Don't overreact when it's all the same bell curve
Performance is a spectrum
Stereotypically, we think of math and emotions as opposite ends of the spectrum. But being a bit of nerd, I've found ways to let math have an influence on my emotions.
Many of us have experienced being frustrated when someone doesn't perform up to expectations (whether that someone is ourselves or our teammate). But putting performance in its proper, math-y context can help us remain calm about so-called "underperformance".
The key is bell curves. Bell curves (most of you probably know this already) describe the distribution of data on a spectrum.
To give a concrete example: if I try to throw 100 hucks as far as I can, they won't all go exactly the same distance. A couple might go especially short, whether due to a gust of wind or because the disc slipped slightly in my hand. A few that I happen to throw perfectly will go especially long. But the majority of them will probably be within ~10 yards of each other.
These results drawn out as a graph — a few of the results especially far below average, a few of the results especially far above average, and most of them somewhere in the middle — make the shape of a bell curve.
All of our performance—throwing, catching, decision making, etc, is on a spectrum. Here's what it looks like visually, using catching skill as an example:
We shouldn't think of ourselves (or our teammates) as having a certain exact level of skill at a particular moment in time. Performance is a spectrum. No matter how good we are, 1% of the time we're going to throw our 1%-least-accurate pass. 5% of the time, we make a worst-5% decision.
I find this to be a very useful concept for staying calm, whether in frisbee or in life. If we don't see performance as a spectrum, we'll be surprised and frustrated every time someone messes up: why are they suddenly underperforming? But seeing skill as a spectrum can dissolve that surprise before it even happens: we know that it's just a part of life that our teammates will throw their worst-10% passes, 10% of the time. They're not underperforming, because those performance expectations already include worst-1% performance, 1% of the time.
In other words, they're still on the same bell curve. And this should influence the discussions we have with our team. Before saying something to a teammate who made a bad play, think to yourself: will this shift their entire bell curve towards better performance? There's often not much benefit in offering advice to someone who just made a 1%-er play. Whether you say something or not, their next result is probably going to be back around their 50%-level. (AKA Regression to the mean.)
Bell curve shifting is more of a long-term project. "Practice makes perfect" is a beautiful phrase in its own way, but to stay sane you should also remember how reality works: "practice shifts our bell curve to the right". (It probably makes our bell curve less-spread-out as well, but I don't want to over-complicate the metaphor.)
Is this whole essay just a convoluted way of saying "sometimes we have bad luck"? Well, I guess it is, but I like the framing of "using math to influence our emotions". I also prefer framing performance as intrinsically being a spectrum, and different outcomes being on the same bell curve of performance.