IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0267541.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the role of chance in fencing tournaments: An agent-based approach

Author

Listed:
  • Chiara Zappalà
  • Alessandro Pluchino
  • Andrea Rapisarda
  • Alessio Emanuele Biondo
  • Pawel Sobkowicz

Abstract

It is a widespread belief that success is mainly due to innate qualities rather than external forces. This is particularly true in sports competitions, where individual talent is usually considered the main, if not the only, ingredient to reach success. In this study, we explore the limits of this belief by quantifying the relative weight of talent and chance in fencing, a combat sport involving a weapon, with the help of both real data and agent-based simulations. Fencing competitions are structured as direct elimination tournaments, where randomness is explicitly present in some rules. We focused on épée, which is one of three disciplines. We collected data on international competition results and annual rankings, in the range 2008–2020, for male and female fencers under 20 years old (Junior category). Then, we built the model calibrated on our dataset and parametrized by just one free variable a, describing the importance of talent—and, consequently, of chance—in competitions (a = 1 indicates the ideal scenario where only talent matters, a = 0 the complete random one). Our agent-based approach can reproduce the main stylized facts observed in data, at the level of both single tournaments and the entire careers of a given community of épée fencers. We find that simulations approximate very well the data for both Junior Men and Women when talent weights slightly less than chance, i.e. when a is around 0.45. We conclude that the role of chance in fencing is unusually high and it probably represents an extreme case for individual sports. Our findings shed light on the importance of external factors in both athletes’ results in tournaments and throughout their career, making even more unfair the “winner-takes-all” disparities that often occur between the winner and the other classified competitors.

Suggested Citation

  • Chiara Zappalà & Alessandro Pluchino & Andrea Rapisarda & Alessio Emanuele Biondo & Pawel Sobkowicz, 2022. "On the role of chance in fencing tournaments: An agent-based approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(5), pages 1-17, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0267541
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267541
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0267541
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0267541&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0267541?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert H. Frank, 2016. "Success and Luck: Good Fortune and the Myth of Meritocracy," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 10663.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Emmanuel K. Yiridoe, 2021. "Fostering a culture of equity, diversity, and inclusion in the Canadian agricultural economics profession," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 69(1), pages 5-15, March.
    2. Hernán Bejarano & Joris Gillet & Ismael Rodriguez‐Lara, 2018. "Do Negative Random Shocks Affect Trust and Trustworthiness?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 85(2), pages 563-579, October.
    3. Guenther, Isabel & Tetteh-Baah, Samuel Kofi, 2019. "The impact of discrimination on redistributive preferences and productivity: experimental evidence from the United States," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203652, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    4. Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2019. "Values of Economists Matter in the Art and Science of Economics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 472-499, August.
    5. Spencer Bastani & Sebastian Koehne, 2024. "How Should Consumption Be Taxed?," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 80(3), pages 259-302.
    6. Mikhail Drugov & Margaret Meyer & Marc Möller, 2024. "Selecting the Best: The Persistent Effects of Luck," Economics Series Working Papers 1049, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    7. Vrooman, J. Cok & Boelhouwer, Jeroen & Gijsberts, Mérove, 2023. "A contemporary class structure: Capital disparities in the Netherlands," SocArXiv zunqs, Center for Open Science.
    8. Elias Bouacida & Renaud Foucart, 2022. "Rituals of Reason," Working Papers 344119591, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    9. Jan Vandemoortele, 2021. "The open‐and‐shut case against inequality," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 39(1), pages 135-151, January.
    10. Zunino, Diego & van Praag, Mirjam C. & Dushnitsky, Gary, 2017. "Badge of Honor or Scarlet Letter? Unpacking Investors' Judgment of Entrepreneurs' Past Failure," IZA Discussion Papers 11017, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Alessandro Pluchino & Alessio Emanuele Biondo & Andrea Rapisarda, 2018. "Talent Versus Luck: The Role Of Randomness In Success And Failure," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(03n04), pages 1-31, May.
    12. Andreas Siemoneit, 2023. "Merit first, need and equality second: hierarchies of justice," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 70(4), pages 537-567, December.
    13. Mikhail Drugov & Dmitry Ryvkin, 2019. "The shape of luck and competition in tournaments," Working Papers w0251, Center for Economic and Financial Research (CEFIR).
    14. Arnaud Lefranc & Alain Trannoy, 2017. "Equality of opportunity, moral hazard and the timing of luck," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 49(3), pages 469-497, December.
    15. Preuss, Marcel & Reyes, Germán & Somerville, Jason & Wu, Joy, 2022. "Inequality of Opportunity and Income Redistribution," VfS Annual Conference 2022 (Basel): Big Data in Economics 264138, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    16. John Komlos, 2022. "Running the U.S. Economy at Full Throttle Is a Stressful Variant of Capitalism," CESifo Working Paper Series 9966, CESifo.
    17. Peter Andre, 2025. "Shallow Meritocracy," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 92(2), pages 772-807.
    18. Granaglia, Elena, 2019. "Can market inequalities be justified? The intrinsic shortcomings of meritocracy," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 284-290.
    19. Alberto Alesina & Stefanie Stantcheva & Edoardo Teso, 2018. "Intergenerational Mobility and Preferences for Redistribution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(2), pages 521-554, February.
    20. Bejarano, Hernán & Gillet, Joris & Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael, 2021. "Trust and trustworthiness after negative random shocks," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0267541. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.