Underdogs, upsets, and overachievers

Abstract

This paper explores three phenomena in sport that are connected to narratives of hope: underdogs, upsets, and overachievers. Each of these phenomena is complex. I seek not only to understand the intrinsic nature of these phenomena, but also to explain why they captivate the imagination. After exploring some partial explanations of their enduring appeal, I focus on how the drama associated with underdogs, upsets, and overachievers in sport illuminates the human condition and awakens our sense of possibility when the odds are against us.

Keywords:

• Underdogs
• upsets
• overachievers
• possibility
• hope

Acknowledgments

I would like to offer special thanks to Paul Gaffney, whose numerous helpful comments helped improve this paper. Before this project was resurrected, drafts of this paper were presented at the 35th Annual Meeting of the International Association for the Philosophy of Sport, Ljubljana, Slovenia, September, 2007 and at the Group Meeting of the International Association for the Philosophy of Sport, American Philosophical Association Central Division Meeting, Chicago, IL, April, 2008.

Notes

1. This account is drawn from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, ‘Miracle on Ice,’ https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_on_ice, accessed July 25, 2016, and Krantz (2005).

2. For an interesting, nontraditional take on the story of David and Goliath see Gladwell (2015).

3. See Dixon’s (2002, 228–232) discussion of ‘inferior performances by superior athletes’ (228). The designation ‘failed athletic contests’ occurs in Dixon (2002, 220, 226).

4. See Wilner and Rappoport (2006), chapter 2, ‘The Guarantee,’ 21–35.

5. I am indebted to Paul Gaffney for this point.

6. The account below of the Leicester City football team draws especially from Hill (2016).

7. ‘How an underdog (2016) UK soccer team beat impossible odds.’ PBS NEWSHOUR. TOPICS>WORLD>SPORTS. May 3, 2016. www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/how-an-underdog-uk-soccer-team-beat-impossible-odds/, accessed July 24, 2016. To give some perspective regarding the odds against Leicester City, the odds for the Loch Ness monster being discovered were 500–1, and the odds for Elvis being found alive were 2000–1, as they were for Kim Kardashian becoming president.

8. Matters are further complicated if all events are determined. If they are determined, then overachievers or underachievers are merely following scripts that they are determined to enact. Even so, the terms ‘overachiever’ and ‘underachiever’ may still be useful, insofar as they are assigned relative to expectations.

9. I am indebted for this point to a member of the audience when I presented a version of this paper at the Group Meeting of the International Association for the Philosophy of Sport, American Philosophical Association Central Division Meeting, Chicago, IL, April, 2008.

10. For further discussion of situation-indexed capability see Fry (2011b, 3).

11. I am indebted to Paul Gaffney for the suggestion regarding moral victories.

12. As Paul Gaffney suggested to me, it seems possible that both opponents in the same contest could overachieve or underachieve.

13. See Fry’s (2011a) parallel treatment of comebacks in sport.

14. For a discussion of moral luck in sports, see Simon (2007). On the varieties of moral luck, see Statman, editor (1993).

15. For Ranieri’s comment see ‘How an underdog UK soccer team beat impossible odds.’ In an article for The Telegraph, Katie Driver (2016) draws seven lessons about what it takes to be successful from Leicester City’s triumph. They are: ‘Be determined,’ ‘Play to your strengths,’ ‘Take one day at a time,’ ‘Find your supporters,’ ‘Work with the right people,’ ‘Build the team,’ and ‘Keep yourself fit.’ ‘7 things underdogs Leicester City can teach us all about success.’ The Telegraph. Lifestyle/Women. May 3, 2016. www.telegraph.co.uk/women/work/leicester-city-premier-league-win-7-things-underdog-leicester-c/, accessed July 24, 2016.

16. I am indebted to Paul Gaffney for suggestions regarding what I have referred to as ‘extrinsic’ considerations.

17. Dixon’s (2002, especially 225–226; 230–232) view on whether the ability to perform well under pressure is an athletic excellence is nuanced.

18. In a related vein, in commenting on the antics of former tennis star John McEnroe, Randolph Feezell (Feezell 2006, 15) writes: ‘The behavior may be unsportsmanlike, but I don’t see anything unfair about it. Psychological strength in combating such tactics is a part of tennis as well as other sports.’

19. See Simon (2007), especially 14–16. The example is found on 15–16. For Loland, this would be a case in which ‘luck follows skill’ (quoted in Simon 2007, 17.) On luck in sport see Loland (2002, 87–92; 94–95). Simon (2007) draws on Loland’s discussion. Loland does not view all luck in sports as endangering the meritocratic core of sport. See norm III.3.1. in Loland (2002, 84).

20. For these considerations regarding the dramatic possibilities of playoffs, I am indebted to Paul Gaffney. For a defense of ‘championship pluralism,’ which involves utilizing a variety of ways for determining champions, see Harper (2016).

21. I am not suggesting that all individuals will automatically root for the underdogs. As noted, some individuals may have vested interests in victory by the favorites. Such things as nationalistic interests play a role here. Nevertheless, even individuals with such vested interests may still have respect for underdogs who achieve an upset. The fact that underdogs and upsets captivate the imagination of many seems indisputable.

22. See Fry’s (2011a) parallel treatment of comebacks in sport.

23. On Schadenfreude in sport see McNamee (2010).

24. See Fry’s (2011a) parallel treatment of comebacks in sport.

25. See Fry’s (2011a) parallel treatment of comebacks in sport.

26. As Paul Gaffney helpfully pointed out to me, there are also other kinds of narratives in play here. There are cautionary lessons to be learned about hubris, as well as about underestimating one’s chances.

27. The once heralded story of Lance Armstrong perhaps contains elements of all of these categories of inspiration. The question is whether all of these cases reduce to forms of self-interestedness. For a defense of the possibility of altruism in the face of the psychological egoist’s challenge, see Rachels and Rachels (2015, 65–71).