Because the "most skilled" could mean many different things. If you knew who the most skilled was before a contest began, and that was the only way to judge merit, then why compete? Hand the medal to the most skilled (mathematically and scientifically verified of course) and then move on to the next award ceremony. Dealing with chance, and changing circumstances is something that cannot be predicted and measured. To suggest a 'lesser skilled' competitor has no chance of winning ignores all evidence to the contrary.

As far as why would I bother supporting a 'lesser skilled' competitor, well, honestly, I don't mind losing. The one who wants it the most and works the hardest for it, the one who does not quit despite the odds or what those who live and die by them say, the one who continues, perseveres, and finishes regardless of his place is the one that deserves my admiration.

The one who had been told he was going to win, knew he was going to win, and felt there was no chance of losing has risked nothing, and thereby gained very very little with his accomplishment.

That is why I would root for the underdog, or less skilled, in a test of skill. I don't cheer the sun when it rises every day because it is a foregone conclusion and therefore, it is an event of little (though not empty of) excitement.

Now if a guy were to say that through force of will he could keep the sun from rising for a few seconds. Well, despite my better judgment, I'd have to root for him just a little.

I would hope that explains my point of view. And I would hope you'd be less likely to label those who's experience differs from yours as 'insane' in the future. But again, to each his own.

In reply to this comment by gorillaman:
I don't know why you would want a test of skill to be won by anyone but the most skilled. Insanity, presumably.

In reply to this comment by Lolthien:
To only support the most 'competent' contender is to only root for the favored athlete in any competition.

And that my friend, is decidedly un-American ;-)

Rooting for the underdog, ESPECIALLY from your own country, is a well practiced tradition than pays off so much more rarely than pulling for the dominant player, but when it pays off, it pays off big.

Talent gets you to the Olympics, but in a close race, heart wins it everytime.

I don't know why you would want a test of skill to be won by anyone but the most skilled. Insanity, presumably.

In reply to this comment by Lolthien:
To only support the most 'competent' contender is to only root for the favored athlete in any competition.

And that my friend, is decidedly un-American ;-)

Rooting for the underdog, ESPECIALLY from your own country, is a well practiced tradition than pays off so much more rarely than pulling for the dominant player, but when it pays off, it pays off big.

Talent gets you to the Olympics, but in a close race, heart wins it everytime.

To only support the most 'competent' contender is to only root for the favored athlete in any competition.

And that my friend, is decidedly un-American ;-)

Rooting for the underdog, ESPECIALLY from your own country, is a well practiced tradition than pays off so much more rarely than pulling for the dominant player, but when it pays off, it pays off big.

Talent gets you to the Olympics, but in a close race, heart wins it everytime.