Predict the number of centurys made at The Masters

[spike]

CONGRATS to matoski in getting closest to predicting the total number of centuries at the 2010 Masters and therefore winning the contest!

[wildJONESEYE]

spike maths was not youre strongest point.....

i think you will find there was 20 centuries making me on 21 closer than matoski on 17

[wildJONESEYE]

closest without going over ????????????????

this was a guess the centuries total and not pontoon or bruce price is right lol

[jrc750]

spike maths was not youre strongest point.....

i think you will find there was 20 centuries making me on 21 closer than matoski on 17

but you were not allowed to go over - so tough

[matoski]

spike maths was not youre strongest point.....

i think you will find there was 20 centuries making me on 21 closer than matoski on 17

Yes you are, and i'm the first to congratulate you. Well done wild!

[ore]

closest without going over ????????????????

yeah

[wildJONESEYE]

god im far to competitive for my own good i want to win everything lol

[spike]

spike maths was not youre strongest point.....

i think you will find there was 20 centuries making me on 21 closer than matoski on 17

When starting this thread i made it quite clear from the start if no one predicted the correct no then (the prediction that was closest without going over) would win..

[cally]

But 21 is still closer to 20 than 17 innit...

[ja.]

When starting this thread i made it quite clear from the start if no one predicted the correct no then (the prediction that was closest without going over) would win..

how going under is better than going over. its not fair.

[ore]

how going under is better than going over. its not fair.

but the rules are set before, not after.
maybe next time spike will reconsider how to formulate them.

my guess spike wanted to avoid co-winners thingie as happened in the UK century predictions

[ja.]

but the rules are set before, not after.

but it doesnt make them less unfair

my guess spike wanted to avoid co-winners thingie as happened in the UK century predictions

well we would have 1 winner this time anyway because 21 is indeed closer to 20 than 17. just as well, 10 more people could have predicted 17.

[wildJONESEYE]

how going under is better than going over. its not fair.

i bet you been both ways

[ja.]

i bet you been both ways

hey im trying to tell spike that you should be the winner here, so shush!

[ore]

well we would have 1 winner this time anyway because 21 is indeed closer to 20 than 17. just as well, 10 more people could have predicted 17.

but then nobody was as nutts as matoski!