Whether it is the smallest greyhound in the rabbit chase, or a fifth grade team playing a sixth grade team, it doesn’t seem to matter. Wherever a contest is about to take place, observ- ers are openly or quietly rooting for the underdog. This has always been an interesting phenomenon to me, but having observed many battles in my long life, I have noticed that people generally do favor the underdog. I was watching Jeopardy the other night, and one of the contestants was falling way behind, and I found myself coaching him in terms of hitting the button faster, and I was verbally saying out loud, “Come on, you know the answer to that, etc.” (even if I did not). Why do people support underdogs and find themselves even silently openly coaching, as I sometimes do? In a series of studies reported in ScienceDaily (Dec. 20, 2007), researchers from the University of South Florida were seeking to understand why people are drawn to the Rocky Balboas and the Davids and Goliaths of the world. Using both sports and political examples, the researchers asked study participants to react to various scenarios. For instance, in one study using the Israeli and Palestinian conflict, the participants were given the same essay about the history of the area, but with different maps to reference—one showing Palestine as smaller than Israel (and thus, the underdog) and the other showing Israel as smaller. The participants consistently favored the underdog to win, i.e., the smaller country on the map. Why do people support underdogs and find them so appealing? The researchers propose that those who are viewed as disadvantaged arouse people’s sense of fairness and justice—important principles to most people. They also found that people tend to believe that underdogs put forth more effort than “top dogs,” but that favorable evaluation disappeared when the underdog status no longer applies, such as when the expected loser has a lot of available resources giving him a distinct advantage. Another reason may be because the “top dog”(as opposed to the underdog) often appears to be brutal and/or cruel, etc., and most of us want to see the brutal and cruel get their just desserts.
The researchers above mentioned the Rocky Balboas and the Davids and Goliaths of the world. I remember very clearly the thoughts that I had when I read the story of David and Goliath. I almost felt sorry for Goliath because I remember reading how practiced, and maybe even expert, David was with his sling. Slings and stones were important and deadly military weapons during Old Testament times. Modern archaeology has shed further light on this part of that ancient arsenal. The following events were recorded in the Old Testament: “It was used by the Israelites in war. (2 Kings 3:25) There were 700 Benjamites who were so skilled in its use that with the left hand they “could sling stones at a hair breadth, and not miss.” ( Judges 20:16; 1 Chronicles 12:2) With a sling and a stone, young David smote the Philistine giant (1 Samuel 17:40, 49). The sling was a valuable weapon of war; we can’t think of their slings as we think of the little slingshot boys played with in our day. I don’t believe that David was the underdog in that conflict with Goliath. Goliath was cumbered with armor and heavy weapons and David was young, fast and agile. He, like the 700 Benjamites, was probably just as skilled in the use of his weapon, and he, too, could possibly sling stones at a hair breadth. If Goliath, at nine feet tall, hadn’t been such a big mouth, challenging the Israelite army every day, I probably would have favored him as the underdog, knowing what I think I know about David’s skill. We can’t always believe the smallest, the skinniest, even the handicapped to be the underdog.