Dismantling the Over-Emphasis of Competition in Organized Sports
Organized sports have sprung to fame in the past century, becoming an increasingly common experience in childhood for Western cultures. Millions of young people participate in organized sports teams, clubs and training centres, seeking its alleged benefits to physical, mental and academic well-being. A report by Aspen Institute in 2016, Project Play, finds that three out of four American families have at least one member in organized youth sports. Recent studies on the psychological benefits of physical activity by Alicia Garcia-Falgueras provide evidence that, “stress generated in our muscles during sports practice are helping to release our own tensions […], and to reduce our stress level.” Aimed to improve individual human physical ability, sports foster a variety of integrants, functioning as one’s physical, mental, and psychological well-being. Yet then, according to a poll done by the National Alliance for Youth Sport, why do nearly 70% of youth athletes in organized sports drop out by the age of 13?
The primary reason that youth are in sports is to, “have fun,” according to a study conducted by assistant professor Amanda Visek at the George Washington University. “If they drop out, it’s because it’s not fun anymore,” Visek argues. The problem then, is an over-emphasis on competition, and a lack of emphasis on intrinsic skill acquisition and enjoyment. Historically, the successful administration of sports programs has been accredited to competition; differentiating competitive sports from other physical activities. In accordance with the social comparison theory in psychology, the continuous drive upwards to perform better than other persons fosters competitive behaviour, in manifestation to uphold one’s own superiority. Bringing competition into perspective today, George Orwell’s “Sporting Spirit” argues, “Nearly all the sports practised nowadays are competitive. You play to win, and the game has little meaning unless you do your utmost to win.” Orwell recognizes the increase of competition and outcome-based participation in organized sports, even at the international level, and points out, “that sport is an unfailing cause of ill-will,” causing more tensions and negativity, rather than strengthening relations and sportsmanship. Today, as sports universally engage in a more rigorous competition, youth sports programs are undoubtedly prone to become victims to an unfocused purpose, one that is a result of the increasing emphasis on competition, created manifestly by parents, coaches, spectators and other athletes. The proponents of the issue suggest reforming the structure, proposing to, “emphasize that there should be action, [and] involvement among all participants.”
This reformist movement is intended to shift the overemphasis on winning, to the illumination of skill development and fun — raising a timely question: Why is the current model of organized youth sports inhibiting athletic development and long-term retention of youth athletes? Although the complexities and nuances of competition are considered pertinent in driving motivation for sports participation, eliminating the antecedent from organized youth sports fosters better skill acquisition and construction of the central purpose of competitive sports, securing the long-term participation of youth athletes.
To understand why reform is needed in today’s organized youth sports programmes, one must fully comprehend the issues with, and the pressures of the current model. Developmental psychology deals with, “changes in cognitive, motivational, psychophysiological, and social functioning,” focusing on the relationships of environmental and biological factors in the personality of a child. Now, in Western societies, where organized youth sports programs are a common experience, the outcomes result in an inordinate number of losers compared to winners; the traditional tournament-style dictates there can only be one victor. Combining the study on children’s development and social psychology, author of Why Sport?, Sheryle Bergmann Drewe, suggests that when youth are continually exposed to such losing situations, they develop self-fulfilling prophecies, internalizing the loss and reaching a state of vulnerability, identifying themselves as losers. The result — a selfish drive to win-at-all-costs, limiting the intentional education through sport. At the young ages of 5–12, where children are more likely to seek fun, such perspectives become toxic, eventually leading to dropouts by early adolescence.
With this deluded mindset, young athletes moving into adolescence are likely to develop attitude problems and justify cheating, violence, and doping to gain athletic superiority. When motivated to achieve our goals, the natural human impulse to create tools ourselves plays into the central purpose of sport — to strive to be better. When cheating, violent game-play, and the use of performance-enhancing drugs (i.e. doping) become justifiable for young athletes — who are motivated to achieve societal norms of being the best — moral failure in sports increases. From a moral standpoint, cheating involves intentional rule-breaking, becoming incompatible with gameplay conventions and internalist principles; doping expresses a, “morally corrupt character or violates a moral value (authenticity or naturalness); and violent play, though manifested through participation in many sports, poses a significant risk to the physical health of participants, and raises questions of the concept of “social good.” As youth navigate their way through the rules and norms of athleticism, along with the other intricacies of childhood development, it is of utmost importance for program providers and supporters to encourage a healthy environment that fosters the intrinsic motivation to perform better, rather than extrinsic incentives, such as victory.
According to Robert L. Simon, first editor of the Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, sports are more than rules and conventions; there lies an internal motivation for excellence. “Broad internalism claims that in addition to the rules of various sports, there are underlying principles that might be embedded in overall theories or accounts of sport as a practice,’’ Simon states, maintaining that competitive excellence and intrinsic motivation interact to define the practice of sport. Based on various interpretive theories of principles that are key factors in sports, arises the foundation of the mutualist view. For Simon, this is the, “mutually acceptable quest for excellence through challenge,” which best fosters sport. Unlike the minimalist zero-sum perspective that focuses on participation benefiting only the victor, the mutualist argues a non-zero-sum perspective — all participants are benefited, regardless of their victories or losses. For the mutualist, the core purpose of competitive sport is the cultivation of excellence, rather than the pursuit of victory. Simon argues for this to occur, “competition presupposes a cooperative effort by competitors to generate the best possible challenge to each other,” essentially comparing the athlete’s relative abilities in hopes to determine athletic superiority.
In an environment that allows for the physical, mental and cognitive development of the child, competition is healthy; until the only outcome acceptable is winning. Overemphasizing competition falls short in appreciating the cooperative dimension of competitive sport. With the mutualistic mindset, athletes seek resolution; they, “do not appreciate victory for its own sake but as a reflection of a process by which contestants find worthy opponents, agree to create the best possible test, and attempt to overcome the challenge faced.” Under this, the primary commitment is to cultivate the skills of a sport and seek excellence through cooperation. Most mutual philosophers will agree, in that, “the goods more directly connected to victory are external to the practice, whereas those linked to excellence are internal.” The importance of mutualism showing sports in the best light makes it even more pertinent to consider how current youth sports programs can be remodelled to accommodate for stronger cooperation through competition, and encourage intrinsic motivation to perform better.
The main goal for the proponents of the reformist trend is to detach the values and motives of organized youth sports from those of adult-oriented programs. According to Jay Coakley, a Professor Emeritus at the University of Colorado who is known for his infamous Sports in Society; Issues and Controversies text, adult-oriented sports programs emphasize, “performance ethics.” In order to maintain athletic status, athletes conform to the norms of performance ethics in sports, including becoming more competitive, prioritizing the sport over other aspects of life, and viewing excellence and perfection as the ultimate motive. Though the concept of sports ethics may enhance a select number of talented athletes, it lacks in meeting the developmental needs of young athletes who still require the acquisition of skills and gameplay. Consequently, burnout increases when winning is placed at a higher importance than skill acquisition and mastery by coaches, and when parents become overly involved in the outcome of the sport participation, according to Author Ronald Woods’s Social Issues in Sport (III Edition).
The continual displeasure and, conversely, pressure to do better expressed by parents, coaches and administrators result in a concerning decline in the well-being and development of children. “When we have a little eight, nine-year-old that wants to be creative and take some risks in a game, they’re yelled at by parents to pass the ball because it might be a goal against the team and then drop them in the standings,” says Richard Way, a project lead for Long-Term Player Development (LTPD) with Canadian Sport for Life. In the current capitalistic world, it is manifest that youth sports programs are modelled as businesses, requiring parents to pay substantial fees for their child’s participation. According to a 2019 Aspen Institute survey on the effects of household income on sport participation among youth in the U.S., the average family spends about $693 annually on one child in organized sports programs. When high investments of the sort are paid to provide the opportunity of skill development and fitness to their child, the parent expects obvious improvements and returns. Therefore, resulting in over-emphasizing the performance ethic and pressure on the young athlete.
Richard Way says shifting focus away from winning keeps players more engaged in the sport. Canada’s LTPD strategy has been implemented by the Ontario Soccer Association since 2014, which eliminated all score-keeping and league standings for their organized sports teams under the age of 12. The OSA states, “moving away from an over-emphasis on competition, […] would mean retaining athletes and building success at elite levels.” Redirecting focus on skill development might also allow young athletes to develop important spatial cognition and motor skills, as the education of the sport teaches children how to successfully navigate the game.
A key trend among those who advocate refocusing organized youth sports is to de-emphasize competitive practices, by dismantling the keeping of scores and standings. To facilitate the evolution of an atmosphere that is enjoyable, fair, and fosters development, organizations like the National Alliance for Youth Sport (NAYS) have established regulations in place to design and maintain programs that prioritize the skill acquisition and well-being of youth athletes. NAYS Standards 1 and 2 best showcase the reformist movement’s approach to dismantling over-competitiveness, yet not eradicating sports of the uniqueness of competition. Standard 1, “Quality Sports Environment”, guides organized sports programs to set minimum practice standards for participants, establishes a no-cut policy to encourage more recreational participation, and discourages sports specialization. The implementation guidelines for this standard prescribe the establishment of formal competitive teams before the age of 9.
According to NAYS Standard 2, “Sports participation should be fun and a portion of a child’s life,” focuses on balancing youth sports in a child’s life with other social and educational factors. The guidelines for implementation of this standard encourage leagues, parents and coaches to consider a variety of youth activities apart from sports, limit organized practices to age-appropriate timings, and educate the young athletes about positive life skills from sports participation. The objective of youth sports reforms, such as the one outlined by the NAYS, is to enhance skill acquisition and comprehension for children through experiences that are appropriate for their age and developmental level. Standard 2, developed particularly in response to the overemphasis on superiority and winning, even urges parents to, “select youth sports programs that are developed and organized to enhance the emotional, physical, social and educational well-being of children.” Acknowledging that, “historically, many (youth) programs have been modeled after adult-oriented programs,” NAYS strongly believes newer programs have to be remodeled to fit the needs of every child, allowing them to “positively benefit from participation.”
As the interest in sport participation increases at a younger age, with more young athletes joining organized sports teams before the age of 11 today than several decades ago, it is relevant to think of how to reconceptualize traditional adult-oriented athletic programs to effectively meet the mandate of positive youth development in sports. To start, the focus of athletes, coaches and parents, must shift to viewing sports as positive youth development, rather than training for miniature adult athletes. The main factor that differentiates the two — manifest emphasis on competition. While removing competition entirely is not recommended, since it is quintessential to driving the motivation and central purpose of competitive sports, it is important to emphasize skill acquisition, physical development and cooperation at the younger stages of participation. The Long-Term Player Development (LTPD) and the National Alliance for Youth Sports Standards are examples of reformist movements that aim to remodel youth sports by removing competitive practices that reinforce zero-sum views on participation. In doing so, youth sports can be accepted as an activity where competition and positive development interact, towards long-term high-level performance in both sports, and life.
Bibliography
Bonte, P. and Tolleneer, J.. “Athletic Enhancement, Human Nature and Ethics: Threats and Opportunities of Doping Technologies.” Dordrecht: Springer. 2013.
Brown, W. M. “Ethics, Drugs, and Sport.” Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 7(1): 15–23. 1980.
Camiré, Martin. “Reconciling Competition and Positive Youth Development in Sport.” Staps N° 109, no. 3 (2015): 25. doi:10.3917/sta.109.0025.
Coakley, Jay J. Sport in Society: Issues and Controversies. McGraw-Hill, 2004.
Coker-Cranney, Ashley, Jack C. Watson, Malayna Bernstein, Dana K. Voelker, and Jay Coakley. “How Far Is Too Far? Understanding Identity and Overconformity in Collegiate Wrestlers.” Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health. 2018. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6124497/.
Corso, Melissa. “Developmental Changes in the Youth Athlete: Implications for Movement, Skills Acquisition, Performance and Injuries.” The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association. December 2018. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6319435/.
“Developmental Psychology.” Encyclopædia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/science/developmental-psychology.
Devine, John William, and Francisco Javier Lopez Frias. “Philosophy of Sport.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. February 04, 2020. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sport/.
Garcia-Falgueras, Alicia. “Psychological Benefits of Sports and Physical Activities.” British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioural Science 11, no. 4 (2015): 1–7. doi:10.9734/bjesbs/2015/21865.
Garcia, Stephen M., Avishalom Tor, and Tyrone M. Schiff. “The Psychology of Competition.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 8, no. 6 (2013): 634–50. doi:10.1177/1745691613504114.
Lopez Frias, F. J. “Bernard Suits’ Response to the Question on the Meaning of Life as a Critique of Modernity.” Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 13(3–4): 406–418. 2019.
McFee, G., 2004a, “Normativity, Justification, and (MacIntyrean) Practices: Some Thoughts on Methodology for the Philosophy of Sport,” Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 31(1): 15–33.
Merkel, Donna. “Youth Sport: Positive and Negative Impact on Young Athletes.” Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine, 2013, 151. doi:10.2147/oajsm.s33556.
Miner, Julianna W. “Why 70 Percent of Kids Quit Sports by Age 13.” The Washington Post. April 21, 2019. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/parenting/wp/2016/06/01/why-70-percent-of-kids-quit-sports-by-age-13/.
“National Standards For Youth Sports.” National Alliance for Youth Sports. [PDF] 2008. Available at https://www.nays.org/cmscontent/File/National_Standards08FINAL-2-.pdf
Orwell, George. “The Sporting Spirit.” The Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell, Volume IV: In Front of Your Nose, 1945–1950
“Remove Scoreboards from Youth Sports, Group Says | CBC News.” CBCnews. April 15, 2013. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/remove-scoreboards-from-youth-sports-group-says-1.1340518.
Runzel, Tamara. “How to Handle Parents Complaining About Playing Time for Kids.” SportsRec. October 15, 2019. https://www.sportsrec.com/560832-how-to-handle-parents-complaining-about-playing-time-for-kids.html.
Ryan Snelgrove Professor of Sport Business, and Daniel Wigfield Phd Candidate. “Making Youth Soccer Less Competitive: Better Skills or a Sign of Coddled Kids?” The Conversation. January 30, 2021. https://theconversation.com/making-youth-soccer-less-competitive-better-skills-or-a-sign-of-coddled-kids-119061.
Simon, R. L.“Internalism and Internal Values in Sport.” Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 27(1): 1–16. 2000.
Simon, R. L., Torres, C. R., and Hager, P. F. “Fair Play: The Ethics of Sport, 4th edition.” Boulder, CO: Westview Press. 2015.
Simon, R. L. “Fair Play. The Ethics of Sport (2nd ed.).” Boulder: Westview Press. 2004.
Torres, C. R., & Hager, P. F. “De-emphasizing Competition in Organized Youth Sport: Misdirected Reforms and Misled Children.” Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 37(2), 292–309. 2007
Torres, C. R. & McLaughlin, D. W. “Indigestion?: An Apology for Ties.” Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, XXX(2), 2003, 144–158.
Visek, A. J., Achrati, S. M., Mannix, H., McDonnell, K., Harris, B. S., DiPietro, L. “The Fun Integration Theory: Toward Sustaining Children and Adolescents Sport Participation.” Journal of Physical Activity & Health. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24770788/.
Woods, Ronald B. Social Issues in Sport. Human Kinetics, 2011.
“Youth Sports Facts: Challenges.” The Aspen Institute Project Play. https://www.aspenprojectplay.org/youth-sports-facts/challenges.
“Youth Sports Facts: Why Youth Sports Matters.” The Aspen Institute Project Play. https://www.aspenprojectplay.org/youth-sports-facts.
