Way back before the internet and online gaming there was a game, the name of which now escapes me, that people played in a group, in which pairs of people traded with each other. As one person in each pair lost the 'survivors' traded with oneanother until there was only one person left with all the money. On one occasion I disrupted the game as it neared two thirds of its course and triggered the compulsory acquisition of all wealth and distributed it evenly and began the game again. There was still only one winner, but more importantly, the people knocked out on the first round in the first game were knocked out in the first round of the second game (I was one of them - so, beware incompetent ideologues, eh?). I know that doesn't answer your question. But it demonstrates the 'truth' of the 'great man's' assertion.