Robotics. I’m not that good really, but win random sampling, my chances are quite high.
Oh, man… Maybe MacGyver trivia? I’m not a superman or anything, but it’s probably something I could beat 99 random people in.
Any of my real interests or talents, I can readily admit I’m probably just average at.
Ok, give me 5 facts about MacGyver I wouldn’t know. I’ve seen the show but it’s been decades.
Um… let’s see.
Even though it was set primarily in LA (and all over the world), half the seasons were filmed in Vancouver.
MacGyver is always super anti gun, which we do get the backstory for. But in the pilot episode, he straight up is just shooting an assault rifle.
The building used for the Phoenix Foundation headquarters is The Qube in Vancouver. I think that is a cool looking building.
His first name is Angus. I think that’s a pretty well-known one if you’ve seen the later seasons.
Dana Elcar started losing his eyesight (pretty sure to glaucoma) and they wrote his blindness into Pete’s character.
Idk, those aren’t super good ones, I guess I need a refresher.
That’s awesome! Thanks friend. And now you have a reason to go watch it again.
What episode is the intro clip of him eating ice cream from?
I’m not sure the name of it… but I can say it’s early season 1. Basically all of those clips come from like, 5 or 6 episodes of Season 1. Maybe I wouldn’t do so well in this contest.
Euros, as they’re currently worth a bit more.
I put both as sometimes Americans aren’t aware of the conversion rate
Giving me a hand job. So even if I lose, I’ve still won. 100 times.
I suppose I’d probably be the best at being literally Me.
Feels like cheating though.
Being me
Accurately reciting the lyrics to ultimate showdown of ultimate destiny
That is an easy question.
Shooting, combined carbine and pistol, using Practical Competition Shooting League (competition/armor division) rules. Five stages.
I’m in the 20% percentile for PCSL shooters; I am not good when compared to them. On the other hand, very, very few people nationally compete in any kind of shooting sport. People that personally own firearms make up roughly 32% of the US population. People that practice regularly with the firearms that they own make up a much smaller percentage of that. Of the people that practice, people that compete at all, much less regularly, make up a tiny fraction of all firearm owners.
Even if the 99 truly randomly chosen people are all in the US, I’ve got pretty decent odds that I’ll be competing against people that have no experience in shooting on the clock. If those 99 random people are people from anywhere, then, given that gun ownership is very low pretty much everywhere else in the world, the odds are very, very good that the people I’d be competing against wouldn’t even know how to effectively operate a firearm, would be unable to follow the rules, and would end up getting disqualified for major safety violations.
But if the challenge was international, you could get unlucky. Some countries like Germany, Switzerland, or Russia have a very popular shooting sports community. But I like your idea. I would take olympic archery. I’m fine enough to participate in national championships, but I don’t stand a chance to the pros. Plus, it would be that an average person doesn’t have the muscles to shoot 72 arrows on a target at competition distance.
While it’s true that there’s a popular shooting sports community in Switzerland for sure, the style of shooting done in PCSL is pretty particular to the US. Modern sporting rifles–what some would call assault-style rifles–are very strictly regulated in most countries. I would expect that countries most likely to have people proficient in that specific discipline of movement and shooting would be from Switzerland, Finland, and Czechia. Air rifle and air pistol are more popular in Russia because of the strict regulations on firearm ownership. (Technically you can compete in PCSL using a lever action or bolt action rifle, but it would be an enormous handicap.)
Mental math. When I was a kid I could answer math problems faster than they could be punched into a calculator which was a neat party trick I guess. I can still do that but I also understand more advanced math. i.e calculating roots, fermi questions, calculus etc. Back when I was being assessed for ADHD, one of the things that was tested is mental arithmatic. Less than one out of a thousand of my peers can do what I did there. (they couldnt find an upper limit) So there’s less than a 10% chance that any of those 99 random people could beat me in a test of mental math.
Speedrunning Getting Over It
Jesus
Put yourself in one in a million and it’s still a safe bet.
Take my dog for a car ride without puking. She’s an anxious mess, nobody stands a chance!
“Not winning the $1 million”. Whoever they try to give the money to would automatically fall into last place with a 99 way tie for first.
Android debloating, fixed gear bicycle maintenance, and navigation without any tools.
Ohhh if I was in your hundred fixing bikes isn’t a good one for you.
Seems unfair that I get to do the choosing.
But I would probably pick amount of time you can edge during a goon sesh
Backgammon, pretty sure I’m in the top 1% of all people since it’s not a super popular game and I’m a somewhat decent player.
That seems like a risky choice considering it’s a game of chance.
It doesn’t state it would just be one game, nor that you would have to win, just that you had to be better, which is easy to demonstrate with a program that measures the error level as backgammon is a game of skill with a large chance factor and not a game of chance.
backgammon is a game of skill with a large chance factor
Or in other words, a game of chance.
Just like Russian roulette
Apart from the fact some enlightenment on the subject is only a simple query away, you can also test yourself whether there is skill is involved. Just download a free backgammon program like gnu backgammon and play the computer on the easiest setting a couple of times. You will get destroyed. Also, if it were about luck, you would have a completely random world champion every year instead of recurring winners. Not that you would care because you chose not to educate yourself and make an asinine comment anyway on a subject you clearly know nothing about.
I know it is not based on luck but luck does play a factor. Good players do lose to worse players and actually more often than in games like chess. Its exactly like poker. Sure its a game of statistics and calculated risks but its no risk if it can’t fail. My point is, i wouldn’t place a 1mil bet on my opponent not getting doubles more often than me over one game, or me messing up over 2 games. Let alone assume that no one else would be good at it.
Arguing that you are the best overall player without having to win a game or prove it in any way is just a weird way of trying to win this discussion.
The question doesn’t state anything about a game or amount of games, just that you will be compared. Of course there is variance, but that’s not what is being measured. All I’m saying is that if you take 99 random people and me, I’m fairly sure that I would be the best backgammon player.
Ok sure. You can have it. Won’t argue
