The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
6 Points

Is the "Trophies fo rall" policy good?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/26/2014 Category: Sports
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 593 times Debate No: 50013
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




In today's world, sports give out trophies for everything. The trophies for all policy has changed youth sports over the last 2 decades. Before the trophies for all policy kids had to work to play in the game.So is the trophies for all policy a good thing?


I accept but how many of these debates are you going to have?
I see that you have already debated this topic several times.
Anyways, let's have fun debating this thought-provoking topic!
Debate Round No. 1


It is the topic I have to give a report on in school
But anyways, Trophies become mean less and give out
The wrong message. Kids need to learn to deal with diss appointment
That's why I say no to the trophies for all policy


Thank you for your arguments, Con.

Before I make my arguments, I would like to rebut some of Con's arguments.

1. "Trophies become mean less"
I am assuming that Con is saying that trophies lose meaning as they are handed out to all participants. However, this is not true. Giving out trophies to all does not change the implications of trophies. Trophies symbolize victory and winning. Even if they are handed out to all participants, trophies still do symbolize winning. Not only that, trophies for all policy provides the trophies with new meanings such as encouragement and optimistic potential.

2. "[Trophies for all policy] gives out the wrong message"
I would like to know what this "wrong message" is and how this message is defined as "wrong."

3. "Kids need to learn to deal with disappointment"
I agree with Con that that kids need to learn resiliency and disappointment. However, trophies for all policy will have minimal effects on this issue. Kids, even at young ages, know the differences between winning and losing. Even if they receive trophies at the end of the tournament, they experience disappointment through losing games. Since, the kids know what losing is, they learn to bounce back and play better in future games. Children also learn to cope with disappointment through different ways such as bad grades.

Now for my arguments.

1. Motivation
Trophies for all policy motivates children to pursue their interests even if they may not be the best at them. This effect can be explained through B.F. Skinner's Operant Conditioning. Trophies act as positive reinforcers. They are desirable consequences that urge children to continue to work assiduously on their interests. As direct rewards, trophies strengthen the will of the children to pursue their interests. [1] Also, children realize that they are as good as the winning team, which motivates them. In addition, the actual winners are also motivated. They see the other participants also receiving trophies and may recognize the need to work harder and to get better to be truly recognized as outstanding.

2. Learning
Children learn from trophies for all policy. As I mentioned earlier, children are able to determine winners and losers at early ages through various social activities that involve trivial amount of competition. By providing trophies for all, the society is teaching the children lessons such as recognizing the existence of joy and rewards even in aversive and unfavourable situations.

I await Con's rebuttals and arguments.

Debate Round No. 2


SoccerGirl3373 forfeited this round.


Con forfeited the last round and failed to respond to my rebuttals and to discredit my arguments.
Con failed to provide strong arguments substantiated by solid evidence.
Vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Jabuticaba 2 years ago
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by etherealvoyager 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit. Conduct & convincing arguments given for obvious reasons. Sources given because Pro used one source, as opposed to Con, who used none