Why do you root for the underdog, the humble, the weak, and the helpless?

Many more people can relate to (being) the underdog. Few are the best at what they do. So when the lesser competitor overcomes unfavourable odds, it gives hope to the masses.
 
There's nothing wrong with rooting for the "underdog", but spiting the winner just because he or she wins or is better is pretty asinine.

I was hoping this topic would have that sort of direction to it, but it doesn't.
 
I root for the underdog because more often than not, the 'overdog' is a massive dirty word and doesn't need/deserve the support and attention, while the underdog does. There.
 
I think that the underdog seems to deserve the glory and accomplishment more. For example, who would really care about the show 'Extreme Makeover Home Edition' if they only made more extravagant homes for the wealthy? No one wants to watch that- they prefer seeing a person who has gone through difficult times to get an amazing gift.
 
Xia said:
Hmm. I clicked on this expecting it to be in Sports Arena and talking about the Browns. Don't think I'm going to argue with someome as receptive as a stone wall, though. Thanks for the laugh, though.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between rooting for the underdog and wishful thinking.

Just sayin'

And just cause I feel like counter-pointing:

Drakhun said:
1: Society admires humility. The humble work as a group towards greater successes, the arrogant destroy their peers for personal gain and in the end fall to the humble. The meek shall inherit the Earth for the mighty will not cooperate and that shall be their doom.
Click to expand...

Society admires success. Kobe Bryant can be a huge asshole to everyone and he will still have legions of fans who support not only the Lakers, but Kobe Bryant personally. There are plenty of teams with humility who have it because in every appearance they are humbled (read: destroyed) by their competitive superiors.

2: The path to advancement and enlightenment does not merely rest upon the 'strong' and the 'smart'. All members have a role in society, and if you were to try to remove the vast portion of society you consider yourself superior to, well 'Sam Colt made all men equal.'
Click to expand...

Arguably though, the strong and the smart get more recognition because they pull more weight. Leadership is the key to making a group work together, and without a strong or smart leader to follow, the motivation necessary to be productive is lacking in all other team members.


3: The goths sacked Rome, repeatedly. Next point please.
Click to expand...

And Rome crucified them, repeatedly. As well as the vast majority of the continent now known as Europe and even parts of Africa. Everyone loves a "Mighty Ducks" storyline, but in the world outside the movies the reigning champion is not there necessarily because of a their bad attitude and penchant for getting away with rule violations, but because they have in fact been superior in their field without any malfeasance whatsoever. The underdog isn't a concept until there is an "overdog," a dominating force as it were.

4: Because the good of the group far exceeds the good of the one. Look at it from a biological standpoint using this example: The lone wolf kills several small prey, and keeps himself alive. He may find a chance or two to mate in his life, and in order to live has to never get sick or injured lest he starve. The pack of wolves have much less problems finding prey, able to work together to bring down large prey like deer. All the individuals in this group get a chance at reproductive success, and minor injuries and illness are less likely to be fatal. Who is more successful, the lone wolf who has his own rabbits, or the pack sharing deer?
Click to expand...

The pack of wolves is nothing without their singular alpha to make the decisions. If they lose that "star player" then they fight among themselves, and instead of fighting deer they are staving off other wolves, a far more dangerous prospect. If you kill the queen in an ant hill, the entire colony dies. When you are as large and powerful as a bear, you don't need to share with other adult bears, as there is never enough to go around for both of you.

5: In the end all of these are self destructive behaviors. The bullies eventually bite off more than they can chew and ends up jailed or worse dead. The megalomaniac is paranoid and self obsessed, and will have little chance of producing offspring as the megalomaniac is too busy with his/her obsession. Narcissus drowned staring at his own reflection, so bad example there. There is no pretending here, no one likes a jerk, as a jerk is an awful reproductive strategy, as a jerk does not take care of their mate or his offspring.

In the end its all about survival and the lone wolf strategy falls far behind the group strategy. We love champions, but hate the arrogant because the arrogant tend not to be the champions. How many super high profile NFL players have super bowl rings? How many NFL players have Super Bowl rings. I guarantee you set B is larger than set A. Life and society are team sports, and the larger the team, the better off everyone within is.
Click to expand...

Groupthink is far more lethal to any organization because 10 people can make decisions so foolish that it amazes each one individually how they could collectively be so stupid. Groups have the capacity to be more dysfunctional, and the bigger the group the greater the propensity for dysfunction. Life requires that there be people who will stand up to errant groups making terrible decisions by committee. Without each individual in a successful team holding themselves accountable the group will fail. How many NFL players don't have Super Bowl rings? It is larger than both of your groups because their teams are either entirely dysfunctional or their individuals lack the performance necessary and rely on "the team" to win, not realizing a team is only as strong as its weakest link. It is almost impossible to drive a lone cow off a cliff, but send a hundred and watch the bodies pile up.
 
As a spectator, the reason to root for the underdog is obvious. A complete blowout is usually uninteresting, while a close match is exciting. Thus, you root for the underdog because he/they doing better will usually make for a more exciting match.
 
Interesting question, but easily answered. If the superior wins, it is just same old same old. When the New York Giants won the super bowl, all hell broke loose and all those cocky fans of the "better" team who had been bragging all year were smashed in the face and shown they werent all that. That satisfaction is what drives many people to root for the better team. Modest champions I can deal with, but many strong teams are far from that.
 
Since i like being a contraian. Most people bet the favorite so fuck that.

Simple as that.
 
Just as some commentary on Rome:

After the Punic wars, the Roman legions' light infantry were open to non-citizens, the heavy infantry were open to any citizens, and only the officers were exclusively what we think of as Romans (read upper class roman citizens).

This meant that Roman legions were actually one of the most diverse militaries for quite some time, if we exclude mercenary forces / allied auxiliaries of other militaries. So in terms of underdogs being the person who was the most like ourselves. The Roman legions actually fit the bill. Whereas the goths were simply homogeneous tribal groups that would go and occasionally get their act together and be able to sack Rome.

After all, Rome didn't fall due to outside causes, it fell because it self-destructed and was weak enough that it was vulnerable.

Furthermore, just to disagree with Deck Knight (sorry, but I don't want to agree with you :P), a large chunk of the time, Rome conquered through diplomacy. If the king would appoint Rome as his heir, then the empire wouldn't give him trouble for his reign and there would be a peaceful transition to Rome control. However, it's the military conquests that get the attention, simply because the Roman legions were powerful.

Not really sure what this had to do with the underdog discussion, but I just wanted to point that out.
 
Because people who are cocky are generally hated and it is funny to see their ego get crushed by the underdog.
 
Vicas said:
Girls like guys who look like their father.
Click to expand...

Nah, I'm not into baldness.

Anyway, people who are ruthless in life to succeed simply aren't attractive socially, in my opinion. It's as simple as that. If everyone in life had the mindset that success is power, and that's all there was to it, we'd be living in a much different world, and would probably ostracize all the weak, flimsy human beings. Maybe even kill them since they'd be such an embarassment. Anyway, it's not even realistic to have a world filled with only the strong. It would eventually implode and destroy itself.

edit: sorry I looked into this way deeper in sports, but I felt the need to do so.
 
There is more to life than survival of the fittest and there is honor in helping those who are defeseless. There is sometimes a moral obligation to helping those who need it. Chivalry is not dead and neither is being a good samaritan.
 
In reality the weak always lose no matter what even in davidvs goliath david had a shitload of advantages over golaith
david
Unsurpassed marksmanship
knowledge of weak points
and lets not forget
a angry all powerful being who wanted to kill golaith on his side
goliath
being really big
yea goliath was fucked
anyone remember the kuntucky durby that mine that bird won by a landslide with 50-1 odds? How many people bet 2$ that it would win? 5 out of 1000 people. Yea when money is involved people dont root for the underdog they root for the surefire winner.
 
Maris said:
In reality the weak always lose no matter what even in davidvs goliath david had a shitload of advantages over golaith
david
Unsurpassed marksmanship
knowledge of weak points
and lets not forget
a angry all powerful being who wanted to kill golaith on his side
goliath
being really big
yea goliath was fucked
anyone remember the kuntucky durby that mine that bird won by a landslide with 50-1 odds? How many people bet 2$ that it would win? 5 out of 1000 people. Yea when money is involved people dont root for the underdog they root for the surefire winner.
Click to expand...

I read a great quote somewhere, but can't remember where it was. Probably one of the Ender Shadow books by Orson Scott Card. It was something like:

"Everyone loves the story of David and Goliath. But what they always forget is the hundred guys who stood up before David."
 
MrIndigo said:
"Everyone loves the story of David and Goliath. But what they always forget is the hundred guys who stood up before David."
Click to expand...
obviously they had no chance to kill goliath
averedge isrealite vs goliath
isrealite vs golaith
sword and sheild sword armor and sheild
fear of being killed cocky knew he would win
around 5'6 about 7'1
weight 125 lbs weight 250 lbs
goliath obviously wins
 
I root for the underdog, because it's more enjoyable when they win

EX: Detroit Lions
EX: Nascar: ANYONE BUT JIMMIE JOHNSON


Yes, i'm a lions fan. Yes, we would've won had they called that darned false start.

Honestly, Who wants to be "oh, the colts won again. That's nice"
when you can be "THE LIONS BEAT THE CARDINALS!!!! OH YEAH!!!! ROOT BEER ALL AROUND!!!! PARTY!!!! *fires six shooters*
 
I root for underdogs since its so funny to see them win and the overdogs are like so mad and about to cry because they lost to a wimpy team or whatever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top