I remember reading somewhere a few years back that in the ancient Olympics, winners would be glorified, while losers would have no place in history. Winners, in this sense, are only those getting the first place. There were no second or third places back then, no silver or bronze medal. You either win it all, or you would be considered as a loser, even if you were edged by the slimmest of margin by the overall winner. The losers, when the reality that they had lost in the event they took part in dawned upon them, would immediately leave and hide, too shameful to face people. While the winners got all the accolades and prestige, losers would be looked down by the society, sometimes even their existences were perished from memories. Some of these losers went as far as committing suicide for shame of losing. This is certainly way different from the way we perceive anything in life these days, sports in particular.
For some inexplicable reasons, somehow I find myself agreeing with this one-winner idea. There was this strange feeling in me when seeing athletes celebrating after finishing in the second or third spots in the Olympics. I know you have worked so hard to get this far, but hey, there was someone else crossing the finish line right before you, what on earth could be your cause for celebration? Should not you be in tears, feeling sorry for yourself? Didn’t you feel the pain, trying to come to terms with the thought of being only a second-best? My only guess is that you were satisfied with your efforts, that second or third-place finish is just fine for you. I am sorry, but I think such thought is just pathetic.
Some say that one’s best effort sometimes just is not enough for a first-place, that at least one can be proud at the fact that one has tried one’s best. The winner, they say, is just blessed with extra God-given strength to overcome any rivals that dare to give a challenge, you simply cannot do anything to change that. I tried to play around this idea inside my head honestly, but it just does not make sense to me. How could you say that you have pour in your best effort and still lose? For me, when you lose, it is simply because you did not try hard enough.
Sorry Morrie Schwartz, I tried to agree with you. But I just could not stop thinking that there is something severely wrong with being number two.
6 comments:
two thumbs up!
he wont feel any sorry, as he's laughing all the way to bank already - every month - maybe with red carpet.
no name's mentioned.
I read somewhere the other day that silver medals give you the worst feeling of them all. hehe.
I mean if you have a bronze, you'd go hey at least i medalled. But silver just screams i'm the highest ranked loser. Hee. Funny!
regarding the post, well my view is that more often than not, occurances such as these are not dichotomous, not just one or the other. So much goes into it in the grey areas in between.
It'd be nice to rewind back to the Archilles' days of one hero or perhaps Caesar's golden days where winner takes all.
It's all bloody heroic. But yeah, bloody too nonetheless lol.
Anyhow, it's an interesting notion but I guess chivalry has taken too big a part in today's games.
I dont know whether this feeling stems out of feeling immuned to losing itself but I believe a loser should not be judged just based on whether he wins or lose but the overall picture - something we may never know.
Yes, he may not be the best. But that doesn't mean he didn't work hard enough. Some people have to work harder than others to get something but that doesn't mean that his effort is lesser than that of the winner. I'm quite a conservative here in saying that luck, talent and fate still pays a part.
Anyway, there's nothing wrong in blaming yourself per say, as it is a good motivation for you to aim for the moon. I just think that there's always 2 sides in evry story and some positivity must come out from losing :)
Am:
OK Am, I don't quite get what you meant. Kau ni berkias sangat. Haha.
Afifah:
I understand what you mean, in fact I've been holding on to that notion before I wrote this, and I still do. When I wrote this, I was just assuming that all things being equal, that it's a fair competition. Of course in real life that seldom happens. Like you said, luck, talent and fate do play some roles. You see in the recently-concluded Olympics, it's almost impossible for the 17-year-old female 200m runner from Somalia to compete with other world-class athletes, all equipped with intense preparation, so there's no shame in losing this way. However if you see the larger picture, if that girl starts to work really, really hard, would we say that it's still impossible for her to surpass her competitors in the future? It's a basic rule of thumb, you work hard and you can progress forward. Some of us might have a headstart compared to the others in terms of talent, technologies, supports etc. but even with all that we can't say that we can't get past them. The key is to work hard.
But again, I do understand that we also have to celebrate those who tried their best but fell short at the finish line. I believe that Morrie was sticking up to this idea when he mentioned that famous line of his. I have no problem at all with that. At the same time, I believe that if we try just a bit harder, we can come home a champion.
Post a Comment