I added two. What would you do? Support your team now!

10-2=8

8-2=6
Single digits! They said it couldn’t be done!

6-2=4

4-2=2

2-2=0
0

Where’s the OP? :slight_smile:

Beaten by the Duckster
High five!

Woot!

Well, if the Maple Leafs never win the Stanly Cup again, I’ll always have this. :wink:

High Five back!!

Thanks to Leaffan, For You and others who made it all possible.

Now I can go pee.

Damm well played!
Who said negative campaigns never win?

I predict the demise of the Additive Party, riven by dissidence and internal conflicts for the next two election cycles.

We came to play. We just wanted it more, that’s all.

Every game is different. Momentum means nothing because the season is taken one game at a time. We came to play. That’s our strategy.

Defense wins championships.

On paper we were as good as anyone else. It just comes down to staying healthy and keeping focused.

You’ve got to give the Additive Party credit here. They’re a good team, and anyone can win on any given night. We took advantage of some third period absenteeism and kept the math in their end during the final minutes.

Aw frick. The game started so slow, I went to bed expecting it to still be 250 +/- 20 when I got up.
Damn. Ambushed in my sleep. Well played, Team Negative.

0-2= -2

FINALLY! The NEGATIVE TEAM can finally come out to rule the world!

Ok, not really. I didn’t open this thread until just now and I wanted to play. But it’s over. But NOTHING is over until I say it’s over!!

Now, it’s over.

Well that escalated quickly. XD

Congratulations to Team Negative for winning! :smiley:
Props to the few night watchers from Team Add who kept the fight on.
You are outnumbered but you will be remembered.

Well, I guess I underestimated the sheer drive, commitment, and positivity (or should that be negativity?) of my fellow team members - well played! Although mainly I missed the part of the OP which made it obvious you were allowed to post to the thread more than once. I assumed everyone was only allowed one vote. Anyone want to try a version along those lines (but with a smaller target)?