Perfect Form

For a while now I've been in a quandary regarding tennis, though the subject concerns all sports. Should your goal be winning or trying to achieve perfect form?

Being a bit of a perfectionist, I do strive to play elegant tennis and I admire players with beautiful strokes. I also have to admit that I don't like losing to players with less than attractives strokes. I follow the school of thought that if you improve your strokes your game will also improve. It's not that simple, of course, as learning tactics and executing them etc. obviously contribute to development at being 'good'.

Is winning the be all and end all? I was speaking to a very good tennis player today and he thinks that winning is the ultimate goal. As he says, 'You can see somebody play and think that person is a great player. But are players with beautiful strokes and perfect form remembered or really recognised by their peers if they don't win any competitions.' A good point.

According to this new tennis aquantance being a skilled player and being a good player (my best translation at least) are two separate things. I asked whether he thought there were good players who weren't so skilled, or at least didn't have an 'attractive game'. Of course, I knew the answer but still don't like the answer!

Comments

[quik]

The same logic can be applied to anything. I am good at my job, but I don't make waves and I stay quiet. Other louder people who aren't necessarily as good may move up faster than me simply because they make the right noises and they 'look' like they are doing a good job rather than an excellent job like me.

People typically go for what stands out. In tennis that maybe winning rather than form as people remember the winners. Who came 4th in last years Wimbledon? Do you remember? I don't. Who won?

[Darren]

From what you've said you seem to be moving up at quite a rate even if you are a quiet worker.

In terms of work I'd say that striving for perfection is often not appreciated by others where efficiency and doing a decent job are far more important. For example, even if you write flawless elegant code, I shouldn't think your boss would appreciate it if it took twice as long as functional code which may not be quite as robust.

The question boils down to what is most important to you as an individual and striving to meet your own expectations.

[quik]

But if its important to you to succeed, then you may have to bend your principles a bit to get there.

I am currently playing the politics game to move around. Had I relied on my technical talents alone, I would be at a much lower level.

[Darren]

Yes, I see what you mean. There's a lot of politics at work.

You'd hope that if you were talented and simply worked hard that eventually your work would be recognised, though.

Mind you, if you are too good as a techy you may not be able to move around so easily as there's a danger you might get pigeon-holed.