Topic: What are you going to do if Parkour turns into a entirely competitive sport?

[Michael H. HIPK]

I would ignore what the world turns it into and keep doing what I am doing now. Its about the flow of movement, not who can do it faster. The minute you turn it into a competition its no longer parkour in my mind.

Oi... You have a point. Because if it's between you and another person and a finish line... That's a race. You may use parkour in a race but then again whose to say you can't. It's racing but not parkour.

Really the only competitiveness in parkour is between you and yourself. What you can do better, pushing your self to the limits, overcoming fears. So I guess in a way yes parkour is a competitive sport. Competitive against your own self...

[jp2ykz]

Really the only competitiveness in parkour is between you and yourself. What you can do better, pushing your self to the limits, overcoming fears. So I guess in a way yes parkour is a competitive sport. Competitive against your own self...

Isn't competitiveness between you and your self the basis for good training in every sport? like setting personal goals and benchmarks.

I don't then see the harm of then testing yourself against where others are at.

I think this provides an exiting way to test your skills. As long as this is done in a positive social environment I think competition would be great for parkour and those who practice it. 

As far as a technical definition of parkour maybe you are right.. However the definition of words change through history based on how people use them. I think that FR and PK are really the same thing and can be used interchangeably any where outside of PK community. You can hope that your definition will prevail but it is doubtful.

This however doesn't mean the philosophy and the history will be lost so I see no harm in the long run.

[Gabe Arnold]

I'm coming more and more to the conclusion that Parkour is a very limiting form of movement. Sure, I can use whatever I want to overcome the obstacle, as long as it's done with the intention of speed/efficiency! But I'm interested in all forms of movement that involve obstacle navigation. Does that mean I'm purely a Freerunner then, going for aesthetics and beauty/coolness above all else? No, sometimes I do just want to conquer all walls in a single bound.

So what do I do then? Call myself a Traceur AND a Freerunner? But within the course of a single training session I could switch my mental goal multiple times, becoming both a traceur and freerunner. The only thing I feel that separates us from tricking/urban acrobatics/running is the continuation of movement and the use of obstacles to create that movement.

Isn't there a way to merge these two types of movement? Why can't I call myself, say, a Motion Artist or something. Then I can say that sometimes I prefer the purely philosophical, non-competition end of the spectrum (David Belle's Parkour) and sometimes I prefer the stylized, competition-tolerant end of the scale (for lack of a better term, Daniel Ilabaca or Team Tempest Freerunning)

It'd be like a sliding scale on the Motion Arts. It may risk turning different viewpoints into schools like in martial arts, but I think we should be free to say we practice a very general concept, like motion arts, and from there we can pinpoint our personal belief, be it closer to the ideals of Parkour, Freerunning, or something in between. 

[jp2ykz]

Yeah!!!

Maybe like parkour unlimited or unlimited parkour or ultimate parkour.

Motion arts describes it well but just sounds kinda dorky to me.

Maybe we should have a contest to see who could come up with the best all inclusive name for pk like activitys. Lol

[Gabe Arnold]

Yeah!!!

Maybe like parkour unlimited or unlimited parkour or ultimate parkour.

Motion arts describes it well but just sounds kinda dorky to me.

Maybe we should have a contest to see who could come up with the best all inclusive name for pk like activitys. Lol

Perhaps haha. I'm not sure what you could call it, but I like to point back to when David Belle, Foucan, and the rest of the Yamakasi originally starting training together. Parkour wasn't a word yet back then. Neither was Freerunning. They really didn't have a word - they just trained together and did their thing. It was later on that Belle started to form his own way and call it Parkour, and Foucan his own and called it Freerunning, and everyone else tried to stick with L'art du Displacement.

In the end, we really already have "schools of movement". Those that follow Belle's ideas to the letter, those that follow Foucan's, and those that seek something in between. Our few unifying tenants are the desire for obstacles, continual smooth movement, and basic morals like being accepting, kind to others, and so on. I think if we could find a way to give ourselves a vague outline like that in a word, and allow everything else to take up the middle, we'd all be a lot happier.

EDIT - Kinetic Arts? Dynamic Arts?

[Millercb96]

Yeah!!!

Maybe like parkour unlimited or unlimited parkour or ultimate parkour.

Motion arts describes it well but just sounds kinda dorky to me.

Maybe we should have a contest to see who could come up with the best all inclusive name for pk like activitys. Lol

In pure opinion parkour unlimited or unlimited parkour those sound dorky the art of motion or motion arts sounds a lot better but I guess that's just me 

[TedD]

I've found that motion arts kinda makes people think martial arts without the purpose of hitting people.  I have no problem with it lol.

[DaveS]

Saying you compete against yourself is just a bad way of saying you want to improve. There is only one of you, and there is no way to be competitive because there is nothing to compete against, no way to win or lose. You might as well try donating blood to yourself or picking yourself up if you're going to try competing with yourself.
You can create all kinds of phrases that mean nothing. Sure, learn from comparisons between yourself and other people, but it's nonsense to try and use 'competing with yourself' as a synonym for 'self-improvement', or indeed to describe anything that actually exists.

Gabe, just to make sure, it's the movement from one place to another and the obstacles that make up parkour, not speed or efficiency. If you get past an obstacle slowly and also waste lots of energy that's not an issue as long as all you're trying to do is move past the obstacle.

People that are concerned with aesthetics, expression, beauty and coolness in movement have had a name for thousands of years. They ARE motion artists, or 'dancers' as they're commonly known. Doing it around obstacles just makes it dancing with obstacles.
Parkour = move past obstacles. Dancing = expression and beauty. Gymnastics = perfection of specific movements. Acrobatics = entertainment.
I think each practice has a name already, if you feel the desire to use one.

David Belle, Sebastien Foucan, the Yamakasi, Danny Ilabaca, have all practised the same thing. It has many names; parkour, freerunning, AdD, etc. Some for longer than others, and all of them have done other things as well. They each practised in different ways though, because everyone has different goals and different starting points. Therefore they face different obstacles and push back different limits. Even the most similar people have slight differences, and the longer you live and practise the more obvious those slight differences become. They've ended up at different places because everyone does.

[Gabe Arnold]

Gabe, just to make sure, it's the movement from one place to another and the obstacles that make up parkour, not speed or efficiency. If you get past an obstacle slowly and also waste lots of energy that's not an issue as long as all you're trying to do is move past the obstacle.

People that are concerned with aesthetics, expression, beauty and coolness in movement have had a name for thousands of years. They ARE motion artists, or 'dancers' as they're commonly known. Doing it around obstacles just makes it dancing with obstacles.
Parkour = move past obstacles. Dancing = expression and beauty. Gymnastics = perfection of specific movements. Acrobatics = entertainment.
I think each practice has a name already, if you feel the desire to use one.

David Belle, Sebastien Foucan, the Yamakasi, Danny Ilabaca, have all practised the same thing. It has many names; parkour, freerunning, AdD, etc. Some for longer than others, and all of them have done other things as well. They each practised in different ways though, because everyone has different goals and different starting points. Therefore they face different obstacles and push back different limits. Even the most similar people have slight differences, and the longer you live and practise the more obvious those slight differences become. They've ended up at different places because everyone does.

So then the main difference (possibly only difference) between Parkour and any other movement involving obstacles is that we don't care what it (the movement) looks like, so long as we conquer (move past) the obstacle? I'm leaving out any sort of philosophical undertones because I'm purely concerned with the physical aspect as it applies to this discussion.

If my goal is to become as comfortable and confident as possible in my movement does that mean I do not practice Parkour? I'm not picking a fight or anything just trying to find a way to reconcile my views and goals with others. I'm not concerned with the end product of my training, whether I use it for something competitive, instructional, personal or otherwise. I just want to move and get better at moving, damn the name of it. There is a certain life-affirming or lesson aspect to it but really I don't care about that either. What am I doing then?   

[Sam Chin]

Gabe, just to make sure, it's the movement from one place to another and the obstacles that make up parkour, not speed or efficiency. If you get past an obstacle slowly and also waste lots of energy that's not an issue as long as all you're trying to do is move past the obstacle.

Actually, Parkour is defined as getting from point A to point B the most efficient and quickest way. You practice Parkour slow and steady to learn the movements safely then when you feel 110% confident in the movements you've practiced over and over in a safe manner then you move onto using those movements to get to point B "the quickest and most efficient way possible".

[TraceurMars]

I think it will fairly be a good idea. We will have more groups of traceurs, more fun and more art on the streets. There will be more training gyms. Although trans-passing will get even more strict.

[DaveS]

Sounds like you're practising 'movement', Gabe.

Sam, that's a description of purposeful movement, not a definition of parkour. People have used it to attempt to define parkour in the past, but only because many people have had such a problem understanding what we mean by purposeful, functional movement.
Parkour is not just an action of moving efficiently, and it's not some unachievable perfect ability to move.
You don't have to be good at moving to be practising parkour. Parkour is a discipline/system/method to help you achieve those things, by practising getting past obstacles.

[jp2ykz]

In pure opinion parkour unlimited or unlimited parkour those sound dorky the art of motion or motion arts sounds a lot better but I guess that's just me  Smiley

I think you are right too that's just the first thing that poped into my head I really think we should start another thread.

Hey Dave, I was just curious if you have a full comprehensive definition of Parkour that you are going off so that we could have a more solid basis for discussion. Maybe just a complete definition of what you think if there isn't one set in stone already.

[DaveS]

Parkour is the Way of movement. It involves practising overcoming obstacles with movement in order to help get past all obstacles in life.

[sparta98]

It should never end up that way. I feel like the mindset is something that we cant lose no matter what other people do. If it does come to that point, then we will split, just as many religions have. (takes preacher hat off)

[M2.]

Oh no, here I go ... call 911 if I'm not out of this in a week

DaveS - but it's nonsense to try and use 'competing with yourself' as a synonym for 'self-improvement', or indeed to describe anything that actually exists.

I strongly disagree and say that through usage this has incredible meaning and in fact motivates hundred of millions of people to become better - and they do think of it as "competing against themself".

Yes, there are all kinds of words and phrases that don't make any literal sense, however they are commonly used.

You might as well say "What's Up?" doesn't make any sense. It's a phrase that gets used probably billions of times a day and everyone knows what it means, but nobody (ok, probably 10,000 people a day who THINK they're funny) actually looks upward and describes what they see.

So, my point being, that if millions of people use this idea of "competing against themself" to improve, what's the harm or problem? Because you don't like the way the literal definition of the words mixes?


__________________________________

Now for competition - it's been covered that parkour won't be "completely" competitive, I'm personally going to make sure of that because I will practice by myself until they put me in the ground, I'll practice in my own back yard, in an alley, in the woods, wherever I can / want to / am able to. So in the sense of "competing against others for a prize or purpose" parkour will be safe by at least one person at least as long as I am able to train.

Each person is welcome to do the same.


Competition is everywhere, it is part of the nature of existence. (challenge - debate that as fact)

I don't feel that anyone can deny that at least 50% of the population of the world sees competition as something that inherently exists in life. Scientificially, if you believe that things evolve, then competition is part of life.

Can you name a game for me that is not competitive? I can name a few
Catch.
Fetch.

The majority of games are based in competition, whether it's played by kids, animals, adults, professionals, recreationalists.

I think we can even say that the majority of non-passive recreation exists in competitive environments. How many people play video games worldwide? How many of those have no competitive element? How many people play sports worldwide? How many of those are non-competitive?


How about this:

Walk into a toy store, a big one, a really big one!
starting at the very beginning, examine every item in the store and see which ones have a competitive element or for which a competition exists. I am willing to bet that you end up at over 80%. you can start with the gumballs they sell in the machine on your way in, move to action figures of army soldiers, barbies with corvettes and bigger and bigger houses and smaller and smaller waists ... the etch-a-sketch.

God forbid we go to the Guiness book of world records - after all, what is a record? It is a comparison of an achievements to the similar achievements of others (competition). Over 100 million copies sold by 2004 and 11,000,000 visitors a year to their website. I have to say that this points out that MANY people like competition. It is the world's most sold copyrighted book. 

Business is inherently competitive - how many people work for a business that competes in some way. Even Charities compete for people's attention and resources.

Anyone or everyone is welcome to not like competition, not agree with the premises, whatever you want, but you can't deny that many humans enjoy competition and that competition is in fact everywhere.

Now, how it affects you - that's up to you ....

[Chris [.5gibbon] Stevenson!]

i like competition.  have none of you played sports? its fun.  just because you compete with someone doesn't mean you hate their guts.  lol  i would compete for sure if they have parkour competitions

[jp2ykz]

Yeah, me and Gibbo here are locked in battle right now awaiting the results from the workout journal contest. Lol

I can't speak for him but I really hate that guy. 

No seriously though cool entry!!

btw, can Gibbo be your competitive sport nick name??

Everyone in competitive sports has one right? I wonder what mine should be?

[M2.]

Haha so true about competitive names -- you need a nickname in the heat of battle

BTW, thanks for pointing out - APK made a competition for workouts, and I'm going to throw out a BS statistic and say that workout logs are up 100% - no doubt they are up by a significant amount, exactly the intention, so positive change and motivation brought about by competition - And like almost all competitions, not only do the competitors benefit, but the spectators who are motivated as well.

Who really benefits when a race car driver wins?  - All the people who have anti-lock brakes in their cars - innovation is often brought about by competition. Could people spend that money on R&D without competition? No. the competition itself generates tremendous revenue that helps not only the competitive version but the every day user.

[DaveS]

Mark, I didn't say that there aren't some people that find that phrase useful, only that the phrasing makes no sense and therefore you can't use the fact that the phrase exists to also justify competition. Useful or not, it's still nonsense.

Competition exists in lots of places, but it's still a fundamentally bad situation because it's based on the idea that not everyone can succeed. Sure, that is the case for many animals, but it's not the case for humans any more because we have much more control over our situation. As a species, we have plenty of everything we need.
Competition is now a self-perpetuating system for creating misery, because the only reason anyone fails is that they are working against each other instead of with each other. Two people together can achieve far more than either on their own. If people worked together then everyone could get everything they need.
As it is, many people are still stuck in an outdated, competitive mindset which no longer has any practical purpose.

The argument about competition leading to improvement is also nonsense. If you don't spend the time and effort  trying to achieve the abstract goals of competitions you can spend it trying to achieve more useful things. The only way that doesn't happen is if people devote themselves to something else that is pointless.

I'm not sure the computer game community is representative of the whole world, but even there the stats are against competition. There are plenty of computer games that are played online against other people, but how many computer game players compete against others and how many just play on their own? If you look at the sales figures I think it's clear that most people do not compete with computer games.
How many people play sport vs how many enter competitions? Numbers are not on the side of competition. Only tradition, and the rules of our society that are based on tradition, support competition. It's a tool used by the minority with power to keep power to themselves.

I'd agree that most people in the world think in a competitive way, and also that competition has benefits. However, it doesn't change the fact that it doesn't have as many benefits as cooperation. If the majority think competition is good, then the majority are clearly wrong. The majority is always wrong when things first start to change for the better, because change doesn't happen instantaneously.