Predict the number of centuries made at the Welsh Open

[Mignon]

Err... I’ll have to ask my sister Pythia but I bet she’ll come up with something like ‘it will be Ronnie not another one’.

Of course, the problem is always the same: where should one put the comma....

[matoski]

27 centuries.

[ore]

I was thinking about (if no one manages to predict the correct no of centuries, then the nearest too either under or over the actual amount would be the winner). Though say if the number of centuries made was 20, and we had four predictions of 19 and three of 21 we could end up having 7 winners in total. IMO having so many winners would devalue the contest.

So instead, the winner/winners will be the one who (predicts the correct number of centuries made) at the 2010 Welsh Open.

Well, it still could be 7 people who would predict the same number. (Now 4 have 27, and some 5 other numbers also have been taken more than once).

And if the nearest predictions would count, I think the risk of having even 7 not precise predictions is not that big.
For example in Masters the number of centuries was lowish compared to the the more likely/expected version, therefore, there were not many people chosing those low numbers = if nobody gets the totally precise prediction, it is likelly to be because the actual was too low or too high, and not many people will have made such an extreme guess anyway.
That should hold if the number of predictions made does not increase much.
And this way we'd be sure we do have a winner

Another way would be to count just that member who made the prediction earlier = always only ONE winner! But maybe it's a bit too cruel for those who are not logged in 24/7

My guess is 30.

[RGCirencester]

What if for next tournament everyone guesses the number of centuries and high break? Closest without going over the high break and prediction would win. Would at least cut down the number of people. Though we'd probably have a lot of wishful thinking 147 guesses.

[mushka]

Another way would be to count just that member who made the prediction earlier = always only ONE winner! But maybe it's a bit too cruel for those who are not logged in 24/7

I think I'm in favour of this, too.

[ore]

What if for next tournament everyone guesses the number of centuries and high break? Closest without going over the high break and prediction would win. Would at least cut down the number of people. Though we'd probably have a lot of wishful thinking 147 guesses.

Creative. Sounds good to me!

[spike]

Well, it still could be 7 people who would predict the same number. (Now 4 have 27, and some 5 other numbers also have been taken more than once).

And if the nearest predictions would count, I think the risk of having even 7 not precise predictions is not that big.
For example in Masters the number of centuries was lowish compared to the the more likely/expected version, therefore, there were not many people chosing those low numbers = if nobody gets the totally precise prediction, it is likelly to be because the actual was too low or too high, and not many people will have made such an extreme guess anyway.
That should hold if the number of predictions made does not increase much.
And this way we'd be sure we do have a winner

Another way would be to count just that member who made the prediction earlier = always only ONE winner! But maybe it's a bit too cruel for those who are not logged in 24/7

My guess is 30.

Thanks for your suggestions ore and i hear what you are saying. I think i will leave things as they are for this event and just see how it goes.

We may end up having multiple winners doing it my way or we may not. I dont have a problem so much if we end up with 3 or more winners, if they do end up correctly predicting the correct number. It's going to take a stroke of luck to predict the correct total anyway..

[Mr P]

Wouldn't it be a better way if you actually set up the numbers from the 15 to 35, and then members pick them as first come first served, then once there gone threr gone.

I don't know if this has been suggested of not, but there you go.

[ore]

Thanks for your suggestions ore and i hear what you are saying. I think i will leave things as they are for this event and just see how it goes.

Welcome, and take a look at RG version too.
I very much agree that rules should not be changed for this tournament anymore - it's always the most fair/transparent if rules are known before people start predicting.

[spike]

I quite like the sound of both Rob's and ore's suggestions. Like i say i will see how things go with the Welsh, but may well decide to change the rules for China.

Thank's for your input guys it is appreciated..

[brendan147]

What if for next tournament everyone guesses the number of centuries and high break? Closest without going over the high break and prediction would win. Would at least cut down the number of people. Though we'd probably have a lot of wishful thinking 147 guesses.

Great post RGC...

[spike]

Only just over 4 hours to go now.

Make your prediction soon before it's too late..

[pat39]

I'll go for 31.

[intheblitz]

27 please!!

[dantuck_7]

I'll go for 47.