Long drive home

Bronzie
Bronzie Posts: 4,927
edited March 2008 in The bottom bracket
Managed to get out of cycling in the p*ssing rain and wind yesterday ( :) ) by going to watch my 12 year old lad play hockey at a county hockey festival...................so I stood in the pouring rain instead, gradually getting colder and colder while I tried to shout encouragement to them through clenched teeth ( :cry: ).

Turned into a bit of a crap day out all round really because not only did his team (Bedfordshire) lose every game and come thoroughly last, but they didn't even manage to score a goal in 6 matches, or in fact even come close to scoring.

It was a rather long quiet journey home I'm afraid. :roll:
It's a Lifestyle! -+-+- Coggan Training Levels

Comments

  • geoff_ss
    geoff_ss Posts: 1,201
    I know this is a view that's often derided but my opinion has always been that it really is getting stuck in and having a go that matters most. There are too many so-called sports enthusiasts who are really sports watching enthusiasts. I've never been much good at sport but I've had a few successes and enjoyed the experiences.

    I often used to get a bit depressed when we struggled along in mid-fleet at national dinghy championships but it was still better than sitting at home and not frightening ourselves to death :)

    At least your lad and his team had a go and probably learned something of value. He has a memory that will last.

    Geoff
    Old cyclists never die; they just fit smaller chainrings ... and pedal faster
  • fossyant
    fossyant Posts: 2,549
    It's about competing, not winning - bet he still had fun...
  • Bronzie
    Bronzie Posts: 4,927
    fossyant wrote:
    It's about competing, not winning - bet he still had fun...
    He is VERY competitive and represents his school at rugby, cross-country, swimming, cricket and hockey. He also plays cricket for the county squad. He most doesn't certainly get this competitive streak from me or the missus (neither of us were at all sporty at school), as we've always encouraged him to just do his best and that's all I'd ever ask of him. The only pressure on him is his own high expectations, which I do my best to try and temper whilst still offering all the encouragement and support I can.

    I'm thrilled that he even gets into a county squad, and I told him that on the way home. But I can empathise with how miserable he ended up feeling with getting trounced in every match, and getting soaked and frozen into the bargain.

    Once he'd cheered up and defrosted a bit, we did end up having a laugh about. Bizarre thing is, it's a repeat of last years hockey festival in Lincolnshire when he said he wouldn't bother with the county hockey again - he just can't help himself! :x
    It's a Lifestyle! -+-+- Coggan Training Levels
  • Nuggs
    Nuggs Posts: 1,804
    fossyant wrote:
    It's about competing, not winning - bet he still had fun...
    [rant]See, I think that's just bollox and sums up everything that's wrong with British sport.

    What's the point in turning up, if not to win?

    Do our Olympic athletes turn up for the fun of it? Do results not matter? Just so long as they enjoyed themselves?

    I really enjoyed the feckless Tim Henman turn up to Wimbledon every year, just to see him have a nice run out. Really flew the flag for Britain, not through winning but by being there taking part.[/rant]
  • Shadowduck
    Shadowduck Posts: 845
    Nuggs wrote:
    What's the point in turning up, if not to win?
    For a professional, as in your examples, I would assume very little.* The sport is their job and their life.

    For the majority of amateurs, sport is something they do just because they enjoy it. And that's the point of turning up. Sure they'll be trying to win, or at least get the best result they can, but if the only people who took part in sport were those who regularly won things, there wouldn't be much sport at all!

    *Though they could be using one event as training for another, or competing above their level to gain experience, or doubtless many other things.
    Even if the voices aren't real, they have some very good ideas.
  • geoff_ss
    geoff_ss Posts: 1,201
    Nuggs wrote:
    fossyant wrote:
    It's about competing, not winning - bet he still had fun...
    [rant]See, I think that's just bollox and sums up everything that's wrong with British sport.

    What's the point in turning up, if not to win?

    Do our Olympic athletes turn up for the fun of it? Do results not matter? Just so long as they enjoyed themselves?

    I really enjoyed the feckless Tim Henman turn up to Wimbledon every year, just to see him have a nice run out. Really flew the flag for Britain, not through winning but by being there taking part.[/rant]

    Professional sport is another branch of the entertainment industry so the main point of turning up is to entertain the paying public. Amateur sport is different - it's for the entertainment of the participants.

    It's just as well everyone doesn't have your attitude or there'd be no sport at all. When I competed against 100 other boats at national championships 90% of the fleet had no chance of winning but if we hadn't been there neither would the potential winners. We mid-fleet sailors had our own private battles and got to share in the thrill of racing on big open sea courses.

    The Tour would be a sorry spectacle if only the potential winners rode. Sport has no value if it isn't done for the sheer enjoyment of pitting yourself against other competitors and (often) the elements. In the great scheme of things it isn't very important at all - it just helps to pass the time in an entertaining way.

    Geoff
    Old cyclists never die; they just fit smaller chainrings ... and pedal faster
  • ColinJ
    ColinJ Posts: 2,218
    Nuggs wrote:
    fossyant wrote:
    It's about competing, not winning - bet he still had fun...
    [rant]See, I think that's just bollox and sums up everything that's wrong with British sport.

    What's the point in turning up, if not to win?

    Do our Olympic athletes turn up for the fun of it? Do results not matter? Just so long as they enjoyed themselves?

    I really enjoyed the feckless Tim Henman turn up to Wimbledon every year, just to see him have a nice run out. Really flew the flag for Britain, not through winning but by being there taking part.[/rant]
    So if you came second in the world road race championship that would mean nothing, but if you beat the other two competitors in the annual Mytholmroyd egg-and-spoon race you'd be a true sporting hero :wink: ? Anyone can win if they go up against weak enough opposition. It takes guts to compete when you know that you have almost no chance. Chapeau to those who do!

    I don't take part in any competitive sport but if I did I'd try to be humble when I won, and give deserved praise to the winner when I lost.

    The Winning is Everything attitude comes from seeing sport as a substitute for war. I agree that I wouldn't want to come second in a Decapitate-the-Enemy contest :shock: !

    Eddy Merckx won only (!) 35% of his races but I think it was still worthwhile for him to take part in the other 65%. How else would someone get the opportunity to beat him?

    As for Tim Henman - okay, he didn't win as much as he might have done but at one point he was ranked 4th in the world. He won a silver medal at the Atlanta Olympics and he played in 6 Grand Slam semi-finals. He made over $11,000,000 in prize money. He was obviously not The Best but he was a good candidate for Best-of-theRest!
  • redddraggon
    redddraggon Posts: 10,862
    ColinJ wrote:
    Eddy Merckx won only (!) 35% of his races but I think it was still worthwhile for him to take part in the other 65%. How else would someone get the opportunity to beat him?!

    I think Eddy Merckx definitely raced to win and was always one of the favourites though, not just to compete, I think he was rarely weak opposition to the ones who ended up winning.
    I like bikes...

    Twitter
    Flickr
  • ColinJ
    ColinJ Posts: 2,218
    redddraggon wrote:
    ColinJ wrote:
    Eddy Merckx won only (!) 35% of his races but I think it was still worthwhile for him to take part in the other 65%. How else would someone get the opportunity to beat him?!

    I think Eddy Merckx definitely raced to win and was always one of the favourites though, not just to compete, I think he was rarely weak opposition to the ones who ended up winning.
    I'm sure that he did. From what I've read about him, I don't imagine that he did many races just for training. Imagine beating Eddy Merckx and knowing that he was really going for it! I wonder what he would do if he was racing now - what Big Mig and Armstrong did? The opposition is so much stronger now, it would be impossible to do so many races and still win 35% of the time.

    I can see why some races are used for training - it just isn't possible to peak for every race. I think in those situations, you should try to help one of your team-mates to win and not just make up the numbers.
  • redddraggon
    redddraggon Posts: 10,862
    ColinJ wrote:
    I can see why some races are used for training - it just isn't possible to peak for every race. I think in those situations, you should try to help one of your team-mates to win and not just make up the numbers.

    Aye. After all most cyclists in the peloton are domestiques, are they not? Armstrong used to support Hincapie in a few spring races aswell didn't he?

    Cycling is a funny old sport isn't it, a lot of professionals won't be "racing" to win personally but for the benefit of the team and give someone else most of the glory.
    I like bikes...

    Twitter
    Flickr
  • iainment
    iainment Posts: 992
    Of course most sport is about taking part and the challenge to yourself, however I was thrilled to beat Haile Gabrisellassie at last years marathon - he gave up but I finished, so by my reckoning it's IAINMENT1-0 GABRISELLASSIE!!!!

    :wink:
    Old hippies don't die, they just lie low until the laughter stops and their time comes round again.
    Joseph Gallivan
  • pneumatic
    pneumatic Posts: 1,989
    I think most people engage in sport in order to do the best that they can (and get fit, have fun, show off, wear brightly coloured clothes, buy dinky gizmos, imagine themselves to be their heros etc..)

    If you are talented, fit and focused, the best you can do might also involve winning sometimes, in which case you go for it, of course. However, by definition, for the majority of participants winning is so unlikely that it would be totally disheartening to have that as your only objective.

    Over the last 35 years, I have played (competitively) rugby, football, squash, tennis, badminton, golf, cross-country running, orienteering, archery, athletics and skiiing. I have never won any competition at any of these sports. I have also cycled in a couple of mass participations and a sportive. I wasn't the fastest in them either.

    Have I been wasting my time? Am I a disgrace to British (Scottish) sport?

    I don't think so.

    Fast and Bulbous
    Peregrinations
    Eddingtons: 80 (Metric); 60 (Imperial)
  • Nuggs
    Nuggs Posts: 1,804
    I just re-read my post and even I don't agree with its sentiments (except the bit about 'Tiger' Tim).

    That'll learn me for posting after a miserable commute!
  • SteveR_100Milers
    SteveR_100Milers Posts: 5,987
    Its ALL about winning..until you don't THEN it's about competing. Why not teach kids that in order to win you have to take part, rather than simply take part. What is so wrong with being driven to win? Why can't we celebrate success for a change instead of making excuses for not achieving it...as for the wining is evertyitng as a form of war, then of course sport is war! It's surrogate tribal fighting, and without it we'd probably spend even more time doing it for real.
    http://www.pontypoolrcc.co.uk/
    www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=44397853765
  • robbie the roadie
    robbie the roadie Posts: 423
    Was it Scott who years ago ran the advertising campaign 'Second place is just the first loser'?

    For what it's worth I think it's good for people to learn that in life there will be times when you lose and face dissapointment. In my opinion things like 'non competitive' sports days that some schools have don't really equip people with the skills neaded for real life. You don't always suceed at a job interview or pass your driving test first time but if we have had similar experiences in the past we will be better equiped to deal with it.
    Cycling - The pastime of spending large sums of money you don't really have on something you don't really need.
  • Nuggs
    Nuggs Posts: 1,804
    SteveR_100Milers wrote:
    Its ALL about winning..until you don't THEN it's about competing. Why not teach kids that in order to win you have to take part, rather than simply take part. What is so wrong with being driven to win? Why can't we celebrate success for a change instead of making excuses for not achieving it...as for the wining is evertyitng as a form of war, then of course sport is war! It's surrogate tribal fighting, and without it we'd probably spend even more time doing it for real.
    Yeah! Now I agree with Steve (and me at 9 o'clock this morning)...

    I'm having a confusing day...
  • Shadowduck
    Shadowduck Posts: 845
    I'm not sure I agree with the idea that sport is either "non-competitive" or "all about winning". When I play, I play to win* - sometimes I do and sometimes I don't, but my day won't be ruined if it's the latter!

    *Even when I know it's very unlikely!
    Even if the voices aren't real, they have some very good ideas.

Categories