Note XXXI - The Wrong Reward

If you enjoy observations like this from 150+ countries, you can subscribe here.

On a crowded beach volleyball court, the point is already drifting out of control long before it ends, even though the scoreboard will later show a clean result. The pass comes in slightly off, the set doesn’t quite land where it should, and what follows has little to do with intention anymore. People move late, react instead of anticipating, reach instead of positioning. The ball somehow stays in play, not because anyone is in control, but because no one fully is. At the last possible moment, someone jumps and gets a touch on it, sending it over the net in a way that feels accidental more than deliberate. It drops somewhere awkward, unreachable, and the point is over. Everyone celebrates, the score moves, and from the outside it looks like a successful rally.

I remember standing there after one of those points, not celebrating, not even reacting, just thinking that if this is what winning looks like, then something is off.

There was nothing in that sequence I wanted to repeat. It didn’t make the next point easier. It didn’t tell me anything about how to improve. If anything, it rewarded exactly the kind of play that keeps you stuck over time, because it gives you a result without giving you a pattern. The discomfort didn’t come from the chaos itself, which is part of any game, but from the fact that the outcome treated it as if it had been intentional.

The opposite situation feels entirely different, even when it ends in a loss. A clean reception, a proper set, a well-timed jump, and a strong attack that misses the line by a small margin.

The point is gone immediately, the scoreboard reflects it without hesitation, and yet the sequence holds together in a way that feels stable.

The movement makes sense, the timing is right, and you can feel that repeating it will eventually produce the result you were aiming for. There is something in it you can build on, something that carries forward into the next point. That kind of rally leaves you satisfied, even when it doesn’t count, because it moves you somewhere.

Once you notice the difference between these two situations, it becomes difficult to ignore. The scoreboard treats them as equal, but they are not equal in what they give you. One contains information, structure, and direction. The other gives you a number and nothing else. One builds something, the other resets you to the same place you started.

Most environments are built around outcomes, because outcomes are easy to see and easy to measure. The ball is either in or out. The point is either won or lost. Everything that happens before that disappears behind a single moment. Over time, this changes how people play. You start seeing players who aim to keep the ball alive in any way possible, who celebrate points that required no control, and who move on quickly from sequences that actually contained something worth keeping, simply because they didn’t lead to an immediate result.

The effect is subtle, but it compounds. You begin to follow what works in the moment, even when it doesn’t hold. You reinforce actions that feel successful without asking whether they can be repeated. The system confirms it through points and games, so there is no immediate pressure to question it. Progress starts to look like a series of wins, even though the underlying level hasn’t changed.

This is where winning becomes misleading.

It starts to feel like progress, even when it isn’t.

The same pattern appears the moment you step outside of volleyball and look at other games or sports. In tennis, you can win points with mishits, net cords, or defensive shots that land just out of reach. In golf, you can hit a poor shot that catches a slope and ends up exactly where you wanted it, even though the strike itself wasn’t clean. In simple games, you can win because someone else makes a mistake at the right time, or because a sequence happens to unfold in your favor without much control from your side. The result registers the same way every time, but the signal underneath it is very different.

If you follow the result, you reinforce whatever just happened. That seems logical at first, but in a system where randomness plays a role, the thing you are reinforcing is often not what you think it is.

You start repeating behavior that cannot hold under pressure, because it worked once. You build confidence on something unstable, and the system keeps confirming it until it doesn’t.

That is where things start to slow down without being obvious.

Because learning depends on patterns that can be repeated, adjusted, and refined. It requires actions that produce similar results under similar conditions. Random success doesn’t provide that. It feels good in the moment, but it leaves nothing behind. It doesn’t reduce uncertainty, and it doesn’t make the next attempt more predictable.

For a long time, I didn’t separate those things clearly. I associated ambition with the desire to win, with pushing for the result, with competing hard on every point. I have many friends who still operate that way, and I understand it, because the system supports it. The scoreboard gives you a clear signal, and it’s natural to follow it. But over time, I noticed that I wasn’t enjoying games where the outcome didn’t match the quality of what was happening.

Even when I was winning, something felt off.

The shift that followed wasn’t a rejection of competition or a loss of interest in results. It was a change in what I paid attention to. Instead of focusing on whether we won the point, I started looking at whether the sequence made sense. Whether the movement, the positioning, the timing were something I would want to repeat. Once that becomes the reference point, the outcome starts to lose its central role. It’s still there, but it no longer determines whether something was valuable.

That changes how you play in very concrete ways. You stop taking shortcuts that only work occasionally. You play the ball properly even when an easier option would secure the point. You accept missing if the movement was right. You repeat what holds, even when it doesn’t immediately pay off. Over time, that creates a different kind of progress, one that is slower in appearance but much more stable underneath.

This is also where ambition begins to look different. Wanting to win every point is visible and easy to understand, but it often leads you toward what produces the fastest result.

Real ambition shows up in the willingness to stay with the process, even when it costs you in the short term. It requires a certain patience, because the reward is delayed and less obvious. It asks you to trust that doing something correctly will compound, even if it doesn’t show up on the scoreboard right away.

That’s not an abstract principle. It’s a decision that happens in small moments, over and over again. You can take the easy option and move on, or you can stay with the structure and see it through. You can follow the score, or you can follow the signal that actually tells you something.

For me, that choice has become clear. I don’t try to win every point anymore. I try to play it in a way that holds, even if it costs me in the moment, because the only thing that compounds over time is what you can repeat.

If you want to receive future field reports
and notes from 150+ countries, you can subscribe below.