Winner and Loser Lane

From Freakonomics:  A great story where a guy named his kids "Winner" and "Loser" to see what would happen to them. Well, Winner went on to become a career criminal. Loser was a success story.

From the book:

This might explain why, in 1958, a New York City man named Robert Lane decided to
call his baby son Winner. The Lanes, who lived in a housing project in Harlem, already
had several children, each with a fairly typical name. But this boy—well, Robert Lane
apparently had a special feeling about this one. Winner Lane: how could he fail with a
name like that?
Three years later, the Lanes had another baby boy, their seventh and last child. For
reasons that no one can quite pin down today, Robert decided to name this boy Loser. It
doesn’t appear that Robert was unhappy about the new baby; he just seemed to get a kick
out of the name’s bookend effect. First a Winner, now a Loser. But if Winner Lane could
hardly be expected to fail, could Loser Lane possibly succeed?
Loser Lane did in fact succeed. He went to prep school on a scholarship, graduated from
Lafayette College in Pennsylvania, and joined the New York Police Department (this was
his mother’s longtime wish), where he made detective and, eventually, sergeant.
Although he never hid his name, many people were uncomfortable using it. “So I have a
bunch of names,” he says today, “from Jimmy to James to whatever they want to call
you. Timmy. But they rarely call you Loser.” Once in a while, he said, “they throw a
French twist on it: ‘Losier.’” To his police colleagues, he is known as Lou.
And what of his brother with the can’t-miss name? The most noteworthy achievement of
Winner Lane, now in his midforties, is the sheer length of his criminal record: nearly
three dozen arrests for burglary, domestic violence, trespassing, resisting arrest, and other
mayhem.
These days, Loser and Winner barely speak. The father who named them is no longer
alive. Clearly he had the right idea—that naming is destiny—but he must have gotten the
boys mixed up