The Louis-Schmeling Paradox

On the Guardian's cricket feed today somebody was talking about the Louis-Schmeling Paradox, something I can find no reference to online (despite a lot of history between the two boxers) and so probably their own invention, but it struck a chord with me anyway.

"In sports economics there is this concept called the Louis-Schmeling Paradox which states that although you want your team to win every game it plays, if it actually did then the certainty of victory kills interest."

The choice between a whitewash and a tense, nervy game. Everyone likes to see their own team trounce somebody now and again, but for entertainment value isn't a hard-to-call, dramatic-to-the-wire game much better value? (This is especially the case in cricket, where over 5 tests you can end up watching (or losing interest in) a competition that is over with over ten days play remaining.)

Ow

But what about boardgames? Where is the balance between entertainment and likely victory struck? How willing are players to play a game they don't expect to win? And is playing a game you are confident of winning less exciting than an even field?

Although I hope I'm not so competitive as to completely rule out any game I can't win, I have to admit my reticence in playing Agricola is at least partly down to my conviction I'm destined for 3rd or 4th place (partly also because it's a long game to play with this conviction in place at the outset). Actually to be fair I do equally badly at Railways but I'm much more amenable to that, maybe because it feels a less pre-ordained experience, and there's an exploratory aspect absent from Agricola...

How does Adam feel when he sits down to play a thinky, strategic game with the rest of us? With the most regular attendees at least, he is recognisably the best at managing multiple game strands; at recognising what other players aims are as well as his own and adjusting his moves accordingly. Obviously he likes to win - who doesn't? - but is it too easy? I'd hope from the stats we strike a reasonable balance of pushing him a little, even if we may have some more luck-based games to thank for this. I think Tinner's Trail is a great leveller - it does have luck but by and large you can manage your luck, and when I sit down to play it I have no idea who is going to win.

I think we're quite lucky at GNN in this respect - usually Adam is the person to beat, but we don't have anyone who steamrollers everyone in every season. Our Louis-Schmeling balance is perhaps just about right in that we have a bookie's favourite but everybody has a chance to make their mark over an evening - or indeed a season. In fact having some odds to 'buck' makes it feasibly more exciting for the rest of us!

That said, it would be lovely to see someone hit the Perfect Five* before long. I was actually disappointed when Adam missed out on it recently.

*five wins in a row on the form table