Ok, so the baseball analogy was not totally correct. To further
illustrate (and alter those illustrations I have made):
1) A no-hitter in baseball would be analogous to a game in which one
team got all the tossups that were answered, not necessarily all 20
(i.e., 18 out of 20), but the other team either didn't ring in or had
all negs (0 for 20). This says that the other team "didn't get any
hits."
2) A perfect game in baseball would be analogous to a 20-tossup game
by one team, meaning that the winning team allowed no hits, but they
also allowed no walks (unanswered tossups), errors (negs by that
team), or hit batsmen (doing something silly that causes the other
team to be read a tossup by itself).
3) A true perfect game, 800 to 0 or whatever, would be like a
baseball game in which every batter was struck out on three pitches
(one could also say a game in which every batter was retired on the
first pitch).
For comparison purposes, this would probably be the way to go.
However, a mere 20-tossup game (however a 20-tossup game can
be "mere") is still not a perfect game by definition.
Josh, who couldn't get 20 tossups in a game if playing against his
mousepad