"Equity has morphed from its original meaning of fairness to mean that all outcomes should be the same; in short, there should be no winners or losers."
Dr. Richard Bosshardt - With Deepest Respect and Fraternal Esteem,
Your reflections on the 2025 French Open struck with the precision of a well-aimed shot -concise, penetrating, and unflinching. You captured not only the kinetic artistry of high-level competition, but more importantly, the transcendent ethos that binds such moments to the broader human endeavor: the relentless pursuit of excellence. This resonated deeply with me—not as a mere admirer of sport, but as a retired Marine who, like you, has been shaped by disciplines where performance is not recreational, but consequential.
In combat, we do not entrust life-and-death decisions to those who meet ideological quotas. We entrust them to those who have proven, beyond reproach, that they are capable. The notion of assigning command based on equity rather than qualification is not only misguided - it is dangerous. In the operating theater, in the cockpit of a supersonic fighter, at the edge of a storm-tossed rescue mission, and in the crucible of battle, there is no room for pretense. Competence is not a virtue among many - it is the sine qua non.
Consider the fighter pilot. The training pipeline for an F-35 pilot demands over 1,000 flight hours, a level of cognitive resilience that rivals any academic field, and the ability to endure 9 G-forces in split-second decision environments. Or the United States Coast Guard Rescue Swimmer- whose preparation includes hypothermic water conditioning, breath-hold protocols under stress, and psychological resilience training that simulates the mental fog of drowning victims. Only about 50% pass the course. Why? Because when a crew is clinging to wreckage off the Alaskan coast in 45-degree seas, no one asks if their rescuer met demographic criteria—they ask if they can save a life.
These are professions in which meritocracy is not a luxury - it is a covenant. The same is true in your own operating room, where the scalpel must be wielded by steady hands sharpened through years of mastery - not by someone who merely satisfies bureaucratic constructs of equity.
Your observation - “How did Alcaraz not fold?” - touches a profound truth. The answer is not mystery, nor accident. It is forged in the obscurity of discipline. True excellence is not given; it is earned - in the repetitions no one sees, in the mental battles no one records, in the painful mastery of craft that demands everything and guarantees nothing. It is not cruelty to expect greatness. It is justice to honor it.
Today, however, we are watching the slow corrosion of that principle under the guise of “fairness.” The prevailing ethos insists that equality of outcome is more noble than equality of opportunity, even if it requires the erosion of standards that once safeguarded lives and elevated civilization. But fairness, misdefined, becomes the enemy of excellence. It is not just a cultural shift—it is an existential threat to professions that depend upon absolute standards: surgery, aviation, combat leadership, nuclear engineering, emergency response, and beyond.
You, as a surgeon, understand this more intuitively than most. In a crisis, your patient is not asking whether you’ve completed the right social training. They are entrusting their life to your competence. The public must be reminded: true compassion is not found in lowering standards to protect feelings - it is in upholding them to protect lives.
There is a term we used in Marine doctrine: violence of action. It means bringing overwhelming force to bear - quickly, decisively, and without hesitation. But it’s more than tactical. It’s philosophical. It speaks to the urgency of clear judgment and unimpeachable preparation. When we dull the edge of excellence to appease a cultural obsession with uniformity, we not only weaken the profession - we degrade the human spirit.
You saw it on that court in Paris: the evidence of effort, the supremacy of preparation, the nobility of resilience. That wasn’t just tennis. That was civilization, remembered in motion.
Lastly, I submit this uncomfortable truth: the battlefield - like the operating room, or a burning high-rise, or a rescue hoist over 30-foot waves - has no concern for skin color, gender, or identity politics. It cares only for capability. Either you can carry the weight, make the critical decision, lead under duress - or you cannot. To pretend otherwise is not inclusion. It is sabotage.
So yes, Dr. Bosshardt, your alarm is well-placed. But so is your hope. What we saw in Alcaraz - and what we still see in warriors, rescuers, surgeons, and professionals who uphold the ancient code of merit - is a light that must not be extinguished.
The whole concept of sports competition requires equality, not equity. In golf it is called a handicap. It makes competition “fair” and more exciting in friendly competitions. It is even used in betting, the spread or odds. In elite competitions all compete an “equal” basis. But, not really anymore.
In colleges they separate based on size, divisions 1, 2, 3, All in an effort to balance toward fair competition, same for high school , by ages in pewee leagues.
Not so in trans gender competition. It is falsely assumed that trans athletes are somehow equal in baseline abilities independent of skills. In reality, the athlete’s acquired skills are devalued by unfair physical attributes based on genetic sex.
Las Vegas odds makers could probably figure this out. For me, I would prefer one on one, not one on one+ a Y chromosome. .
Amen! Sadly, sports are one the last institutions that hold merit as sacred. That is why they are the last form of "real" entertainment and exciting to watch. Even when my kids were in AYSO soccer 20 years ago, we all knew what the score was, even though "we were not supposed to keep score." In every field and profession, people long to know who is the best, and who do I need to avoid.
Dr. Richard Bosshardt - With Deepest Respect and Fraternal Esteem,
Your reflections on the 2025 French Open struck with the precision of a well-aimed shot -concise, penetrating, and unflinching. You captured not only the kinetic artistry of high-level competition, but more importantly, the transcendent ethos that binds such moments to the broader human endeavor: the relentless pursuit of excellence. This resonated deeply with me—not as a mere admirer of sport, but as a retired Marine who, like you, has been shaped by disciplines where performance is not recreational, but consequential.
In combat, we do not entrust life-and-death decisions to those who meet ideological quotas. We entrust them to those who have proven, beyond reproach, that they are capable. The notion of assigning command based on equity rather than qualification is not only misguided - it is dangerous. In the operating theater, in the cockpit of a supersonic fighter, at the edge of a storm-tossed rescue mission, and in the crucible of battle, there is no room for pretense. Competence is not a virtue among many - it is the sine qua non.
Consider the fighter pilot. The training pipeline for an F-35 pilot demands over 1,000 flight hours, a level of cognitive resilience that rivals any academic field, and the ability to endure 9 G-forces in split-second decision environments. Or the United States Coast Guard Rescue Swimmer- whose preparation includes hypothermic water conditioning, breath-hold protocols under stress, and psychological resilience training that simulates the mental fog of drowning victims. Only about 50% pass the course. Why? Because when a crew is clinging to wreckage off the Alaskan coast in 45-degree seas, no one asks if their rescuer met demographic criteria—they ask if they can save a life.
These are professions in which meritocracy is not a luxury - it is a covenant. The same is true in your own operating room, where the scalpel must be wielded by steady hands sharpened through years of mastery - not by someone who merely satisfies bureaucratic constructs of equity.
Your observation - “How did Alcaraz not fold?” - touches a profound truth. The answer is not mystery, nor accident. It is forged in the obscurity of discipline. True excellence is not given; it is earned - in the repetitions no one sees, in the mental battles no one records, in the painful mastery of craft that demands everything and guarantees nothing. It is not cruelty to expect greatness. It is justice to honor it.
Today, however, we are watching the slow corrosion of that principle under the guise of “fairness.” The prevailing ethos insists that equality of outcome is more noble than equality of opportunity, even if it requires the erosion of standards that once safeguarded lives and elevated civilization. But fairness, misdefined, becomes the enemy of excellence. It is not just a cultural shift—it is an existential threat to professions that depend upon absolute standards: surgery, aviation, combat leadership, nuclear engineering, emergency response, and beyond.
You, as a surgeon, understand this more intuitively than most. In a crisis, your patient is not asking whether you’ve completed the right social training. They are entrusting their life to your competence. The public must be reminded: true compassion is not found in lowering standards to protect feelings - it is in upholding them to protect lives.
There is a term we used in Marine doctrine: violence of action. It means bringing overwhelming force to bear - quickly, decisively, and without hesitation. But it’s more than tactical. It’s philosophical. It speaks to the urgency of clear judgment and unimpeachable preparation. When we dull the edge of excellence to appease a cultural obsession with uniformity, we not only weaken the profession - we degrade the human spirit.
You saw it on that court in Paris: the evidence of effort, the supremacy of preparation, the nobility of resilience. That wasn’t just tennis. That was civilization, remembered in motion.
Lastly, I submit this uncomfortable truth: the battlefield - like the operating room, or a burning high-rise, or a rescue hoist over 30-foot waves - has no concern for skin color, gender, or identity politics. It cares only for capability. Either you can carry the weight, make the critical decision, lead under duress - or you cannot. To pretend otherwise is not inclusion. It is sabotage.
So yes, Dr. Bosshardt, your alarm is well-placed. But so is your hope. What we saw in Alcaraz - and what we still see in warriors, rescuers, surgeons, and professionals who uphold the ancient code of merit - is a light that must not be extinguished.
Thank you for defending that light.
Semper Fidelis,
With Admiration and Brotherhood in Purpose,
Hank
Major Henry R. Salmans III, USMC (Retired)
The whole concept of sports competition requires equality, not equity. In golf it is called a handicap. It makes competition “fair” and more exciting in friendly competitions. It is even used in betting, the spread or odds. In elite competitions all compete an “equal” basis. But, not really anymore.
In colleges they separate based on size, divisions 1, 2, 3, All in an effort to balance toward fair competition, same for high school , by ages in pewee leagues.
Not so in trans gender competition. It is falsely assumed that trans athletes are somehow equal in baseline abilities independent of skills. In reality, the athlete’s acquired skills are devalued by unfair physical attributes based on genetic sex.
Las Vegas odds makers could probably figure this out. For me, I would prefer one on one, not one on one+ a Y chromosome. .
Amen! Sadly, sports are one the last institutions that hold merit as sacred. That is why they are the last form of "real" entertainment and exciting to watch. Even when my kids were in AYSO soccer 20 years ago, we all knew what the score was, even though "we were not supposed to keep score." In every field and profession, people long to know who is the best, and who do I need to avoid.