Image courtesy of TeamRankings.com
A friend of mine plays several weekly football pools…straight picks…no point spreads, with the Monday Night total being the tiebreaker. He showed me the payoff breakdown of the largest, which has a pot of over $5000 per week. First place takes home over $3K. Second about $1K, third about $500, fourth is about $400, and fifth about $300. Considering it’s only $10 per week, per sheet to play, and one can play as many sheets as one likes, it is a good deal. Merely placing once would get a weekly 1-sheet player his/her money back, plus extra.
All good, until I noticed a sixth payout slot: $100, regardless of pot size, would go to……………..get ready for this……….THE BIGGEST LOSER!
That is right. The person who wins the least gets $100.
When I first saw this, my thinking was it keeps the struggling players engaged, which after all, keeps the money pot high. More money for the winners and everybody is happy right?
Wrong!
THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!
Why reward the Biggest Loser when those who consistently miss only two games get nothing?
Understand that this particular pool has nearly 700 entries. It is not uncommon to go into the Monday Night game with only one loss and be out of the money because five with one loss picked the same team as he did, which means he cannot catch the five leaders. To consistently get through an NFL Sunday with only two losses takes some skill, and yet you walk away with nothing. However, the Biggest Loser gets $100? What this means is that in theory, one could tank the pool, lose on purpose, and win $1700. I know that this would never happen because losing the most has a degree of chance just as winning the most does. However, even if you were the Biggest Loser twice; the $200 would pay for your season and then a $30 return.
So, I asked my friend about this and his response was that they do not let anyone win “The Biggest Loser” prize more than once to prevent just what I feared.
Now here is how a “scheming demon” would get around this: He would simply pretend to have recruited new players, which would all in fact be him, so that he could continually tank games and pocket the $100 per week. Again, even though he would not be the Biggest Loser every week, he still games the system because we have set it up to essentially reward losing.
Now some will expand this concern of mine to the larger society and the debate over entitlements and a larger social safety net, and even calls to move toward a collective first society and away from predatory Capitalism.
It is not that deep.
Those of us who are adamant about moving away from Capitalism are simply saying the basic needs the collective 99% should take priority over the selfish desires of 1 percent and their never-ending attempt to horde the world’s resources for themselves.
The key term is needs.
Winning a football pool is not a need. Nor is the Biggest Loser’s plight the result of a rigged system, both historically and til this day.
He simply either does not pay attention or does not know what he is doing. It is ok. It does not make him a bad person, but it also does not warrant him a reward for his “pick em” incompetence.
Let everyone win by putting the work in and paying attention. Otherwise, this pool is destined for the participation trophy category.
