Golly, that’s a surprise. I’ve really not kept up with New Zealand news.
Looks like I am back up to third place, my high water mark of last year. I guess that makes me the Marco Rubio of the Death Pool. CAMJAY77 and Registered at Last can fight over which is Donald Trump.
Feek is more points than I’ve gotten in all the years I’ve played put together!
I’m still have no points.
I probably won’t be doing it that way, as I’ve always found that way unwieldy and puzzling/confusing.
My score will be 1. xxx 2. (four people tied and listing them all) 3.(seven people tied and listing them all) 4. (eleven people tied and listing them all), etc
That’s too bad. The way Baker is doing it is pretty standard for competitions. It’s more accurate in terms of knowing how someone placed relative to the field.
For example, if three people tied for first place, then calling the next person “2nd” is misleading since they actually came in fourth.
I agree with Tangent. I think the way Idle Thoughts is planning to do it is less accurate and more confusing.
Is it bad that upon hearing of Feek’s passing, my first thought was “Poor Baker!”
I agree. It would seem bizarre if you could be in second place but not be in the top ten.
Let us not annoy the guy running the store before it opens, okay? :dubious:
“With great power, comes great irresponsibility.”
-Deadpool 
I disagree. I call it “A three way tie for first”. So three people got first. The next person is the only person who got second place. He didn’t get fourth place, he got second, because the three above him all got a tie for first.
Of course, the Death Head can do it as he chooses, either Baker’s way or the wrong way.
If three runners break the tape at exactly the same instant, the one who follows does not come in second: there are three runners better than that runner, so that runner is literally fourth.
Well, this is damned confusing, and there are ten months before the beginning.
:dubious:
Yeah, that’s in a race. In something that has scores, I consider a high score score of 20,000 (gotten by three people) to be a three way tie for first place and a person to have a score of 19,999 to have taken second place.
…or sharing second place with others depending on how many others got a score of 19,999.
In pro golf, for example, if two people tie for second place then they are both listed as “2nd” but they typically split the prize money for second and third places. The next golfer in line is listed as “4th” and gets the prize money for 4th place.
Then there could be dozens of people in the top ten.
I understand that, but my logic is this and you really can’t argue against it:
Let’s say there is a contest that has scores and five people get 30,000 points, which is the highest anyone gets who is in the contest. So they all are tied for first. They got the highest score of anyone else. So obviously you can’t say to one person “You got 30,000 points, you win” and say to another “You got 30,000 points, you don’t win” (unless the rule is “whoever gets to 30,000 points first”, but that’s not the case in the death pool so let’s say it’s not the case in this example either).
But I realize nobody is debating that in here… where the disagreement seems to come from is what we’d say to the person who got, say, 28,932 points.
Now most of you seem like you’d say that person got 4th place…but yes or no, IS 28,932 NOT THE SECOND-HIGHEST SCORE ANYONE got? It is. It’s the second highest/second place score, behind 30,000…so, in my mind, any person (be it one person or more than one) who got 28,932 got the second highest score…thus SECOND place.
So, put into a scoreboard, it would be like this:
Mark 30,000 <----Highest score
Jay 30,000
Tim 30,000
Helen 30,000
Peter 30,000
Mary 28,932 <-------Second highest score
Tommy 27,655 <--------Third highest score
Jean 27,655
Steve 27,655
Elaine 27,012 <-------- Fourth highest score
Or, put more simple, a list of scores, with doubles taken out:
30,000 <–first place score
28,932 <–second place score
27,655 <–third place score
27,012 <–fourth place score
Going with looking at it that way, I’d say 27,012 was fourth place with the fourth highest score, taking home the fourth place prize (if there is one) and the three people in third place should either all get a third place prize of their very own or split it.
And the three tied for first either all get the first prize or split the prize or a new sudden death quickie tie-breaker round should happen to decide the winner out of those three.
That’s all just me, though…I realize it’s done differently in other venues, but if I’m running this, I’m going to keep score like I’m used to. Of course, if Baker or someone else wants to not use me as host next year for this reasoning, that’s fine too, I don’t mind. 
I’d understand..
…but really, I think it’s a small enough thing to where it really shouldn’t matter much anyway, haha.
That’s right.
Anyway, sorry for the hijack, I will stop talking about it beyond this post.