Tie-breaker

Can't focus huh -- must be the "motivational clinic" coming up on Friday!  

Ok -- I'm making an assumption here, so this might need some "tweaking".  But based on what I'm seeing, the team that wins will most likely hit 100 percent of team hitting 100% of goal.  If that's the case, perhaps yardage percentage "above" team goal could be the tie breaker.   So, for example, suppose that team A's team yardage goal was 100,000 yards, and 110,000 yards were completed then team a would be 10% above goal.  -- Now suppose Team B had the same 100,000 yard goal, and as a team completed 125,000 yards -- then team B would win -- because they were 25% above goal. 

Don't know if that would work or not, but then another possibility would be that each team would be recalulated without the 100% cap and that would determine the winner.  Just some thoughts.

What better motivation than that.

I agree with McFuzz.

This is my thinking, too.

100% of goal = winners.

< 100% of goal = Florida residents.

I agree with Renee on this as well.  Every 100% team is a winner.   On the other hand -- to answer McFuzz comment on teams with smaller numbers -- It is true that larger teams have to get more to work to make it to the top, but the smaller teams require as much, as every team members personal results carries a heavier weight! 

For example -- Team with 10 members -- 1 members not making goal -- impacts 10%

Team with 5 members -- 1 member not making goal -- impacts 20%

I vote for Renee's solution

As it's been stated many times already, I also think that if anyone makes 100% they should be declared winners- Afterall, that's what this was about. I'm not sure there's any real fair tiebreaker. However, if there must be a tiebreaker, the % of team yardage over goal for each team that made/exceeded 100% of their goals IMHO offers the most fair way to weight teams of different sizes and skills----

If we base it on total team yardage or number of people on the team, although it was perhaps easier for the smaller teams to meet their goals, smaller teams were always at a disadvantage and never really had a chance to win... 

Perhaps a more fair way to do this in the future would be to limit team sizes or require a minimum number of participants per team. 

 Just my two cents!  

Way to go Team UTAH!!!! 

I've said it in earlier challenges and I will say it again, using yardage/mileage over goal just isn't a fair way to judge these challenges.  Some people set a goal which they know they will really have to stretch themselves to reach.  That is the whole purpose of these challenges.  It isn't fair to penalize these people by rewarding those who might have set a slightly lower goal which they knew they would achieve with relative ease. 

My vote goes to giving the 100% achievers equal first place status.

My second vote goes to those who had to overcome adversity.  Surely I get a slight advantage with this one :-)

Cheers,

Malgal