Competition

I was talking to one of my friends the other day about debate. He was pretty good and won the TOC, which probably makes him the best debater in our year by far. And no, anything that is not policy debate is basically just elementary.

Recently I got diagnosed with ADHD, and I found it kind of weird. Ever since I was a kid, I would say I was fairly competitive, maybe more so than the average person. I sometimes feel like there is no purpose in my life if I am not chasing something, which sounds bad, but it is something I have struggled with.

I think competition is a double edged sword. I do appreciate all the skills I learned in debate, but if I was not as obsessive, I feel like I would be more technically gifted. Competitive activities are essentially overfitting your time into what is basically a drug.

Winning feels good, but then it does not.

Losing feels bad, but in different ways:

• You lose to a bad team, and you are sad.
• You lose to a good team, and you cope, but you still do not feel good.
• You beat a bad team, and you feel fine.
• You beat a good team, and you feel really good, but then your perception of what "good" means shifts, and you want more.

The desire paradox is inevitable. In the economic state of the world right now, it is probably good to have a lot of desire.

I want to introduce the concept of morality here. I do not think you can be the greatest while having strict morals. It is not positive EV.

Poker teaches this very clearly. In equilibrium theory, it is optimal to avoid having a polarized range in any spot. You want your bluffing and value frequencies to be close to half and half.

I think this is true for life, jobs, math, debate, and programming. You cannot fully lean on your skills alone, at least for most people. You also need to exploit or take advantage of certain edges. It is an unpopular opinion, but this is what I believe.