Competition

"The members of this community stand firmly against the idea of organized parkour competition. Our reasons:

1.
We don't believe in elites.
We don't believe in any form of selection among practitioners.
We don't believe in the necessity of any form of hierarchy of performance among practitioners.
We believe to be "the best" doesn't mean anything in parkour, because winning or losing don't mean anything in parkour philosophy.
We do not accept such a drive as part of the parkour philosophy.

Instead, we believe the drive to train should always and only come from within.
We strive to be stronger for ourselves and others, not against people, but with and for others.
Therefore, we reject and disregard any form of rivalry between practitioners.
Instead, we value mutual respect and solidarity in making progress as individuals and as a community.

2.
We believe it stands against the philosophy of parkour to compete to win or earn anything that is not part of parkour values, such as medals, prizes, trophies, money, fame, recognition, or glory.
Same goes about showing off for a crowd.

Instead, we look for priceless and beneficial outcomes to our actions.
We also look for benefits we all can share.
We are givers, not takers.

3. Competition encourages the unready to sacrifice their health for early victories, or to reach a ranking that has no true meaning.
It forces elite competitors to constantly and repeatedly endanger their most precious good, health, because of obsession and obligation of victory, and whatever is at stake as a direct consequence of it, including money, rank or status, pride, and also professional or sponsoring contracts and profitable commercial deals.
It leads competitive practitioners to unbalance their training and focus only on the specific skills needed to win, leading to chronic injuries.
Despite official denials, doping is most of the time involved in every level of competition, that money is involved or not.
We believe the physical consequences of competing at high level goes against the philosophy of parkour which emphasizes on moderation and the necessity of enduring.

Instead, parkour is a humble, patient and lifelong discipline, and the human body requires incremental conditioning to ensure its resistance and longevity.
Moderation is a truly important value of parkour and an indispensable quality in order to preserve oneself and for the body to endure.
Therefore, we reject whatever goes against moderation and that impairs the body.

4. Parkour doesn't belong to corporations, sponsors, medias, and people sitting at home to watch.
We believe we must not accept activities and plans that are abusively called parkour, that misuse its name and hijack its image to draw public and medias attention to something that is NOT parkour, despite the resistance of the majority of the community against such intentions.

Instead, we affirm parkour is a non-competitive discipline that belong to all practitioners, to the local communities, to the teams and friends, and to the human race as a whole.
We believe we must stand together against ambitions that do not reflect the original philosophy of parkour and that are disrespectful to the parkour philosophy and the parkour community.

Competition is not inevitable - it is just another obstacle! Support original parkour, keep our discipline free!" ~ Hebertiste and TK17

"Why I am against competition in parkour

One of the most consistent arguments within the parkour community is the argument over whether parkour should become competitive. In my experience most experienced traceurs are against parkour competitions, but can rarely offer a strong argument against competition except that parkour isn’t competitive, or maybe because David Belle has said it should not be competitive which is neither clear nor a powerful argument. Meanwhile, many of the large commercial parkour sites have come out as supporting competition, or at least arguing it is inevitable.

When I first started parkour I did not understand the proscription against competition at all. I am by nature a competitive person I love to wrestle, box and play team sports and I want to win. In fact, as a kid running through the woods I used to fantasize that I was competing in the new Olympic event of obstacle coursing.

However I now look at the possibility of parkour competitions as a negative thing. When Gear wrote his essay on why we should look forward to competition in parkour, I thought he made excellent arguments, but it didn’t sit right with me and I could not agree with the conclusion, however I wasn’t sure exactly how to explain why I was against competition so I did not respond at the time. However I have continued thinking about it and at some point I was able to figure out why I was against competition in parkour.

To me it boils down to understanding the philosophy and background of parkour. Parkour is often connected to two french mottos: the natural method motto etre forte poure etre utile, and the parkour motto etre et durer. The natural method motto means “be strong to be useful.” The parkour motto means something like “to be and to endure.”

David belle has said that parkour was inspired by fireman and soldiers and he would like it to keep that spirit; that our competition is to see who can help the most people. I believe that the two mottos I quoted are both consistent with the attitude you will find in experienced traceurs that their training is not just to be efficient today, but for tomorrow, the next day, and 30 years down the road. To always be able to be useful and strong. To me this is very important and I think it is unfortunately counter to the reality of professional sports today.
I worry that parkour becoming competitive would be mean, over specialization in traceurs training, and even more injuries and accidents due to competitive pressures.

I think before I go into why parkour should not be competitive, it’s important to explore what competition in parkour would probably be like and what conditions are like in similar sports. Some people have thrown rock climbing out as a comparison, saying competition wouldn’t be that bad, few people know about rock climbing competitions, it affects recreational rock climbers very little except in improving the quality of their equipment, and some people get to make money doing what they love. What’s so bad about that? Nothing really. If I thought parkour could go a similar way, I would be a lot less worried about competition. The problem with that analogy as I see it is that rock climbing simply lacks the aesthetic element that parkour brings. How many movies feature gratuitous rock climbing scenes? How many music videos feature rock climbers doing their thing? I think the visual aesthetics of parkour are equal to or better than any of the most popular televised x-game sports, and on par with gymnastics as well.

So, assuming that competition in parkour would be more like the x-games or gymnastics or another minor but well known televised sport, these are the problems I see:

1. Parkour is general. Competition by its nature must be specific. I would draw an analogy to martial arts. A complete unarmed self-defense system will teach you striking at range using all your limbs, clinching, striking in the clinch, grappling in the clinch, take downs, grappling on the ground, and striking on the ground. However you will find very few martial arts schools that still teach all of these aspects because most martial arts have become competitive. If you look at the history of competitive martial arts like boxing, you will see how all of these techniques were once part of what was known by practitioners, but gradually they were banned until only something very specific was left, like boxing (striking with the hands), tae kwon do (striking primarily with the feet, with points not power as an emphasis), judo (takedowns), and wu shu (aesthetic displays). Jujitsu was until recently one of the most complete martial arts, but recently submission grappling competitions have become common under the name jujitsu, and you will find more and more schools whose primary focus is success in these competitions. At this point striking is hardly taught in many jujitsu school is hardly, and even take-downs are often barely taught in my experience.

A parkour competition similarly would very likely be a standard length or maybe a few different standard lengths. It would also likely include standard types of obstacles, and very likely standard safety features that you would not find in the real world. Optimal training for competition would mean not focusing on optimal overall training. It would mean over-specialization.

For those who say that competing would not affect their training: perhaps not, but what about the next person to become involved in the discipline, or the person after that? Tell me that most modern judoka are not basing their training for competition and not actually fighting, or tae kwon do athletes, or boxers, or jujitsu fighters. Competitive parkour would no longer be parkour in its truest sense in my opinion, and I think the new competition brand of parkour would likely cannibalize the old style.

2. Too far, too fast, too high. As Gear mentioned in his thread, competition is great for pushing one to their limits and discovering new levels of performance. I am certain that without competition the development of techniques like the triple back in gymnastics would have taken much longer. But what he ignores is the cost. Professional athletes are often viewed as the epitome of health. I think this is simply counter to fact. There is price to achieving the level of performance seen in professional athletics and it usually involves your health.

Take a look at gymnastics. Last summer I had the chance to chat with Bill Sands, a sports scientist who works with the USA national gymnastics team. He told me that at some point in the last 2 years every member of the men’s senior national team has had reconstructive shoulder surgery, except Jordan Jovtchev who had injured his elbow. His reason as to why this was happening was simple: the maltese cross. In his opinion, this technique was simply beyond the human shoulders design specs, and training it regularly was a guarantee of future injury at this point. However, in order to be competitive in men’s rings you have to do a maltese at the international level, so all the top men’s gymnasts are now getting shoulder injuries. My gymnastics coach, who was an elite level gymnast, has 20 percent disability in both elbows, has had reconstructive surgery on one shoulder and needs it on the other. He blames it on years of having to compete the Yamawaki — which is a double front flips in between the rings.

The average life expectancy of an NFL player is 55, 22 years less then the general average. Elite endurance athletes have enlarged hearts and a higher risk of heart problems .
I am not even going to touch on the issue of performance enhancing drugs which are rampant in professional athletics.

From my perspective it is simple the pressure and money involved in elite professional athletics force an athlete to become over specialized and to take a constant risk with their health that eventually catches up to them. That is not a future I want to see for parkour.

If parkour is about being useful today, tomorrow, and in 20 years, and able to overcome obstacles whenever it is needed, I think that professional competition would be counter to that in the long run.

To those who would say “well it’s inevitable, there’s nothing we can do about it:” That is simply defeatism, we can not know what effect taking steps against competition can have until we try!

Also to those who say “well sure, parkour shouldn’t be completive, but free running competitions are fine:” this to me is hypocritical. Most people will tell you they’re against competition because David Belle said parkour shouldn’t be competitive. Well, if Sebastien Foucan is considered the father of free running and his motto is “no chiefs, no competitions, just a way,” shouldn’t his wishes be respected just like David’s?
Furthermore I think free running has even more aesthetic potential than parkour, and if it does become a popular competitive sport, parkour would basically get swallowed up by it just as easily as by a competive version of parkour.

That’s my thoughts for what their worth I am not completely happy with how I put them down but I hope the make you think." ~ Faelcind Il Danach

"To people considering competition as a good way to "spread" parkour :

That many people watching parkour competitive event just like any other entertaining show on TV while drinking coke and eating pizzas is not going to spread parkour, or not the way you think.
When you have great parkour shows on TV it's for sure going to be a truly excellent thing for everyone involved in parkour-related business.
Maybe lots of people will indeed want to start training parkour after such shows are broadcasted :

Where are they going to go learn ?
Who is going to teach them ?
With what method and what experience ?
What pedagogy ?
Where is the official representation that will certify trainers ?
How many trainers are ready now ?
What is the best training method ?
How good is this method ?
Remember the lesson of Jump London : it is the total lack of preparation that made so many people desperately look for a reliable source of information on the Internet, then found a commercial website that distorted the original names, original purpose, and helped spread a totally altered image of what parkour is.
It was so altered that at some point, they were ready to launch and promote "freestyle parkour", remember ?
That's the way they "help" parkour "spread".
A broadcasted parkour competition would be the same issue X 10.
After many companies (including commercial parkour websites) will have already jumped in the bandwagon of "parkour competitions" (actually parkour entertainment shows that are spectacular and sell very well), lots of other individuals or fitness companies will start their own "parkour academy" or "parkour class", including why not acrobatics as part of the training, mixing it with dance or yoga or anything. "Parkour-fitness", "PK-fit", "Ultimate PK", "Freestyle Parkour", "Loose weight fast with parkour", and hire people with most of the time NO experience in practicing or teaching parkour. Could be fitness trainers that have some talent for jumps...could be any wannabe-traceur that has NO experience in teaching but will see in it an opportunity to make money. Parkour will "spread", will flourish...will be actually quickly and almost totally ALTERED. Anything will do to make money using parkour, including selling you parkour equipment to train at home, or Powerballs !
Anything...
And everything out of control, because many people are ready to anything just to make bucks while many others are very naive and will buy because it's a new trend that looks "cool" and make them feel special.

That many people of any starting physical condition have access to a safe parkour training and can learn it on the long run and make incremental progress is going to spread parkour efficiently the RIGHT way.

If parkour competitions were to ever happen, it should NEVER happen before there's serious teaching method of parkour that is used worldwide and with at least of few years of experience and feedback, and an official representation like a federation.
This slow process can take years, but it is truly and totally necessary.
It is actually the wise way to "spread" parkour because it is patient and wants to avoid all possible alterations of the image and of the practice of parkour.

So now I have questions for people willing to organize parkour competitions soon :

Why are you in such a hurry ?

Isn't it that the "spreading" of parkour, good or not, is an essential and priority way to expand your parkour business, despite your arguments to convince us it is for other reasons supposedly beneficial to the community ?

Why are you already looking after parkour competitions, when NO serious method of teaching parkour has proved to be truly efficient on the long run, when people starting to teach it are still learning it themselves, when there's still no worldwide official representation of the discipline, when there's still so few serious classes where to learn a serious way ?

Isn't it the teaching of parkour on a wider scale that people should focus on before thinking of people competing ???

Why are you always only discussing the supposed beneficial outcomes of such competitive events while never discussing about the very plausible negative effects on the discipline and the community, which outnumber the possible good effects ?


I truly doubt people considering parkour competitions soon are motivated with the best intentions.
I don't understand (or actually understand it so well) why they are so excited with their articles promoting the idea of competition in parkour.
I don't forget how profitable such opportunities could be for them, and I'm quite convinced they're priority concerned with these opportunities before anything else. But of course we all know the road to hell is paved with good intentions...so you will hear them praise all the good things competitions will bring while NEVER talk about all the bad things it can bring. Why ?
If they were so serious about the right spreading of parkour, they would be patient, would work hard on spreading the right information and how to spread the teaching of parkour, which they seem to do now (after the entire community forced them too, or else who knows what kind of "parkour" they would be talking about now...).
Classes, workshops, more and more and more, that's what is needed, in addition to the great work local communities do.
That money is made teaching parkour that way ? Why not ?
It's the only acceptable kind of business I can see when it comes to parkour, for someone truly and sincerely concerned with the spreading of parkour as a "useful to people discipline".

Parkour competitions to help improve equipment ?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
A good (French) friend of mine is one of the best traceurs alive.
He trains with a simple 12 euros (15 usd) pair of running shoes. Unknown brand.
Simple clothes. Unknown brand.
No "Powerball". No pricey shoes.
Excellent level of practice.
Constant, steady progression.
No intention to ever compete.

Keep in mind Blane's article "Dilution".
Ironically, people madly willing to organize those competitions were among the people applauding this article...

Maybe one day some acceptable format of competing can be designed.
The parkour community need more feedback and experience.
Needs more practitioners that hold genuine values, train with safe and efficient method, with healthy ethics.
Organizing the worldwide teaching to make such a growth happens, and build a BIIIIG, STRONG and HEALTHY community is the key and is the ONLY and ABSOLUTE priority to spread parkour the RIGHT way.
The long fight against "style" in parkour is not even won yet.
The necessary tools to make all newbies train safely, gradually, with the right motivations, are not yet efficient enough. For instance we have to fight all the stupid videos, the ones that totally distort the image of parkour and spread the wrong perception of the discipline, and that are also a big part of the "dilution" of parkour. There's still LOTS to be done to spread parkour the right way before competitions destroy everything for good. Because it won't spread well and long as long as foundations are not DEEP and STRONG.
Like I said, this could take years.

First things first.

But business people do not have years. They want the money NOW.

People of the true community of parkour, don't let those people FOOL you with their propaganda.
It's ALL commercial ambitions." ~ Hebertiste

"Does competing make you bad? It would make you less of a traceur in my view, certainly. If you enter a competition with the intention of trying to win then you are seeking to measure your ability against others, which not only hinders your parkour development (in terms of training useful applications or training your mind to rid yourself of unnecessary distractions and desires) but may also make other competitors feel bad about themselves.

For traceurs, physical activity and exercise is a serious matter of acquiring functional skills. With other activities you may only be doing them for fun and so whatever you get enjoyment from is fine, whether that means competing, not competing, whatever.

For me, the philosophy of parkour is not just for when you are moving, it is for always. Parkour has helped me realise that competition is not necessary, neither for improvement nor enjoyment, so I find myself less tempted by any form of competition now, in any activity. I do still feel the temptation sometimes but I recognise that the feeling comes from the part of me that still believes happiness comes from social standing and so I try and ignore it.

Of course anyone can still enter competitions as a bit of fun, but you just need to think carefully about your motivations for doing so.

Competitions are bad from a personal and a global parkour perspective. I'm not trying to get into a moral relativism debate about whether or not parkour is the best way of living we can imagine, but if someone is trying to practice parkour then competing will hinder them, thereby making competiton bad for them, and bad for other peoples' understanding.

I'm sure lots of people think competatively, but I am equally sure that there are very few people who truly practice parkour. I doubt anybody has reached the goals parkour sets for us, but I suspect there are only a small number that are truly aiming for them.

People talk about the "attention that we honestly all need sometimes" but I think they are wrong. We do not die if we are not famous. The only part of us that is affected by fame is our ego, and happiness can be found elsewhere; in parkour, through becoming useful.

As I have said before, the best way to promote a philosophy like parkour is to attempt to follow it. If you follow it you become a living demonstration of the benefits and living proof that some people do believe it is the best way. Nobody is going to want to learn something where they can't see any benefits and few people believe words without seeing them in practice.
The key to the survival of parkour is for new people to take it up. If everyone makes compromises with the philosophy then the goals and ideals are lost. " ~ Feraess

"Personally, I love chess. In case you don't know it, chess is a highly competitive game. However, I play chess not to beat my opponent, but to play chess as well as I can. You can participate in any competitive activity, without actually competing. You can play basketball without trying to win, but simply trying to be the best player you can be. Self-improvement is the goal, not victory. Competition is redundant.

If you only like the physical side of Parkour, then you are not a traceur. I'm sorry, Parkour is not just physical, it is also spiritual. You cant practice half a discipline and expect to be a true student of it. You can practice Parkour movement, but you are not a traceur, because that is like learning Karate and beat people up. Raw techniques, without philosophy. That's not Parkour. Sorry.

Running, climbing, jumping, etc, have all existed long before Parkour. Therefore, when you practice Parkour without the philosophy, you are simply running, climbing, jumping, etc. You don't need a new name for that." ~ noxteryn

"Competition shows you how your skill level compares to that of other people, which is irrelevant for someone focussed on personal development in skills related to inanimate objects, which I think should be everyone that practices parkour.

Through our training we know what we are comfortable doing. If we want to know what our absolute limit is then we could simply go outside and try difficult things and see whether we can do them or not. The reason we don't do this is that it is more dangerous than training normally and has no extra benefit in terms of improvement. You don't become better once you have done something difficult, your physical ability hasn't changed, only your awareness of it. The added danger means that in fact you are risking a possible drop in ability (through injury) for a short-cut to awareness, which is obviously not a good training practice.

We only push ourselves right to our boundaries when we have a reason to. In an emergency the necessity of doing something outweighs the danger of actually doing it, and so we do it. In other situations we need to think more carefully about whether or not we should do something. In a competition, it is the reward of winning that motivates us to push ourselves beyond our safe limits, not the desire to improve (as simply participating in the competition doesn't help you improve). Training for a competition in the future can motivate you to train hard to improve, but if you are practicing parkour then your motivation should already be 'to be useful' and so you should have the motivation anyway. If you don't have the motivation to improve yourself then parkour is obviously not the activity for you." ~ Feraess