This is an ethical problem, of both theoretical and practical interest. The description is somewhat long; I apologize.

Your team is in a round-robin competition with several other teams. The four top winners in the round-robin will advance to the semi-finals, a knockout in which the #1 team will play #4 and #2 will play #3. Going into the final match of the round-robin, the #1 and #2 teams have already been decided. If you win this match, you will be #3; if you lose, you will be #4.

During the round-robin you learned that your team does much better against the #1 team than against the #2 team. So you would rather play against #1 in the semi-final. To do that, you must be #4. In other words, you must lose this match.

What do you do?

Is it ethical to throw this match to give your team a better shot at getting to the finals? Or does sportsmanship require that you try your best to win this match even though it worsens your chances to make it to the final?

Is it ethical to win this match when your obligation to your team is to give it the best chance to win overall? Or does sportsmanship require that you try your best to win the tournament, even if it means that you have to throw this match?

In baseball, for example, one might reasonably argue that the batter has an ethical responsibility to try his best to reach first base safely. Does this make the sacrifice bunt unsportsmanlike? Are these situations comparable?

Please don't complain that the conditions of contest are unfair because they put you in this position. I know they are, but you're stuck with them. Sorry.

 

Good question M.

Still not SURE that's what I'd do (dive) but when it comes down to the reason to compete being 'winning'... that means the tourney more than the indiv event.

A dive meaning more likely to win the tourney... probably do it if not think long-and-hard about doing it.

Good Q.

 

I would say that as long as it is for the benefit of your team and not for another outside reason, then it would be alright to lose the match (game/whatever), on purpose.

It is similar to the idea that to win the war, you may have to lose a few battles.....

 

AGREED. That was a *major* part of my consideration.

Apollo wa *said* to have dumped results to let his buddy quality for the O's. Don't believe in doing that.

 

I feel the goal should be to win the final game, and provided you win, hope that you beat #2 in tourney play, and #1 beats #4, and you get your preferred game against #1 (who it is believed is a more advantagous match for you) for the championship.

Consider:
- 4 team round-robin: Team #1 is 3-0, #2 is 2-1, and the other 2 are currently 0-2. If you "throw" the match, you end up 0-3. You're defeated, and the team may begin to feel that they are inferior and cannot compete.
- Since it's not clear, it's possible that this is more than a 4 team round robin. In that case, the inferiority complex may not play a part, but the rest still stands.
- Win or lose, chances are you're going to have to beat #1 and #2 eventually to win the tourney. By winning this last RR game, you've built some positive momentum against a quality opponent. Major confidence booster!
- A victory over team #2 in the 1st round puts you in great position - you've beat 2 quality opponents in a row, and are up against a team you feel you can beat for all ther marbles. If #4 upsets #1, you know you can beat them (#4) since you already did it in RR play. A loss against team #2 in the semi ends your tourney in a respectable way.
- The alternative scenario (throwing the match) pits you against #1 in the semi, who you felt you could beat. Even if you do beat them, you still have to play #2 (who you feel is a more difficult foe than #1) for the championship, so you've really gained nothing. In fact you might be worse off: you have to play a team which you perceive to be the superior of the 2, in a situation where the stakes are higher.
- If merely getting to the finals qualifies as success to you, maybe you need to re-evaluate your career choice as a "coach"

- Ethics: throwing the match goes against what competition was about. "Losing the battle to win the war" is a really bad analogy. Nobody ever said "let our troops die, we'll pay 'em back next time". The whole point of competing is to test your skill against that of your opponents. Throwing a match is demeaning to you, your team, and to the "sport" (whatever it may be).

Conclusion: Throwing the round robin match doesn't significantly improve your chances to win this tourney (as I explained earlier), so to do so would be a poor choice on both the ethical and competitive levels.

 

you don't want to develop a losing mentality - winning becomes habit and so does losing.

If you follow what the pro-coaches do - where they don't want to be caught for giving "throwing the game instructions" what you might do is field maybe a 50-75% strength team - so if they win, great you can still do even better in the final - and if you lose, well you are changing the players anyway and the loss might be expected with the weaker team.

 

I was also going to suggest this......

If it is a team game you can take the opportunity to rest players and also introduce younger, less experienced players and give them an opportunity to experience the "big time" hopefully making them better and stronger when you need to call on them in case of injury or the like.....