Competitions > General Discussions (Competition)

What is a worldchampion?

(1/4) > >>

7Erik7:
Recently, I was looking at some clips from Art of motion 2010 and the Parcouring championship. The competitions in parkour have been on my thoughts for a while. While I see the beauty in the pure physical sense it also somehow boggles my mind.

Basically, a competition is by definition a contest between inviduals, groups, animals and so on and you generally strive for a goal that cannot be shared. It can be anything; food, water, wealth, prestige and fame.

So, what is a championship?

The definition for a championship iaccording to wikipedia is:

…’’the top achievement for any sport or contest. The title is usually awarded by contest, ranking systems, stature, ability, etc. This determines the best nation, team, invidual (or other entity) in the world in a particular field. […]’’

Now, this question started to make me wonder. A lot. Without giving me any clear answer to it. I’d like to hear other peoples thought and opinions about this:

What makes you to a master, or a worldchampion, in parkour?

Ryan Courtney:
Personally, and this is just my opinion, I feel like anyone claimed a "world champion" in Parkour should have been given that title by their peers. It shouldn't be a title given by judges for what they can do, it should be for what they do, teach, and stand for among other things.

Gorramshiny:
I don't want to say that there really is a "world champion" of Parkour. Everytime I see something on Art of Motion, the athletes all talk about loving the camaraderie that comes from the event and how the jams and such before the actual event are often more fun than the competition itself. I also see things on the AoM in particular inferring "this is a place to show what you can do", not "this is a place where you can show you are better than the people around you."

That being said, there are certain people who are considered simply the best at what they do. Daniel Illabaca, Sebastian Foucan, and David Belle come to mind instantly, and there are many more well-respected practitioners . They don't get these reputations for no reason, and these people have dedicated a long time to their art. Many say Parkour is a martial art, and I would agree that it is in this sense as well: there are martial arts competitions all around the world for the various arts, but for the masters, it is still about the philosophy. There are also many people who never go to a championship for one reason or another because they choose to focus more on the philosophical aspect of the art than the physical. This is, in my head at least, most commonly associated with the stereotypical "zen master in the mountains" idea, but there are many people who live ordinary lives and they are amazing at Parkour.

I would argue that, especially in a sport as new and community-based as Parkour is (at least right now, and although it's an individual-work-based thing, the community obviously exists), being a "master" is a relative title "bestowed" (so to speak) when you earn the respect of your peers both in your local area and on the national or international level. To my knowledge, there are no "tests" in Parkour that mean you are now a "master" and I would like to think that is partially because Parkour is such an individualized philosophy. The individual is grounded in a community that says "this is a safe way to go about your art, this is how we practice safely", but the final movements are very person-specific.

(Reading back through this, I hope this is actually coherent and makes sense, but I can't think of a way to rephrase it. 4 hours of sleep will do that.)

7Erik7:
In order to say that someone is a world champion you obviously have to put up rules and limitations to what qualify as a world champion and what doesn't. This doesn't go in line with the competitors saying (and parkours) about inviduality and selfexpression.

This may put limitations to parkour or freerunning since you must follow a regulated, pre-defined path with a lot of rules and regulations. So even though someone's peers would call someone else a world champion, its still not true, and it is indeed a very subjective question depending on who you ask. I believe the reason 'champion' exist is due to the reason of sport, and in parkours case, has more about the commercialism regarding it but also selfpromotion.

Because since many of the competitors claim that no one is the best what is the point of having a sponsored competition with an audience with TV teams? I believe all of the competitors want to represent themself. This is in my opinion not to confuse with parkour.

Because I honestly don't believe the main reason to the competition is fun and camradieship. A jam would be more than sufficient for that. The reason is probably rather ego (impressing others, tv, gaining recognizion, being labeled as a master etc) since the people who attent will get personal gains.

So if parkour is highly invidual how come the very same people promote themself as champions? I believe in what I wrote above for the moment unlesss someone else have another explanation.

Jason C. Astor:
Again, Erik, this is kinda semantical.

A champion is a winner of a contest, If one does not compete in this contest one can not be it's champion. This is not to say that this person "Champion" is the best at his/her discipline, just that this person has competed and defeated all other "Challengers". As for a Worlds greatest, this could never be decided for aforementioned reasons, but a "Champion" can most certainly be crowned.

Just my thought on the Matter

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page