Big fish/small pool or vv?

[Count Steer]

Various topics have got me thinking. Is it better to be a big fish in a small pool or a small fish in a big pool? ie battling to be top of the Championship or battling relegation in the Premiership, winning BSB or trailing the field in WSBK?

(Probably need to ignore the ££ aspect, ie get more money for being an also ran than being a winner).

I know people think they can compete at the top level but reality often interferes.

So, would you rather be battling for a podium or battling not to be last but at a higher level?

[weeksy]

As you can imagine, my and weeksy08 are living this question right now.

In the small pond he's without doubt a big fish and will podium/win in the smaller races, but in the big pond with the big fish, he's a teeny tiny little fishy...

We're targetting and trying to become a big fish and whilst the smaller races still exist, we're doing less and less of them and concentrating on the big tough races and placing lower, to build up skills, strength, fitness and speed.

[Felix]

Would this not depend on what you are doing? Look at the SPL. We have two big fish (Celtic and Rangers) in a small pond with only two fish competing at a higher level. Its quite boring to watch but playing in the small pond is needed to get into a big pond (Champions league)
In England you have a big pond with lots of big fish competing what makes life more exciting as the winner (If in the right group) can get to play with the Scottish Champions

[cheb]

I'd rather be evolving and climbing* out of the pond.

That's the walking use of climbing, not a rope and piton job.

[McNab]

Hmm, I guess it depends if when you move up to the big pool, you are able to continue to grow in size or not. If you move up a league or whatever and then you are constantly struggling against relegation/money/staffing then that is not a nice way to live your life. If you can grow, improve, keep getting bigger and more successful then it is worth the risk. But, of course, you'll never know which it is until you try.

[Rockburner]

Depends on the context.

In work I've always been a "small pond, small fish" employee - I like being in a small team where you can get a good environment, and always hated working for larger companies (had one or two jobs like that), but I've never been a managerial type (did it for 4 years, got the mental scars to prove it), and I prefer to just be a small, but very useful cog.

In social life: again - tend towards small fish mentality, but prefer a bigger pool to swim in.

[Cousin Jack]

IME I always wanted to be a big fish in a big pond. Reality interfered, and I was mostly a small or medium fish in a small pond. After a bit you accept reality, and just enjoy your pond. Constantly striving to get to play with the big boys is hard work, and if you do succeed you get your ass kicked.

[Count Steer]

I guess there are different scenarios. In football you hope that the increased income buys better players and you can compete, like Leicester did. I was rather thinking of it from the player POV though.

In motorcycling and eg F1 it rather depends on being good enough to get supplied with the best machinery and then competing against people with similar kit. I'd be a bit about getting there and struggling around at the back on an uncompetitive m/c even if the money was better.

In Weeksy08's case there seems to be enough categories that are incrementally tougher so you can 'climb the ladder' and get the buzz of measuring/seeing progress and also competing with your mates within the competitions.

(BTW This was mainly triggered by 'is Shakey Byrne the greatest...' thing in another thread. If he didn't really move up from BSB is that 'greater' than someone that did OKish at higher levels?).

I think I'd be happiest in a 'I'm in with a chance of a win/podium if I perform at my very, very best/a bit better than I've ever performed before' scenario.

[Mr Moofo]

Meh, I would rather walk like a panther

[weeksy]

I guess there are different scenarios. In football you hope that the increased income buys better players and you can compete, like Leicester did. I was rather thinking of it from the player POV though.

In motorcycling and eg F1 it rather depends on being good enough to get supplied with the best machinery and then competing against people with similar kit. I'd be a bit about getting there and struggling around at the back on an uncompetitive m/c even if the money was better.

In Weeksy08's case there seems to be enough categories that are incrementally tougher so you can 'climb the ladder' and get the buzz of measuring/seeing progress and also competing with your mates within the competitions.

(BTW This was mainly triggered by 'is Shakey Byrne the greatest...' thing in another thread. If he didn't really move up from BSB is that 'greater' than someone that did OKish at higher levels?).

I think I'd be happiest in a 'I'm in with a chance of a win/podium if I perform at my very, very best/a bit better than I've ever performed before' scenario.

Shakey did WSB races both as a wild-card and as a full time racer... He did well as a wild-card as the bike and tyres/rules suited his bike, when he went full time to WSB he was pretty garbage though.

[KungFooBob]

Didn't Shakey ride the Aprillia Cube in MotoGP to (albeit with very little success)?

[Skub]

Setting aside employment and climbing the greasy pole,which is primarily money related,then probably,everyone wants to be the best they can at what they do for kicks. If you have a talent for something,then it's natural to see how far you can get with that talent.

To succeed as a big fish in a big pond,it will take very hard work and often a degree of single mindedness verging on the psychopathic.

Never having been a big fish in either pond,I suspect there's a level of satisfaction and contentment in being a low profile ninja.

[KungFooBob]

Pool?

Nice little indoor tank, away from all the predators, with regular feeds and plenty of water changes please.

[Slenver]

Without wishing to sound too pansy, I think that as you get older you realise that doing things well enough to achieve personal satisfaction, regardless of the pool and the other fish, is what it's all about. If you achieve success at whatever level, then so be it.

I have several hobbies and interests, both professional and personal... when younger I was fairly ambitious and competitive about some of them, but in my ripe old years I can now enjoy achieving something for what it is, and that's enough. Will I ever play guitar like Hendrix, for example? No chance whatsoever. But can I play something that gives me satisfaction? Sure. And the same for all kinds of other areas in my life.

[Mr Moofo]

Without wishing to sound too pansy, I think that as you get older you realise that doing things well enough to achieve personal satisfaction, regardless of the pool and the other fish, is what it's all about. If you achieve success at whatever level, then so be it.

I have several hobbies and interests, both professional and personal... when younger I was fairly ambitious and competitive about some of them, but in my ripe old years I can now enjoy achieving something for what it is, and that's enough. Will I ever play guitar like Hendrix, for example? No chance whatsoever. But can I play something that gives me satisfaction? Sure. And the same for all kinds of other areas in my life.

Unfortunately, there will always be someone better than you - faster / fitter/ stronger etc. Unless you are exceptional. It depends at where you set you personal goals... achieve those, and it's golden!

[Slenver]

Unfortunately, there will always be someone better than you - faster / fitter/ stronger etc. Unless you are exceptional.

Exactly.

I nearly wrote 'know your limits', but that was unnecessarily negative. But work hard to find them, then embrace and be comfortable with them. Only one person can ever be the best at anything across the whole world and, statistically, it probably won't be you

[Rockburner]

Without wishing to sound too pansy, I think that as you get older you realise that doing things well enough to achieve personal satisfaction, regardless of the pool and the other fish, is what it's all about. If you achieve success at whatever level, then so be it.

I have several hobbies and interests, both professional and personal... when younger I was fairly ambitious and competitive about some of them, but in my ripe old years I can now enjoy achieving something for what it is, and that's enough. Will I ever play guitar like Hendrix, for example? No chance whatsoever. But can I play something that gives me satisfaction? Sure. And the same for all kinds of other areas in my life.

Unfortunately, there will always be someone better than you - faster / fitter/ stronger etc. Unless you are exceptional. It depends at where you set you personal goals... achieve those, and it's golden!

Basically it depends on whether or not you care about those other people.

[Yambo]

Without wishing to sound too pansy, I think that as you get older you realise that doing things well enough to achieve personal satisfaction, regardless of the pool and the other fish, is what it's all about. If you achieve success at whatever level, then so be it.

I have several hobbies and interests, both professional and personal... when younger I was fairly ambitious and competitive about some of them, but in my ripe old years I can now enjoy achieving something for what it is, and that's enough.

^^^^^^^
That pretty much sums it up for me.

In my last job in the army I was a fairly big fish in a fairly large pool - I held the appointment of Master Driver and there were only 27 of them at the time. I had a lot of clout. I was also fairly good at the army's main motor sport - night navigational rallies - top 5 in the army and top 3 in the Corps (as a navigator) but some other things I wanted to be better at, squash in particular, I was only a minnow, likewise motorcycle trials riding.

However I didn't push to be in those positions, I just wanted the Master Driver job, the status didn't come into the desire. Likewise, I enjoyed the rallying (basically orienteering but less physical and I'd been fairly good at that) and as it was an aspect of being an RCT soldier it was just being good at my job.

Like Slenver I now just enjoy doing what I do and while I like to be good at it or try and get better at it, I've no real competitive side any more.

[Count Steer]

I wasn't thinking about work really but given some of the thoughts above I thought about the 'Peter Principle' and ambition....if you're good at your job, you can get promoted, if you're good at that, you can get promoted.... Where does it end? Either when there's nowhere left to go or, more likely, in a job you're not terribly good at and no chance of promotion - and therefore possibly not very happy. So, in an organisation in equilibrium lots of unhappy people have risen to a position of incompetence*.

I guess it's about finding your 'sweet spot' - you're good at it and there's still enough of a challenge for it to stay interesting.

* I've worked in one that seemed to be the template for this and I expect it rings true for a few others.

[weeksy]

In a work context i reached a place where i get paid OK and have lots of freedom and ability to do other stuff, like pick/drop the boy, go for a cycle.

I could have at times pushed for a more senior role, but i've seen the hours these people work etc.