A Quiz For People Who Know Everything

[Alan]

I didn't do very well on the test.

Neither did the author...

very true

 

[NW-Bound]

OK, talk about tests, here's one a friend of mine just emailed me. It supposedly tests your mental acuity to detect early signs of Alzheimer. I am reproducing it here verbatim.


Ready? Go!


How fast can you guess these words?

1. F_ _K
2. PU_S_
3. S_X
4. P_N_S
5. BOO_S
6. _ _NDOM






OK. Here are the answers. See how you fare.




1. FORK
2. PULSE
3. SIX
4. PANTS
5. BOOKS
6. RANDOM


You got them all wrong, didn't you?


No, you do not have Alzheimer! You are a pervert!

 

[RunningBum]

There are actually 9ways to reach base without a hit:

1. Base on balls
2. An error (as noted by another poster)
3. Hit by a pitch
4. Interference by the catcher
5. Fielder's choice
6. Dropped 3rd strike by the catcher
7. Batted ball that hits a runner
8. Batted ball that hits the base umpire before passing a fielder
9. As a pinch runner

#7 is scored as a hit. I suspect #8 is a hit as well, but I'm not sure.

As far as boxing, people may "know" who is winning, but boxing can be very corrupt and you just can't ever be sure how it will actually be scored, so I think that's really correct.

 

[scrabbler1]

Like boxing, many olympic sports (i.e. gymnastics, figure skating) include judging at the end so it is not always known who the winner is until the last participant has finished and the judges' scores are tallied.

 

[Surfdaddy]

I assumed the sport where you didn't know the leader or the score until the end is bowling. You don't know how many balls you will throw until the last one. And you can't add up the score until you know whether you've gotten a strike or spare in the tenth frame.

Good quiz, though!

 

[TromboneAl]

Like boxing, many olympic sports (i.e. gymnastics, figure skating) include judging at the end so it is not always known who the winner is until the last participant has finished and the judges' scores are tallied.

Spectators may not know the FINAL score, but they know the score throughout the competition.

 

[ziggy29]

Got 7.5 out of 12. But question #10 is flawed and I gave myself a half point for knowing "asparagus" for #3.

 

[Texas Proud]

As far as boxing, people may "know" who is winning, but boxing can be very corrupt and you just can't ever be sure how it will actually be scored, so I think that's really correct.

Like boxing, many olympic sports (i.e. gymnastics, figure skating) include judging at the end so it is not always known who the winner is until the last participant has finished and the judges' scores are tallied.

I assumed the sport where you didn't know the leader or the score until the end is bowling. You don't know how many balls you will throw until the last one. And you can't add up the score until you know whether you've gotten a strike or spare in the tenth frame.

Good quiz, though!

(1) There's one "sport" in which neither the spectators nor the participants know the score or the leader until the contest ends. What is it?

Just wanted to put the original statement along with the quotes... it states that we would not know the score OR the leader... as long as we know one of them it is not true...

As mentioned, there are boxing matches you know who is leading... the corrupt scoring is a different matter... and sure, there are matches where you can not tell...

The Olympic sports do not qualify as they score each participant after they do their activity... so when the next participant comes to do theirs, they know who is leading at that time..... they also know the score of thoses people... sure, we do not know the winner, but we do know the leader of the people who has participated...

Same with bowling.... we know the score after every ball... so we know the score and we know who is leading... sure, we do not know the final score, but that does not mean we do not know along the way... and if someone is bowling good, they might have already won the game in the 8th or 9th frame... this breaks both of the options...

 

[RunningBum]

Forget about corruption in boxing. Many fights are too close for a casual observer to know for sure how the judge is scoring a fight. Do a few staggering punches offset a number of non-damaging scoring punches? Do you really know the exact criteria the judges are using? Did you miss some things that they saw, or vice versa? As I said, you may *think* you know, but you don't really know how a fight is going. Just because you will be right in an obvious one-sided match doesn't change the correct answer.