All of that is true, hunter001, however, I still don't feel that that basic and literal definition of a loss leads to necessarily good candidates. If you're the Donald and you have one candidate A that makes 1000 dollars and another candidate B that makes 1050 dollars in a challenge, I don't know that you'd be able to say with any certainty that the extra 50 dollars means that Candidate B is more worthy of being your apprentice. There are a lot of other factors to consider. If the team that had the men that were supposed to look like their definition of homosexuals had one by 50 dollars, I doubt Trump would truly feel that that type of leadership would translate into an excellent candidate for a multimillion dollar real estate operation. To me, rather than just firing two people from the losing teams, sometimes, I'd like to see him say, "you know what ---Team B lost, but you know I've gotta say that Sam from Team A was so ridiculously terrible, even in their victory, that I don't think we have to waste any more of his time. Call back Sam in here and tell him he's fired." Now that would be sweet.