Is trying your hardest just as important as winning?

[Knight Gil]

But there's no denying that it is disappointing when 'everything you've got' gets easily skunked by some guy who is just naturally 100X better at the sport/game than you.

There is no such thing as "naturally better". While good genes help, good athletes NEED to put effort into what they do, or they won't get anywhere. Simply put, they have worked harder and tried harder than you did.

[Tradewind]

There is no such thing as "naturally better". While good genes help, good athletes NEED to put effort into what they do, or they won't get anywhere. Simply put, they have worked harder and tried harder than you did.

That's not entirely true. A dude who's 7' tall is likely going to be a better basketball player than a guy who's 5'6". A guy with a stronger/thicker jaw is likely going to be a better boxer than a guy with a frailer one. Etc.

[The Riddler]

There is no such thing as "naturally better".

Yes there is, and it is not limited to things like height in basketball either. There are just some people who have natural talent and ability in an activity. There are guys who can pop the skin off a baseball like they were born to do it, and they just start off at a higher level of ability. Sure, a shmoe like me can practice 12 hours a day and get pretty good at swinging a bat. But some guy who started off with much more natural ability at it is always going to be better. That's just how life is. This extends to all kinds of things - not just athletics. Someone can get all As in math with never studying when someone else has to study hours every day just to get a C. Someone can write beautifully, and someone else hate's even writing one sentence.

I'm not discounting hard work & practice. Everyone can become good at things with a lot of elbow grease. But someone who has both natural ability AND elbow grease? They will blow the 'hard work alone' guy out of the water 9 times out of 10.

[Deleted]

the prize is the journey not the finish line - if you run a marathon you remember the journey - if you ran 15miles then got a cab to the finish line its not the same .
I also feel the same about people who build there own money, compared to people who inherit - the person who had to graft to reach something will treasure the journey and the people they met along the way
ILL explain in wow terms, if you join a guild thats clearing all the heroic content, and you get a full clear with them, sure youll be happy - but if and your buddies make a guild from scratch and build it from the ground up, then clear the content - that will be much more rewarding

so i think winning is subjective - and sometimes getting first place doesnt mean your reaping all the benefits or rewards

[caractacus]

The thing about "winning" is that it also depends on the level of your competition.

If you can run the 100m in 10 seconds flat as your absolute best, then whether you win or lose depends almost entirely on you performing at your best, and how good everyone else is. You could be the second best of all-time at what you've chosen to compete in, but if you happen to be competing again the best of all time what are you going to do? All you can really do is your best, even if you don't win.

This is an interesting point, I'd rather run a race and come second to Usain Bolt knowing I tried my best than run against a load of 10 years olds and win so I could shout "HAHA IN YOUR FACE!"

Saying that..... a 10 year old would probably beat me

[Knight Gil]

That's not entirely true. A dude who's 7' tall is likely going to be a better basketball player than a guy who's 5'6". A guy with a stronger/thicker jaw is likely going to be a better boxer than a guy with a frailer one. Etc.

I said good genes help. But having good genes don't make you successful, nor worthy of that success. Bruce lee was not a very heavy dude compared to other martial artists and he could kick some ass. There are football players who are considered shit by some managers but other managers pick them and turn them into superstars.

Yes there is, and it is not limited to things like height in basketball either. There are just some people who have natural talent and ability in an activity. There are guys who can pop the skin off a baseball like they were born to do it, and they just start off at a higher level of ability. Sure, a shmoe like me can practice 12 hours a day and get pretty good at swinging a bat. But some guy who started off with much more natural ability at it is always going to be better. That's just how life is.

Playing baseball, or writing, or doing maths, isn't natural. Therefore, you can't be naturally better at those things. You can have certain physical traits that allow you to play baseball better, and psychological traits that allow you to write or doing maths better. But at the end of the day, it is the amount of effort you put into it that matters. Someone has been born with more "natural talent" than you? You can be more successful than him by trying harder

[Deleted]

The only thing you can do is try your hardest, because that is obviously the best you can do.

[Spectral]

There is no such thing as "naturally better". While good genes help, good athletes NEED to put effort into what they do, or they won't get anywhere. Simply put, they have worked harder and tried harder than you did.

Wait, are you actually suggesting that athletic success is 100% proportional to work ethic? This is simply absurd on the face of it.

---------- Post added 2012-09-28 at 04:33 PM ----------

Playing baseball, or writing, or doing maths, isn't natural. Therefore, you can't be naturally better at those things.

This is among the worst arguments I've ever seen.

You can have certain physical traits that allow you to play baseball better, and psychological traits that allow you to write or doing maths better. But at the end of the day, it is the amount of effort you put into it that matters. Someone has been born with more "natural talent" than you? You can be more successful than him by trying harder

There were a lot of people that outworked me in school that weren't near as successful. On the flip side, there were a lot of people that I outworked at basketball that were better than me. You're vastly understating the value of talent.

[Kasierith]

Not if your objective is to achieve a goal. If you need money for food, and you couldn't get the money you need for food despite your effort, than no your attempts aren't as important as the goal. If its for something nonessential, like winning at sports, than its more flexible since the purpose of sports is more intangible than that of obtaining money for food.

[Spectral]

If its for something nonessential, like winning at sports, than its more flexible since the purpose of sports is more intangible than that of obtaining money for food.

Also, it depends on the sport. If I'm playing a pickup basketball game, I want to win, damn it. I'm not going to feel good just because I tried hard. If I'm competing in a triathlon, I don't have a reasonable expectation of winning - the best I can do is my best, and I should feel damned good about that.

[bekilrwale]

If trying your hardest is all that mattered this would be an awful world. People should not be rewarded for how hard they try, rather for what they accomplish. You wouldn't call a McDonald's manager who does his best as successful as a business CEO who may not work up to his very best. The dystopian short "Harrison Bergeron" is a good example of a world where trying your hardest is the best thing!

[Drithien]

I personally believe trying your absolute hardest despite failing is just as important as victory.

What do you think?

I don't think there is such a thing as trying your absolute hardest in anything, ever. That is just an exaggeration to add some poetic value to an effort.

However, there is no such thing as winning in most subjects of life. Things don't break down to so simplistic terms. And 'wining' is just some egotists' or immature persons' way to mentally please themselves.

Now in things such as sports or videogames, in my opinion, winning is not such a big thing as well. Victory is simply a means to elevate the quality of an athlete's/gamer's performance. 'Carrot on a stick' I think the phrase is. Just a form of bait. And it is so weird to see people get so bent up over such an obvious bait. If someone hasn't realised it it's understandable, but to know it is a manipulative mechanism and still, willingly, fall for it?! To be so shallow just to get some self-satisfaction for your ego? The funny thing is even if you'win', you've not actually won, your lust for ego-stroking has. And you are even poorer for it.

On the other hand, if you do sports for the joy of them, you get to have a good and fun time, while learning some interesting and useful stuff, while improving your health considerably. In gaming you may not get so healthy, but you still get some fun times.

Closing, I think it's just wrong to try and compare the two concepts based on some imaginary value, because your base is exactly that, imaginary.

[Deleted]

The only thing you can do is try your hardest, because that is obviously the best you can do.

I like to add that while I still believe this, to be a winner you need to have a winners attitude and never be satisfied with second place.

With that, I don't mean it's not okay to not be first, it just means that if you're always looking up, you'll have something to strive towards.

[Deleted]

You should try to win the smartest possible way. Banging your head at a wall, no matter how much, will not break it.

Example in sports: Instead of training 100m runs in a boring program, you could do something else that you enjoy more, like football, and get the same results while having a better state of mind and possibly more stamina.

[Kasierith]

I like to add that while I still believe this, to be a winner you need to have a winners attitude and never be satisfied with second place.

With that, I don't mean it's not okay to not be first, it just means that if you're always looking up, you'll have something to strive towards.

What about that inexhaustible drive to be the best, to not accept obstacles in your path and push on to your goal? Where does the line between a lack of determination and acceptance lay? A winners attitude could be one that does not take anything but the top as acceptable.

[Zelk]

No. I f you don't win you lose. Losing accomplishes much less than winning.

[Valort]

Winning is in the eye of the beholder. For some, winning is coming first; For others, winning is doing their best and proving themselves they are capable of such thing. For me, if I'm running, winning isn't a matter of finishing first, it is a matter of finishing. If I'm playing sports, for me, winning is having fun, not having the highest score.

On the other hand, I'm very competitive at work, almost cut-throat even, and will destroy anyone trying to be better than me, I would destroy those who are better than me at work, but there are none.

[akaTheDude]

If you know deep down u have 110% and left ZERO on the table, then yes it is. But if you like a crumb on the table...then NO

[Airsoul]

Sentiment of the question is lost on so many.

Trying is better than "winning"

Not everything is a game, you dont win, you dont lose. You may win at work and your boss says thanks, you may not win the next day. As long as you keep trying you will be fine. before anyone pipes up, everyone has a boss.

[DEATHETERNAL]

Trying your hardest is just as important as winning because it makes winning more likely.

This pretty much sums it up.