DAvery Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 a) Come on; I am 'not' talking about special cases or special needs people; and b) Those that succeed, I mean really succeed at becoming the best in the world at their craft, all have the attitude that 97% is still a 3% failure rate. I agree, those are special cases. But I will also add I think we are all special cases. And you did not answer my question. Can you be "successful" with anything less than a GPA of 100%? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpaul Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 a) Come on; I am 'not' talking about special cases or special needs people; and b) Those that succeed, I mean really succeed at becoming the best in the world at their craft, all have the attitude that 97% is still a 3% failure rate. So is being the "best in the world" the only measure of success? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 I agree, those are special cases. But I will also add I think we are all special cases. And you did not answer my question. Can you be "successful" with anything less than a GPA of 100%? And I already answered. Successful people, the winners, the best of the best, see anything less than 100% in terms of failure rate; as in 97% is a 3% failure rate. Ted Williams said that the best in baseball ‘fail’ seven out of ten times at the plate; and even Ty Cobb, MLB Hall of Famer with the highest ever batting average of .366, still felt he could do better. Thus while we should certainly be thankful for our accomplishments, and we should be grateful for being able to achieve things, the truly successful, the winners, the best of the best, are never ever fully 'content' and 'satisfied'. And since a success rate of 100% at all things is humanly impossible, the process of attempting to attain that 100% at all things, at all times, is what ‘winners’ and ‘successful’ actually take to heart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAvery Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 And since a success rate of 100% at all things is humanly impossible, the process of attempting to attain that 100% at all things, at all times, is what ‘winners’ and ‘successful’ actually take to heart. And that we agree on. But back to the band scenario that I presented before. As a band we are "attempting to attain that 100%, at all times", are we "winners" regardless of what we actually attain? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 So is being the "best in the world" the only measure of success? Nope; The constant process of always 'attempting to be the best in the world', doing better this year than last year, attempting to repeat or better the wins from the previous year, always aiming for the top position, that is the measure of success. Bluecoats, though never winning the gold, ‘want’ to win the gold and have had successful years when they place higher from the previous year and failures when they place lower than the previous year. While Regiment failed in 2009 by falling to ninth, they had success in 2010 by moving up to sixth, then success in 2011 by moving up to fifth, then success in 2012 by moving up to third, then failed in 2013 by moving down to sixth. So if Regiment places fifth or higher in 2014 they will succeed (this is because they have the desire to, and they are moving closer to the win based on the previous seasons results). And here is the kicker; the current winner, Crown, can only have success if they repeat win; otherwise they will experience a failure no matter what position they place while Regiment can actually succeed by placing fifth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 And that we agree on. But back to the band scenario that I presented before. As a band we are "attempting to attain that 100%, at all times", are we "winners" regardless of what we actually attain? a) It depends on the quantitative basis which yields 100%; ‘doing your best’ is not a quantitative measurement; making Finals at BOA Grand Nationals after placing 27th the previous season is a quantitative basis; and b) No, you are not 'winners' of what you attain unless you actually 'win' the activity; there should only be one winner in each situation. I believe in the saying that if everyone is considered a winner nobody actually wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAvery Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 a) It depends on the quantitative basis which yields 100%; ‘doing your best’ is not a quantitative measurement; making Finals at BOA Grand Nationals after placing 27th the previous season is a quantitative basis; and b) No, you are not 'winners' of what you attain unless you actually 'win' the activity; there should only be one winner in each situation. I believe in the saying that if everyone is considered a winner nobody actually wins. So if my band makes finals at BOA after placing 27th the prior year, we would be a success even if we did not attempt to be a success? I believe that every could be a "winner" and everyone could be a "loser" ( to use your terms). Art is not a zero sum game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 (edited) So if my band makes finals at BOA after placing 27th the prior year, we would be a success even if we did not attempt to be a success? I believe that every could be a "winner" and everyone could be a "loser" ( to use your terms). Art is not a zero sum game. Nope again; winning and succeeding are two different animals and not synonyms. While you certainly can succeed without winning, you cannot win without succeeding. Succeeding is setting a goal and either meeting or exceeding that goal (we placed 27th last year at BOA Grand Nationals and our goal is to make finals this year; we just placed 11th and made finals at this year's BOA Grand Nationals so we succeeded, but we cannot claim we 'won'). Winning, on the other hand, is taking the Gold, placing first, being the Grand Champion, and only one individual, or entity can become a winner at any given time at any given activity; The BOA Grand National Winner for this year is... Broken Arrow (and therefore no other band can claim to be winner this year at BOA Grand Nationals other than Broken Arrow). What winners and those who succeed do have in common, however, is the belief structure that anything less than 100% of attaining the particular goal is a percentage failure rate. Edited October 30, 2013 by Stu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fsubone Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 The youth perfoming with the University of Kentucky Basketball team, and the Ocean Side Baseball team, etc… certainly were taught 'how to win'; whether or not they learned it was up to each individual. And any entity which makes it a priority to not only have performers do their best, but to reach beyond their best to a level not thought achievable, to always strive to become the winner, to always attempt to become the best in the world (within the bounds of ethics, rules, and legalities), that is a very valuable skill to have learned when applying for, or engaging in, any career position. What can hurt in real life is if this manifests itself as 'win at all cost' to the point of being unethical or illegal. However, learning how to win certainly is a big advantage when going out into the real world. haha, not last year they weren't. Bounced in the NIT? About equivalent to Crown or BD getting bounced from Open Class Finals next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 haha, not last year they weren't. Bounced in the NIT? About equivalent to Crown or BD getting bounced from Open Class Finals next year. True!!!! Sort of like the Florida Marlins (1997) 92/70 regular season and World Series Champions; then the very next year (1998) 54/108 and dead last!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.