==> Do you truely believe there are no other determining factors?
Yes, competition is about determining who can perform best. Winning is not an exclusive outcome of competition, but winning is the objective of competition.
==> Do you truely believe winning is all that competition is about
Yes. Winning is the objective of a competition. That's the very definition of competition. That doesn't mean there are benefits to be had from not winning, but that doesn't change the fact that competition is about winning.
==> Have you yourself ever entered a competition knowing that you could not win? If so, why?
I've entered competitions knowing full well that my chances of winning were very small, but I still entered with full intention of winning. I still played to win. For example, you don't become a good chess playing by playing people you beat all the time. No, you get better by getting you butt whipped and learning from the experience. Losing to superior players allows you to get better. You need the challenge and experience of losing to better players in order to get better.
==> That competition allows you to measure your abilities against others, nothing more.
Not nothing more. Yes, measuring and comparing is all about seeing where you fit on the scale with respect to the other competitors. But it's not nothing more because those measurements mean something. They show you what and where are your opportunities to improve. They show you where you need to get better. If it's nothing more, then why do you care where you sit with respect to other competitors? If you truly don't care about winning or being the best, then why do you care where you measure up against the others?
==> That all participants in this specific competition benefited from it
Of course. But benefiting is not the same as winning. And there are benefits from losing, not the least of which is learning how to lose. See mintjulep's outstanding post of 4 Sep 13 16:55.
==> That I would be satisfied in any competition where I know I have tried my best regardless of the result.(Yes, even last place)
That's fine for you, but if that's your approach, I submit that you're not competing, you're simply participating. Yes I've competed and I've done my best, and I have come in last place in competitions, I didn't have any regrets about my efforts, but I was definitely not satisfied with it. I knew that I had some work to do so that I wouldn't come in last place next time. I took it as an opportunity to get better.
==> That this specific event failed in it's composition as events such as these should encourage participation.
This event failed precisely because it was composed as a competition. Competitions aren't supposed to encourage participation; they encourage winning. And that's precisely the reason behind entitlement comment. When competitions are artificially manipulated to control who can and cannot compete, or whose results are manipulated to ensure everyone wins, then you're enabling entitlement mentality. You're teaching that participation in competition entitles you to rewards, not that being the best in a competition results in rewards. And that's a dis-service because life if full of real competitions, where there are winners and losers, and I think it's important that we teach the kids the difference between fun events and competitions. Again, it the framing of a competition as a vehicle for participation rewards that is the problem. There are plenty of opportunities to have events that encourage and reward participation, but competition isn't one of them.
==> That I have never considered myself a loser in any competition I have entered, where I did not win, as long as I gave it my all.
Losing a competition doesn't make you a loser; it means that you lost that competition. And that is an important lesson to teach. Just as doing something stupid doesn't make you stupid, losing a competition doesn't make you a loser. But that doesn't change the fact that did do something stupid and you did lose that competition.
==> That all competitions yield benefits regardless of outcome. Nothing ventured nothing gained.
Agreed, as discussed earlier.
==> That the "equality of result" mentality is real and is wrong but is simply a reaction to it's polar opposite mindset (also wrong IMHO)
Equality of result is wrong. However, the only reason that equality of result mentality exists is because competitions have been abused and manipulated to foster that mentality.
Competition is the wrong vehicle to teach equality of result. That doesn't mean teaching equality of result is necessarily bad; it means that using competition to each equality of result is bad. Competition is not about equality of result. Competition is about winning.
--------------
Good Luck
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read
FAQ181-2886
Wise men speak because they have something to say, fools because they have to say something. - Plato