Verified by 
Self-confidence translates poorly… across cultures and onto the playing field. When sitting with a handful of East Asian athletes and discussing characteristics of an excellent competitor, the term “self-confidence” arose in the discussion. The excessively polite silence and the slightly uncomfortable body language that followed the term being bandied about told the story. The concept of “self-confidence” was problematic to them.
Having a similar conversation with North American athletes a day later, the term “self-confidence” again came into play. Differently, this group of athletes puffed out their chests and proclaimed, “The athlete that is positive of victory is a great competitor.” Their understanding of the concept of “self-confidence” was problematic to me.
In 2005 Brown, in The Paradox of Japanese Self-Esteem, wisely noted the challenges that occur during considerations of inner strength. The terms used are both poorly conceptualized and poorly interpreted. Even in this day and age of high tech brain scans, we cannot truly read someone’s mind. What is a coach left to do? Read someone’s body. In the world of sport, this often seems to leave one searching for an image of a competitor with head held high, chest puffed out, and moving with a little swagger (and perhaps there is even an edge of nastiness being carried about the field). Is this confidence?
Maybe. Maybe not. Confidence when poorly defined and poorly understood can be both arrogant and ignorant. Not a great combination when high performance is the goal.
“Positive of victory.” A quaint wish. Perhaps a nice pop psychology mantra. Performance confidence at its truest, is likely more honest than this statement.
The mantra “control what you can control” has made it to the lexicon of most advancing athletes. If understood, it reminds the competitor to focus on the things that he or she can shape during their sporting performance. This concept appreciates that winning, losing, placing well, and many other outcomes of sport are not fully under an individual’s influence. Opponents get to play. Coaches get to coach. Results happen, sometimes as hoped for and sometimes not… even when a great game was played. This is truth. This is also why research repeatedly has shown that dwelling on future results may motivate a bit, but quite often leads to stress and distraction (from optimal attributional styles to goal orientation theory to self-determination theory to self-efficacy the song remains the same). It is comforting to be in control… deep in one’s gut most are aware that control must be given up in athletics… it is part of the fun. Hence the flaw in brash, outcome-oriented confidence.
Wishing it so, doesn’t make it so. “Positive of victory,” does not lead to sustaining, competitive confidence nor victory. The truly confident athlete fills in the blank of the following statement more wisely, “Positive of ___________ .” The successful competitor’s head and heart is filled with stuff they can do, control, and try that gives themself the best chance of positive outcomes. Effort, attitude, fundamental skills, and the like are great conclusions to confident statements. They are also honest and ready to accept the challenges of competition.
Self-confidence has become a throw-away word in the sports performance world. Re-imagining what confidence sounds like and looks like will lead to the concept resonating more deeply personally and across diverse athletic populations. There is likely a conceptualization of confidence that lies between Eastern modesty and Western brashness that leads to optimal performance. It does not need to be arrogant and ideally it is leads to a calm focus. Perhaps a dialogue that sounds like, “I believe I’ll take care of my stuff on the playing field and things will work out,” is truly the attitude of champions.
