner or loser, it's not a sport. It's a hobby. Sport is competing with someone or something. Competition is one doing better than the other. Therefore, winner--- loser.

    1. grumpiornot profile image70
      grumpiornotposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I agree, but have had painful experiences at losing sports. Those times taught me lessons, just as much as winning had other lessons.

    2. IDONO profile image82
      IDONOposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      You are right. With winning, I learned gratitude. With losing, I learned acceptance. Both huge ingredients to lead to a pretty good life.

 
working