Raising The Bar!

 

Raising The Bar!

By Jim “Gymbeaux” Brown, April 1, 2010 Revised June 2025

 What does “raising the bar” really mean?  Pulled this definition off the Internet: 

You have a bar (FIGURATIVELY!).   It represents a STANDARD, something to get over (at this point you may well imagine the high jump or pole vault contest in track and field).   Once achieved this standard remains unchanged over a period of time.  Then someone “raises the bar” tries again and succeeds.  All of a sudden more is expected to meet the “new” standard.  This little bit extra could be absolutely anything.  That’s the beauty of the concept.   Use your imagination.  Before anyone could go to university!  Now they had raised the bar; you needed to be intelligent!  In 2025 that no longer seems to be the case.  Look at all of the ongoing riots where students, as we have been TOLD by the media, are engaged in “mostly peaceful protests (riots).  There is no obvious sign of intelligence on display at any of these riots!  

I  originally wrote this Nugget in April of 2010.  I should have known.  I read the book The Naked Communist in the mid-1990s and that is where I learned about the 45 goals The Communist Party USA (yes it is a party within American and yes, it is still alive and active.).  Goal number 17 stands out amongst all of the goals.  It reads, “Get control of schools.  Use them as transmission belts for Socialism and Communist propaganda.  Soften the curriculum.  Get control of teachers associations (unions).  Put the Party Line in textbooks!”  This one goal, established in the late 1950s IS the key to what we are now seeing throughout America.  Instead of “raising the bar”, a topic discussed in the original Nugget, I have sadly learned that lowering the bar is also a possibility that I would have heretofore thought unimaginable before 2025.  The Communist Party USA seems to have accomplished their primary goal of brainwashing students beginning at the earliest of grades and then advance as they are promoted from one grade to another.  Then, just as planned, these students go on to college and they become the teachers and professors of the next generations of students thus promoting and enhancing the Socialist/Communist agendas and most of us just sat back and watched it happen. 

Back to the original Nugget, I truly believe it remains true and optimistic as it should be! 

Using the high jump as an example, it was not that long ago that anyone who could jump over 6 feet was considered a record holder at that height.  Over time, techniques and equipment improved, people in general became larger, faster and more agile and now high jumpers jump well over 7 feet. One high jumpmer, Dick Fosbury in 1968 invented a totally new way to perform the High Jump.  It became known as The Fosbury Flop, proving that there is always a way to “improve the mouse trap.”  The Fosbury Flop became the accepted form ever since.  The same is true for pole vaulters.  Each year athletes “raise the bar” ever so slightly and jump higher and higher.  Yours truly was a pole vaulter in high school in the early 1960s.  The pole I used was about 3” in diameter and about 10’ long and as ridged as possible.  If you could vault 10’, you were considered an elite pole vaulter.  Then came the fiberglass pole that whipped around like a fishing pole.  As you planted this new pole, it would bend to the point of almost breaking and then like a sling shot, shoot the vaulter up over the bar that now exceeds 17’ or higher.  Things change.  Goals and objectives change.  Techniques change.  Sadly, most people remain stagnant in the past and refuse to even consider a different way of doing things.  

"If you continue to do the same things

the same way you always did them,

you'll continue to get the same results"

…Henry Ford, some contribute it to Alfred Einstein 

It has been my sporting experience that there are self-imposed barriers.  For example, I can remember when people thought no one would ever run a 4-minute mile, jump over 6 feet high or pole value over 15 feet.  All these records have fallen.  Did you notice?  “4” minute mile?  “6” feet?  “15” feet?  People tend to establish barriers at almost predictable measurements.  In golf people talk about “breaking 100” meaning they shoot 99 or less; or breaking 90, or 80.  You never hear someone say they are going to break 85 for example. 

Now think about the Law of Attraction.  You tend to bring into your life that which you think of most.  Therefore. if everyone (figuratively) says you cannot run a mile in less than 4 minutes that is what most people thought about.  A very small number of people were not restricted by such thinking and tried anyway.  Along comes Roger Banister and he ran the first sub 4-minute mile.  Once he did it, it only took a couple of weeks before the next person and then the next person and then the next person ran sub 4-minute miles.  What is the next barrier?  Actually, it became the 3 minute, 50 second mile. Who will be the next runner to raise the bar and just how fast will he or she be able to run? 

In golf, if you typically shoot between 95 and 100, why would you set a goal to break 90?  Why not set a goal to break 95, then 94, and then 93 and before you know it you are breaking 90.  Then what?  88?  85?  

Before you can “raise the bar” what must you know?  You must know where the bar is set FOR YOU (either by yourself or someone else) right now.  What is the “acceptable” standard, whether it is in sports, business or life in general?  What do you accept as your standard?  How did you come to accept that particular standard?  Who set it; did you or did someone set it for you?  Why did you come to accept whatever it is you currently accept?  Can you do better? 

Now there’s a question for the ages; can you do better?  Well, can you?  Is there anything you currently do that cannot be done better?  If that is so, what is keeping you from doing better?  Let’s count the reasons: 

1. You don’t really believe you can do any better.
2. Someone, maybe the voice inside your head, has convinced you can’t do any better.
3. You believe that if you do better someone, maybe even you, might expect you to do better every time; not just this time.
4. Maybe you relate doing better to being compensated for what you do or, “I’m not getting paid to do this.”
5. You believe that the more I do the more I will be given to do therefore why do more or better?
6. Unconsciously you don’t know there is a “better” to actually do; what you are doing is acceptable (to whom?).
7. One of my personal favorites is “Close enough for government work!”  Therefore, there is no incentive to do better.
8. What’s in it for me if I do better?
9. No one is really looking, why go the extra mile?
10. Another one of my personal favorites as this applied to me in high school back in……  If I do better, I will be considered a geek and people like those on the football and basketball teams will not want to include me in their activities.  Sound familiar?  Hope not; it was for me. 

Can you come up with more?  I know I sound like a broken record when it comes to the 80/20 rule but it applies to raising the bar as it applies to everything in life.  If statistics could be maintained, it would be my guess that 80% of people would accept the standards that 80% of the people currently experience.  While the 80% are doing whatever they are doing, what are the remaining 20% doing?  I can say with certainty, they are doing what the 80% are doing plus a “little bit more” than what the 80% are doing. 

Why would anyone ever want to be in the 80% group who are obviously satisfied with the status quo?  What is to be gained by being like everyone else? It may take a while to answer that so I’ll wait… 

A picture can be worth a thousand words OR MORE!  Look at the following picture; what do YOU see?

WHAT DO YOU SEE?  It is not what you might first think.  The obvious answer is that they can’t envision putting the round wheels onto the cart making it roll easier and you would be correct.  The not-so-obvious answer is that the four characters ARE SATISFIED with their progress and then fail to think “outside the box” to enhance their efforts.  This one graphic is a tremendous metaphor for people who refuse to consider that there may be a better way and that someone other than themselves may be the one or ones that know what that better way is.  People who have an open mind are typically people who read, who take courses, who teach courses and are always looking to build “a better mouse trap”  which of these two definitions of people are you? 

See if you can equate to my logic.  When I became an instructor in the U. S. Coast Guard I was tasked with teaching people how to complete their paperwork, imagine that for those who know me.  We would actually grade people on how accurate they completed a form(s) or process an event.  Students would get an A, B, C, D and F just like millions of students for hundreds of years.  The first thing I did was change the grading system.  Instead of having a student prepare a form and get a grade of 70% or a C, I would mark the areas of the form(s) the student failed to properly prepare or calculate and then return it to the student not with the correct answers but simply the areas that were incorrect.  It was up to the student, with an open book, to properly complete the form and return it for review.  First consider my logic.  Once these students are “in the field” working, they are not expected to work totally from memory.  They will have resources they can use like manuals and instructions.  Therefore it is equally as vital that they be assessed on how well they can follow the instructions that those resources provide.  I would first mark up the form(s) and if incorrect, return them to the student to try again.  It was the same with every form and every procedure.  The student would be graded not on each form but rather how many times it took him or her to get it correct. 

I can remember it as if it were yesterday when the Training Officer called me into his office to ask me what on earth I was doing.  He called me crazy.  I told him that a passing grade for the school was 70% and he agreed; it was 70%.  Then I said, “Sir, if I were teaching students to be dental technicians, would you want someone who passed with a 70% grade working in your mouth or would you want someone who did it right the first time working in your mouth?”  Before he could answer I then asked, “Sir, let’s look at it another way.  If I were teaching payroll and accounting, would you want someone calculating your pay check who passed the school with a 70% or would you prefer someone who knew how to do it right the first time?” 

The silence was deafening!  He agreed.  The only problem we then faced was how many times would we permit a student to keep trying to get it right before we came to the conclusion that he or she was just not cut out for what was being taught.  After all, not everyone has the motivation and intelligence to be a brain surgeon, plumber or pay clerk.  I can tell you that the quality of the graduating students improved when they understood that the standard, or where the “bar was set” was what they were expected to achieve when performing their work.  Anything less is unacceptable; anything more, commendable! 

Whenever you are performing work, providing a service, or providing a product for someone else, where do you set your bar?  Do you set it where the 80% reside or do you set it where the 20% flourish?  I’m just asking.  You tell me.  If you think that the work you do is satisfactory or “good enough for _______”, is it really?  If the shoe were on the other foot and you were the customer and someone else was performing at the level they considered as satisfactory, would it be satisfactory for you?  

Is it possible to set the bar too high?  Is it possible to run a 4-minute mile? Absolutely!  Is it possible to run a 3-minute mile?  Not yet!  

Here is another way to think about it.  I took my one and only hot air balloon ride with a pilot and one other person, a lot older than I was.  It was magnificent but the actual ride is for another story.  It was getting dark and the wind had taken us north over forests instead of south over clear pastures.  With the sun setting we were definitely in trouble and you could sense that in the change of attitude and presence of the balloon pilot. 

“There”, he shouted as he pointed to a very small clearing surrounded by a fence and with one large oak tree in the center.  He let the air out of the balloon as much as he safely could and we descended so fast I think it was a little more than we safely should have.  We landed very hard and the basket turned on its side and dragged us for quite a distance but we managed to get on the ground, we did not hit the tree or the fence.  We had made it slightly bruised but alive.  

But wait, we landed in a coral not a pasture and there was a very large and very angry bull in the coral.  We were in BIG trouble.  Like the joke you hear about one hiker shifting to his running shoes not to out run the bear but to out run his fellow hiker, I felt I was faced with that choice.  Neither the pilot nor the passenger was as young as I was and neither one able to out run the bull.  With only seconds to spare, I decided that I could attract the bull’s attention and get him to chase me while the other two could get to safety on the other side of the fence.  I had one chance and that was to beat the bull to the oak tree.  Screaming as I ran to get the bull’s attention plus the fact that I was scared to death. I began a bee-line to the tree with the bull on my tail, literally.  It was really getting dark but I could see a low hanging branch about 10 feet high and if I could only reach that branch. I could escape the bull. 

Running as fast as I could and to this day I remember the heat of bull breath on my neck, that’s an exaggeration but I swear I could feel it.  As I came closer to the tree I jumped with all my power to grab hold of that life-saving branch. 

Since I am telling you this story, you can safely assume that the bull did not kill me.  As I said, I ran faster than I had ever run and I jumped higher than I had ever jumped – I missed the branch; after all it was over 10 feet in the air.  But much to my surprise, I caught it coming down. 

Most of that story is true and the part about catching the branch on the way down is not but it serves my purpose in this Nugget.  It is perfectly permissible to shoot for the moon and it is perfectly permissible not to make it because who knows what star you might latch onto on the way up or down.  The standard or the bar should be perfection.  Anything less is like the student passing with 70%.  

I have one question for everyone who reads this Nugget.  Would you want a dentist working in your mouth who obtained his or her dental degree with a grade of 70%?  I’ll wait for your answer… 

When you have a position where people rely on you and your failure could cost them money or as was in the case of the Coast Guard even their life, it is incumbent on you not to score a 70% but to score a 100%; every time!  Remember, if the shoe were on the other foot. you would expect nor would you accept anything less than 100%, am I not right on this?  

Never accept ordinary or the minimum because ordinary and/or the minimum will never make you great; it will only put you in the 80%.  More importantly, you cannot expect others to give you 100% if you do not expect the same from yourself when working for another person’s best interests. 

ORDINARY WILL NOT MAKE YOU GREAT!

ALWAYS SET YOUR BAR HIGHER THAN WHAT OTHERS EXPECT!

Telling It Like It Is

 

TELLING IT LIKE IT IS:

LIKE IT OR NOT!

By Jim “Gymbeaux” Brown, May 12, 2025

The 1950s were my formative years. When I started school, I barely remembered that the United States was engaged in a "conflict" known as the Korean War. It was called a "conflict" as if that somehow changed what was really happening. A conflict? Really? We didn't have news coverage like we do today; we barely had television. The Korean Conflict wasn't even discussed. Most of what we learned in the early '50s was taught at home (the difference between right and wrong) and in schools (reading, writing, and arithmetic). As for the radio, I don’t recall listening to anything but sports coverage — mostly the Cleveland Indians and Cleveland Browns.

I CAN tell you what we were taught about Russia:

UNITED STATES – GOOD! RUSSIA – BAD!

I don’t remember any teacher, at least through junior high, ever telling us that Russia lost more people during WWII than any other country, including the U.S. It was rarely acknowledged that Russia was even our ally during the war. Ask people today if Russia was an ally or enemy during WWII and see what answers you get in 2025. You may be surprised. I won't be.

In the 1950s, China was barely mentioned. No one to my knowledge ever said USA – Good; China – BAD! Where do you think the phrase "There are starving children in China, eat what’s on your plate!" came from? We thought China was a backward nation in poverty. We never really talked about it. The only time we kids mentioned China was when we wondered how long it would take to dig a hole through Ohio to reach the other side of the world. At the time, I would have struggled to find Korea or Iran on a map.

I was born in 1945. That makes me an 80-year-old man in 2025. Fast forward to 1970 — that’s important because it's the basis for the rest of this Nugget. I hope it's a lesson worth thinking about, one that helps you evaluate where you stand on politics and how the issues of today are being resolved — or not.

In 1970, I had never been to sea. Setting sail aboard the 210-foot USCGC ALERT (WMEC-630) made me nervous. Did the crew know I was a first-timer? Would I get seasick? Would I be able to perform my duties beyond my specialty? Questions swarmed in my head like bees.

As usual, my worries were for nothing. None of the bad things I imagined came to pass, aside from actually going to sea. We spent two weeks at sea, then two weeks in Cape May on Condition Bravo, meaning we had to be ready to get underway within two hours of notification. No one had cell phones. Calls were made via landlines. You could miss deployment just by going to the grocery store.

If we weren’t at sea or on Bravo, we were on Charlie Status — when major maintenance was performed.

This Nugget begins on a dark, stormy day at sea. Electrical storms crackled as we were called to get underway: commercial fishermen were in peril. There was a calling hierarchy: the Commanding Officer first, the newest Seaman Apprentice last. As the Ship’s Yeoman and a First-Class Petty Officer, I was about a quarter down the list. Why is this important? Because if you were called last, you had much less than two hours to report — and you still better be there!

Rescuing people in distress was a primary mission. That day we got underway in typically bad weather. Navigating out of the Cape May Jetties into the Atlantic was challenging, as small vessels were heading into harbor while our much larger cutter was heading out. Once past the Jetties, we pushed through as fast as the weather allowed — up to 17 knots. Aircraft could drop life rafts and supplies, but it still took time to reach the scene.

HERE’S THE POINT!

No one asked the race, religion, nationality, or political party of the merchant seamen in distress. No one cared whether they paid taxes, were citizens, or which party they voted for. There were lives in peril, and it was OUR JOB to save them. No questions asked.

The only questions that mattered:

• Where are you?
• How many people are on board?
• Is anyone injured?
• Can everyone get off the vessel into our small boats?
• What provisions do you have or need?
• What first aid is required?
• Have families been notified?

That was the mindset. It didn’t matter who the people were — only that they were PEOPLE.

In 2025, I am sickened by politics. The 1970 experience aboard the ALERT is the opposite of today’s dysfunction. Politicians take oaths to serve all citizens. Many haven’t even recorded their oaths, as required by law. How is that acceptable?

They’ve forgotten — or ignored — their oath.

They were elected to represent EVERYONE in their district — not just donors or party loyalists. But that’s exactly what most of them do. There is no bipartisanship. On important issues, votes are along strict party lines.

It would be like the USCGC ALERT saying, "We only rescue U.S. citizens."

If this continues, our country will swing wildly every election cycle, becoming increasingly dysfunctional. Citizens can’t plan their lives around political whims.

In the past, people could discuss differences and find solutions. That’s no longer happening. Today, one party proposes something and the other fights it, no matter the merits. Crossing party lines is rare. That’s corruption. That’s not what I voted for.

Gary Keller, co-founder of Keller Williams Realty, wrote The One Thing. His principle: prioritize your biggest challenge, then tackle it so other problems start to resolve. Why doesn’t government think this way? If they do, it’s not visible to people like me — and I pay attention. I doubt most Americans care, and that, to me, is America’s biggest problem.

People double down on bad positions rather than admit they were wrong. Look at men playing in women’s sports or the refusal to deport criminal illegal aliens. These aren’t Republican or Democrat issues. They affect the entire country. No one should be dying on that political hill.

I wish my senators and representatives asked for my opinion before voting. In my lifetime, none ever have. They make assumptions based solely on party affiliation.

I am NOT a political party. I am an individual.

And when you ASSUME, you make an ASS out of U and ME.

The 80/20 Rule says 80% of results come from 20% of efforts. I believe that in 2025, 80% of Americans want secure borders and want criminal illegal aliens deported. Yet party leadership (especially Democrat) has taken the losing side of that 80/20 split.

WHY? I know the answer. Do you?

Supporting losing causes is like being adrift at sea without the ALERT coming to rescue you. There is no lifeline for those who support harmful policies. They will flounder until they're voted out by the 80% who eventually wake up.

This applies to all parties: Republican, Democrat, Independent, Socialist, Conservative, Progressive.

As for me, I don’t want anyone in office who can’t discuss opposing viewpoints. But in today’s politics, it’s all about winning — not solving problems.

It has NEVER been about winning. It has always been, and continues to be:

DO THE RIGHT THING,

ESPECIALLY WHEN NO ONE IS LOOKING!

Sadly, it just doesn’t happen that way anymore.