Being an interloper at a world class training club for over ten years now, the one (probably the only) problem that never came up was of these highly competitive fencers (including three Olympians) getting along well with others. In fact, until Jen raised the question, it had not even occurred to me. Upon reflection it does seem reasonable that you might come to hate the person who defeats you; it is just that empirical observation defeats the theory.

Being active across the division, I ran into a single fellow, years ago, who was short to the point of rudeness before bouts. I finally confronted him about that; he responded replied, quite reasonably, that he fed on the energy of hate. After the bout, however, he could be, and was, as affable as anyone.

One of the things I learned in combat was that, contrary to the fumbling attempts at brain washing in basic training, one’s enemy is to be respected – that is the surest defense; liking or not liking has nothing to do with it. In fact, a soldier comes to have more respect for a brave enemy than a shirker on his own side.

I think that the way competitiveness is reconciled with camaraderie at our club is twofold: one, as in the military, one turns to one’s comrades’ for fraternity, not one’s coaches; and two, there is a conscious discipline that everyone fences everyone else. Perhaps the latter forces one to leave emotion out of it; otherwise one would have no friends at all.

All that notwithstanding, emotions often do run high at the club, and there is the occasional blow up. But almost invariably the loss of temper is directed at the self, for failure, not at the other.

Ours is at the training end of the continuum; we generally practice too late in the evening to leave time for going out afterwards. But birthdays are celebrated with a five or ten minute break for an otherwise forbidden slice of cake, once in a while a member will host a party, and there have even been a few field trips. The rest of the time, training is its own reward.

Nice to read this as “and”. Some people assume you have to put a “but” in there.

Coaches lead the culture. With Jen and Matt at the helm, I think there’s a good chance that competition and camaraderie will exist and reinforce themselves almost without trying. But for some “insurance”, it might make sense to state the club’s values/intentions in plain English, and frequently.

One thing that impressed me about Carolina fencing was how your coach explicitly told you, “Carolina fencers do not hook up or unhook by themselves.” You understood immediately that it was about the team as well as the individual. Not just one or the other. Other models are perfectly legitimate — the point is that your coach made clear which one was chosen for UNC. If you like it, great. If not, then don’t join the team.

At best, stating things explicitly and out loud makes it real or makes you quit pretending. My business partner and I tell all our clients and friends, “we’re in this to have fun, do good, and make money — all at the same time. A project that only does one or two is not a good project for us.” Saying it out loud helps us stay committed. It also helps us attract more good business and less bad.

—

OMG — did I just see Craig write about Vet-40?! Welcome to the wise side