And The Winner Is . . .

Life is full of winners. And over the course of the next two weeks in London, a lot of winners will be crowned. Besides the Olympics, there are winners of the Oscar, the Emmy, the Golden Globes and the Tony. People also win Pulitzers, Peabodys, and Peace prizes (Nobel, that is). We hand out awards for Car of the Year, Man/Woman of the Year, Teacher of the Year, even Horse of the Year. There are MVP's, Most Improved, Heisman Trophy winners, All-Pros, All-Stars and Hall of Famers.

And, life also has its share of losers. Variously, there are runners-up, consolation winners, Miss Congenialities, also-rans, cellar dwellers, "nice guys" and those "just happy to be nominated".

People are obsessed with listing things too. The media ranks the sexiest man/woman, the best and worst dressed, not to mention list after list of of the best movies, songs, bands and singers of all time. And don't forget the best places to live, raise children, work, eat and visit. Tired yet?

All of the winners mentioned above (except Olympians)   have one thing in common. They are selected by other people. When reviewing these winners, what stands out is that none of them scored more points, threw farther, jumped higher, or ran faster than their peers. Peers, not opponents. Opponents are those individuals or teams who attempt to defeat each other. When many awards are given, it seems, there is no true opposition, simply other nominees.

So is there any real merit to these, or any, subjective awards?

Awards given to honor subjective excellence are inherently flawed because their selection is based on bias and preference of voters or judges. One person's winner is another's runner-up. A person's vote is cast based on the sum total of his/her experiences, which are different for each voter. These differences, often vast, can cast a shadow on the legitimacy of the award bestowed.

Humans always have, and always will, play favorites. Whatever the event, we are fans. We choose our heroes and villians and act accordingly. If we don't have a bias or preference, we don't watch.

The people who select the winners and losers are fans too. They are swayed like the rest of us by intangible allegiances and hidden motivations. They too are subjective. Even when competitions attempt to apply an objective scoring system, results can still be manipulated, finessed, or at worst, totally disregarded.When there exists enthusiasm for a competitor or nominee (which there always is), manipulation is often the rule rather than the exception.

But, finally, the London Summer Games have begun. I have always loved watching the Olympics. My memory dimly goes all the way back to the Munich Games of 1972. In the daily barrage of "bests" and "worsts", the Winter and Summer Olympics stand apart because subjectivity has been stripped away. Oh sure, ranking gymnasts and divers lends it self to some favoritism, but for the most part measurements and scoring systems are beautifully objective. The swimmer who touches the wall first, the runner who crosses the finish line ahead of everyone else, the team that scores more points; all of these athletes and many more truly earn the title: Champion.

That must be it, because The Whole World is Watching.