Re: RC: winning mentality was reply to Tom Ivers re: re FEI

[Deanna German <dgerman@earthlink.net>]

Boy, did this one fall apart in a hurry, or what?

> Those potential world-class horses go through a lot of events
> as "non-winners" before they reach their potential--if one defines winning as
> being first at every event entered.  That's part of conditioning and part of
> the learning curve, just as much as slogging through those lone miles at home
> is part of it.

As I told a friend of mine recently — this is not a sport you just go out and
"do" on event day. If you want to win, you sacrifice and study (heck, you do
that just to finish) and set goals in pursuit of the win.


> And as others have articulated so well, there are different goals set by
> different riders, and "winning" is a matter of meeting those goals or not.

There's a difference between "meeting goals" and "winning." You're confusing the
two. Each might have the same value to the individual, but they are different.
Right there is the difference between someone who has the "winning mentality"
and someone who does not. It doesn't change the person's worth.


> And the outrage is not at those who strive to "win" in the first-place sense,
> but at those who
> would label those with different goals as losers, even if they succeed in
> meeting their goals.

Well, that is a personal definition. The examples of "sayings "that I provided
are more applicable to a one-on-one situation like a ball-game than to an
endurance race, but do quite a good job of illustrating that a person with that
mentality will never be content with anything less than winning. How about, in
the case of an endurance race, there's the winner and then there's everyone
else? I don't think that winners in this sport find it all that appealing or
necessary to label everyone else as "losers."


> Endurance riding is an example of a "life sport" from which all who strive to
> better themselves and their horses can benefit, even if "first place" is not a
> part of that equation.  The horse and rider who
> have improved themselves from stall and couch potatoes to the level of being
> able to complete an LD in a healthy manner have gained something of worth,
> even if they never strive to go on to greater things.

No doubt and nothing wrong with that. A lot admirable in that, in fact.


> The only "losers" in this sport are the ones who aspire to levels for which
> they have not
> prepared, and who can far too easily do damage in the process.

Can't disagree with that statement.

This sport is not unlike human marathons that take place in cities around the
U.S. Anyone can participate and many have the goal of just finishing. But there
are many entrants who are going for the win. I don't recall ever reading or
hearing about entrants in the two groups having anything bad to say about the
other.

Before distance riding, I've never been involved in or witnessed a sport where
the winner is so maligned. Unless we all cross the finish line together, there
IS a winner. Or change it so it's not a race. But there's a name for that sport:
CTR.

Deanna