Page 2 of 6

Re: - now a spam thread -

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 4:26 pm
by Gavin Chipper
I definitely agree with Tom that if there was going to be a CoC with contestants that were on before the 30th birthday, then it should have taken place before the 30BC. Also there was a special between Kirk Bevins and Chris Davies and between Ed McCullagh and Graeme Cole that were sort of mini CoCs. Having said that, the first of these games had weird numbers so wasn't a "proper game" and there was no special between Jack Hurst and Oliver Garner, which should have been between the two that did happen.

With the supreme championship, they combined the CoC with it. They finished a series, had the CoC that was due, but then made that part of the supremes (it was group A), so only the winner of that CoC continued on. So they could have done that with the 30BC as well, but with Apterous being a recent invention, it would have mean getting rid of a lot of the best players early on. If they had done it, it might have been more satisfying in some sense, but it wouldn't have meant any more games or visits to the studio for people who got to go in it. It would have been the same tournament but restructured and with two champions

It's been nearly five years since the last CoC, easily a record already, so whenever it happens there will have been a massive gap between this one and the last one. So if you include contestants from all series since the last one, I think too many players from more recent series will be excluded - players who came too late for the 30BC anyway. So while you might be able to make a logical case, I think practically it is too late for a CoC that includes players in the 30BC.

So basically, I would say series 67 (that Paul James won) onwards plus also recent players who couldn't make the 30BC, such as Oliver Garner and Eoin Monaghan.

(And can a moderator or Callum change the thread title, please?)

Re: - now a spam thread -

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 4:32 pm
by Innis Carson
Mark Deeks wrote:
should be given priority
Didn't say this.
So you don't think any 30BC contestants should be included in the next CoC at the expense of people who didn't get the chance to play in it? Either that, or you've misunderstood me.

Re: - now a spam thread -

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:23 pm
by Rhys Benjamin
Jennifer Steadman wrote:3. Rhys - your lists don't make sense. Surely byes would be randomly decided (how did you calculate the top 2 seeds for the first list anyway?). Also not sure why you'd have Adam in there over Ed in your second list (surely series winner trumps runner-up?), or invite Heather to a seven-episode CoC but not a 15-ep one.
Looking back through Mike's excellent notes (which I bookmarked!) for COC10, the byes weren't randomly decided. I think, looking back through the wiki, the byes were for the unbeaten players, Kate Ogilvie and Scott Mearns. The other four players had all lost - Simon Cooper in the Grand Final, Terence English in a Prelim, John Ashmore in a Prelim, and Terry Knowles in a Semi Final.

With my formula, I decided upon winners and runners-up who weren't in the 30BC. Adam therefore took precedence over Ed, although I agree Ed might have precedence in the actual event.

For the 15-ep one I decided to include 30BC contestants. That meant that it was either going to be Nicki Sellars or Heather Styles in the 7-ep and not the 15-ep.

Re: - now a spam thread -

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:55 pm
by Rhys Benjamin
And with regard to what Mark's saying, I detect a little cynicism as, let's not forget, he lost in the 30BC Prelims!

Re: - now a spam thread -

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 10:04 pm
by Dave Preece
Firstly all the Supreme Championship contestants also had their chance at a CofC before the SC.

The 30BC was kind of like a 2nd SC (although I realise it wasn't, exactly the same), but the problem was Countdown messed up IMO; they used to have a CofC every 4 series, and had the 1st SC after 32 series and 8 CofCs, so it was all very nice and neat and tidy.

Then they decided to mess things up (for whatever reason) and stop having CoCs after every 4 series and didn't have a 2nd SC after series 64.

This all started to happen around the time of the change from 9 to 15 rounds, for some reason?

They should have carried things on the way they started, it was all very nice and neat and tidy.

BUT, they didn't... So to remedy things they should kick-start a new CoCs (the XIV) and include all contestants who haven't had their chance at a CoC, this would mean having a 16 contestant, comp with all top players that are available to play from series 60 to whenever they do it (although if I was a betting man, I'd bet a lot of my cash on it NEVER happening).

:-(

Re: - now a spam thread -

Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 3:28 am
by Mark Deeks
Rhys Benjamin wrote:And with regard to what Mark's saying, I detect a little cynicism as, let's not forget, he lost in the 30BC Prelims!
No Rhys, you gleeful pot stirrer you. I wouldn't get into a CoC anyway

Re: - now a spam thread -

Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 11:20 pm
by Eoin Monaghan
Jennifer Steadman wrote:
Mark Deeks wrote:If that's the case, why therefore would those not invited to the 30th BC now be considered candidates for a future CoC?
I think due to changes in filming procedure by the time of 30th BC, Eoin wasn't allowed to film unless he'd taken his GCSEs? I've heard it was something convoluted like that, anyway. I don't doubt he would've been invited if not for rules like that.
Yeah that's correct.

Re: - now a spam thread -

Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 11:28 pm
by Eoin Monaghan
Rhys Benjamin wrote:
Jennifer Steadman wrote:3. Rhys - your lists don't make sense. Surely byes would be randomly decided (how did you calculate the top 2 seeds for the first list anyway?). Also not sure why you'd have Adam in there over Ed in your second list (surely series winner trumps runner-up?), or invite Heather to a seven-episode CoC but not a 15-ep one.
Looking back through Mike's excellent notes (which I bookmarked!) for COC10, the byes weren't randomly decided. I think, looking back through the wiki, the byes were for the unbeaten players, Kate Ogilvie and Scott Mearns. The other four players had all lost - Simon Cooper in the Grand Final, Terence English in a Prelim, John Ashmore in a Prelim, and Terry Knowles in a Semi Final.

With my formula, I decided upon winners and runners-up who weren't in the 30BC. Adam therefore took precedence over Ed, although I agree Ed might have precedence in the actual event.

For the 15-ep one I decided to include 30BC contestants. That meant that it was either going to be Nicki Sellars or Heather Styles in the 7-ep and not the 15-ep.
This still doesn't explain why you gave Adam precedence over Ed... they were both in the 30BC.

Re: - now a spam thread -

Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 11:38 pm
by Rhys Benjamin
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
Rhys Benjamin wrote:
Jennifer Steadman wrote:3. Rhys - your lists don't make sense. Surely byes would be randomly decided (how did you calculate the top 2 seeds for the first list anyway?). Also not sure why you'd have Adam in there over Ed in your second list (surely series winner trumps runner-up?), or invite Heather to a seven-episode CoC but not a 15-ep one.
Looking back through Mike's excellent notes (which I bookmarked!) for COC10, the byes weren't randomly decided. I think, looking back through the wiki, the byes were for the unbeaten players, Kate Ogilvie and Scott Mearns. The other four players had all lost - Simon Cooper in the Grand Final, Terence English in a Prelim, John Ashmore in a Prelim, and Terry Knowles in a Semi Final.

With my formula, I decided upon winners and runners-up who weren't in the 30BC. Adam therefore took precedence over Ed, although I agree Ed might have precedence in the actual event.

For the 15-ep one I decided to include 30BC contestants. That meant that it was either going to be Nicki Sellars or Heather Styles in the 7-ep and not the 15-ep.
This still doesn't explain why you gave Adam precedence over Ed... they were both in the 30BC.
My fault, I thought Adam wasn't, I couldn't remember him being in it at all!

Re: - now a spam thread -

Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 11:47 pm
by Eoin Monaghan
Rhys Benjamin wrote:
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
Rhys Benjamin wrote:
Looking back through Mike's excellent notes (which I bookmarked!) for COC10, the byes weren't randomly decided. I think, looking back through the wiki, the byes were for the unbeaten players, Kate Ogilvie and Scott Mearns. The other four players had all lost - Simon Cooper in the Grand Final, Terence English in a Prelim, John Ashmore in a Prelim, and Terry Knowles in a Semi Final.

With my formula, I decided upon winners and runners-up who weren't in the 30BC. Adam therefore took precedence over Ed, although I agree Ed might have precedence in the actual event.

For the 15-ep one I decided to include 30BC contestants. That meant that it was either going to be Nicki Sellars or Heather Styles in the 7-ep and not the 15-ep.
This still doesn't explain why you gave Adam precedence over Ed... they were both in the 30BC.
My fault, I thought Adam wasn't, I couldn't remember him being in it at all!
He replaced Marcus Hares and was (narrowly) beaten by Innis in the first round.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 12:44 am
by Callum Todd
Glad to see this thread back on track and free of hostility.

I previously was one of those who believed that Series 60-66 should not be considered for the next CoC but now, having read Mark's comments, I've been talked around. I think he makes a valid point that the 30BC, while having many similarities with a CoC, was not treated enough like a CoC at the time to make it fair to exclude series 60-66 contestants from the next CoC. Thanks for your input Mark, it was really quite enlightening for me.

However, I think it would be best for 60-66 to be represented in a separate CoC to series 67 onwards, and those from 60-66 who did not play in the 30BC should be given first priority when allocating places for that CoC. So Eoin and Oliver, etc, would be chosen over those who got a place in the 30BC, should it come down to competition for places.

Obviously that idea is a bit pie in the sky, as it speculates two CoCs occurring fairly soon, when in reality we may not even have one. But in an ideal world, that's how I'd have it :)

Re: - now a spam thread -

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 10:36 am
by Matt Morrison
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
Jennifer Steadman wrote:
Mark Deeks wrote:If that's the case, why therefore would those not invited to the 30th BC now be considered candidates for a future CoC?
I think due to changes in filming procedure by the time of 30th BC, Eoin wasn't allowed to film unless he'd taken his GCSEs? I've heard it was something convoluted like that, anyway. I don't doubt he would've been invited if not for rules like that.
Yeah that's correct.
Due to not having taken GCSEs? That's mental. I thought it was just purely about age, which at least makes some kind of sense.
There must have been some people on recently who hadn't completed their O Levels - so is it "age, unless you've passed GCSEs" or something?

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 11:05 am
by Jennifer Steadman
Sometimes things change and it's either not practical or necessary to repeat things just for the sake of what happened in the past. To flip the viewpoint, how many people are up in arms because contestants in series 67 onwards will never get to take part in the 30th BC, arguably the most prestigious of tournaments? Surely that's just as 'unfair' as CoC deprivation for pre-67ers. Holding a tournament solely for the sake of fulfilling some dodgy notion of fairness seems entirely gratuitous and, as Gev, Johnny and Tom have said, the timing makes no sense whatsoever.

Someone could always arrange a 60-66 CoC on Apterous if there's that much clamour for one. Marcus, Ben, Zarte...?

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 12:12 pm
by Callum Todd
Jennifer Steadman wrote:Sometimes things change and it's either not practical or necessary to repeat things just for the sake of what happened in the past. To flip the viewpoint, how many people are up in arms because contestants in series 67 onwards will never get to take part in the 30th BC, arguably the most prestigious of tournaments? Surely that's just as 'unfair' as CoC deprivation for pre-67ers. Holding a tournament solely for the sake of fulfilling some dodgy notion of fairness seems entirely gratuitous and, as Gev, Johnny and Tom have said, the timing makes no sense whatsoever.

Someone could always arrange a 60-66 CoC on Apterous if there's that much clamour for one. Marcus, Ben, Zarte...?
Very good point.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:39 pm
by Johnny Canuck
Callum Todd wrote:
Jennifer Steadman wrote:Someone could always arrange a 60-66 CoC on Apterous if there's that much clamour for one. Marcus, Ben, Zarte...?
Very good point.
Problem is, then the conundrum for the final game could be something piss-easy. Unless we changed the rules for this tourney only.

Re: - now a spam thread -

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 3:57 pm
by Eoin Monaghan
Matt Morrison wrote:
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
Jennifer Steadman wrote: I think due to changes in filming procedure by the time of 30th BC, Eoin wasn't allowed to film unless he'd taken his GCSEs? I've heard it was something convoluted like that, anyway. I don't doubt he would've been invited if not for rules like that.
Yeah that's correct.
Due to not having taken GCSEs? That's mental. I thought it was just purely about age, which at least makes some kind of sense.
There must have been some people on recently who hadn't completed their O Levels - so is it "age, unless you've passed GCSEs" or something?
I was 16 at the time of competition, which is the minimum age requirement, but part of the legislation stated I had to have completed my GCSEs*. It's the reason Kai could compete but I couldn't; I'm actually older than him, but he was moved up a year ( :roll: ) and so had completed his GCSEs. :)

*I think that's the gist of it.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:00 pm
by Mark Deeks
Someone could always arrange a 60-66 CoC on Apterous if there's that much clamour for one.
Not fair on Carl.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:43 pm
by Gavin Chipper
Mark Deeks wrote:
Someone could always arrange a 60-66 CoC on Apterous if there's that much clamour for one.
Not fair on Carl.
It's not, and you should fight for your hero.

But anyway, people have made the point that not all players who would probably have made a CoC made it into the 30BC. That could include your hero Carl. But there's no guarantee of a place in the CoC for any non-champions. And in the CoC that Scott Mearns won, there were only six people, so some players who might have been included in a longer CoC missed out. None of these players are owed anything.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:45 pm
by Mark Deeks
:D

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 6:41 pm
by Dave Preece
If it happened (which it probably will not), this is how I see it...

CofC XIV (S60-63)

Realistic contenders for the title, depending on form and draw:

Kirk Bevins
Chris Davies
Innis Carson
Oliver Garner (outside chance)
Jack Hurst (fave)
Eoin Monaghan (outside chance)

CoC XV (S64-67)

Realistic contenders:

Adam Gillard
Ed McCullagh
Mark Deeks
Graeme Cole (outside chance)
Jack Worsley

Wide open this one would be (XV).

CoC XVI (S68-71)

Contenders so far:

Giles Hutchings
Andy Platt (outside chance)
Dylan Taylor
Callum Todd
Jen Steadman
???
???
???
???

Again, wide open!

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Mon Jan 06, 2014 3:44 pm
by Countdown Team
Pretty sure a C of C will happen again at some point, but it's a headache that can wait for now. Haven't looked into the logistics of who takes part and from when etc, that's a nightmare yet to come, but gut-feeling and immediate instinct at the moment is that it should comprise of non-30th Birthday series contestants, if only to give other people a shot at the glory and turn a new page, so to speak. Would definitely consider Eoin and Oliver, as changes in legislation ruled them out of past contests through no fault of ours or theirs, but beyond that it'll be a no-win situation, as not everyone can be included and there will always be a number of people who think they've been given a bum deal. Likelihood is we'll think about a few weeks at the start of 2015, with 16 participants being the ideal number.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:16 pm
by Andy Platt
^ I think that sounds fair. Might Marcus also be a consideration after he had to withdraw from 30BC?

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Mon Jan 06, 2014 6:55 pm
by Zarte Siempre
Andy Platt wrote:^ I think that sounds fair. Might Marcus also be a consideration after he had to withdraw from 30BC?
If he is, def. an apto trip to Salford.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Mon Jan 06, 2014 7:15 pm
by Callum Todd
Zarte Siempre wrote:
Andy Platt wrote:^ I think that sounds fair. Might Marcus also be a consideration after he had to withdraw from 30BC?
If he is, def. an apto trip to Salford.
Might be getting a little ahead of myself here but... #TEAMMARCUS.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 12:40 am
by Zarte Siempre
Callum Todd wrote:
Zarte Siempre wrote:
Andy Platt wrote:^ I think that sounds fair. Might Marcus also be a consideration after he had to withdraw from 30BC?
If he is, def. an apto trip to Salford.
Might be getting a little ahead of myself here but... #TEAMMARCUS.
#TEAMMARCUS

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 1:06 am
by JackHurst
Andy Platt wrote:^ I think that sounds fair. Might Marcus also be a consideration after he had to withdraw from 30BC?
No disrespect to Marcus and Glen, but they've both already appeared as winners in two series years apart. Both nice guys, and it would be good to see them back on tv, but if it was a toss up between either of them and somebody else who had only been in one series, out of fairness I'd pick the other person.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 1:30 pm
by Charlie Reams
Countdown Team wrote:Pretty sure a C of C will happen again at some point, but it's a headache that can wait for now. Haven't looked into the logistics of who takes part and from when etc, that's a nightmare yet to come, but gut-feeling and immediate instinct at the moment is that it should comprise of non-30th Birthday series contestants, if only to give other people a shot at the glory and turn a new page, so to speak. Would definitely consider Eoin and Oliver, as changes in legislation ruled them out of past contests through no fault of ours or theirs, but beyond that it'll be a no-win situation, as not everyone can be included and there will always be a number of people who think they've been given a bum deal. Likelihood is we'll think about a few weeks at the start of 2015, with 16 participants being the ideal number.
Woo!

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 10:30 pm
by Dave Preece
Countdown Team wrote:Pretty sure a C of C will happen again at some point, but it's a headache that can wait for now. Haven't looked into the logistics of who takes part and from when etc, that's a nightmare yet to come, but gut-feeling and immediate instinct at the moment is that it should comprise of non-30th Birthday series contestants, if only to give other people a shot at the glory and turn a new page, so to speak. Would definitely consider Eoin and Oliver, as changes in legislation ruled them out of past contests through no fault of ours or theirs, but beyond that it'll be a no-win situation, as not everyone can be included and there will always be a number of people who think they've been given a bum deal. Likelihood is we'll think about a few weeks at the start of 2015, with 16 participants being the ideal number.
To be fair, you can't fault Countdown Team for giving us at least a bit of info here, they didn't have to post, so, thanks.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 1:17 pm
by Callum Todd
Dave Preece wrote:
Countdown Team wrote:Pretty sure a C of C will happen again at some point, but it's a headache that can wait for now. Haven't looked into the logistics of who takes part and from when etc, that's a nightmare yet to come, but gut-feeling and immediate instinct at the moment is that it should comprise of non-30th Birthday series contestants, if only to give other people a shot at the glory and turn a new page, so to speak. Would definitely consider Eoin and Oliver, as changes in legislation ruled them out of past contests through no fault of ours or theirs, but beyond that it'll be a no-win situation, as not everyone can be included and there will always be a number of people who think they've been given a bum deal. Likelihood is we'll think about a few weeks at the start of 2015, with 16 participants being the ideal number.
To be fair, you can't fault Countdown Team for giving us at least a bit of info here, they didn't have to post, so, thanks.
I don't think anyone was faulting them, the reaction has been unanimously positive.

Thanks for posting, Countdown Team! Good to hear that another CoC is on the cards.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 1:21 pm
by Jon Corby
Callum Todd wrote:
Dave Preece wrote:
Countdown Team wrote:Pretty sure a C of C will happen again at some point, but it's a headache that can wait for now. Haven't looked into the logistics of who takes part and from when etc, that's a nightmare yet to come, but gut-feeling and immediate instinct at the moment is that it should comprise of non-30th Birthday series contestants, if only to give other people a shot at the glory and turn a new page, so to speak. Would definitely consider Eoin and Oliver, as changes in legislation ruled them out of past contests through no fault of ours or theirs, but beyond that it'll be a no-win situation, as not everyone can be included and there will always be a number of people who think they've been given a bum deal. Likelihood is we'll think about a few weeks at the start of 2015, with 16 participants being the ideal number.
To be fair, you can't fault Countdown Team for giving us at least a bit of info here, they didn't have to post, so, thanks.
I don't think anyone was faulting them, the reaction has been unanimously positive.

Thanks for posting, Countdown Team! Good to hear that another CoC is on the cards.
Yeah, I couldn't make head nor tail of Dave's post there either.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:03 pm
by Gavin Chipper
Jon Corby wrote:
Callum Todd wrote:
Dave Preece wrote:To be fair, you can't fault Countdown Team for giving us at least a bit of info here, they didn't have to post, so, thanks.
I don't think anyone was faulting them, the reaction has been unanimously positive.

Thanks for posting, Countdown Team! Good to hear that another CoC is on the cards.
Yeah, I couldn't make head nor tail of Dave's post there either.
I don't think anyone was saying you could. :?

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:10 pm
by Jon Corby
Gavin Chipper wrote:
Jon Corby wrote:Yeah, I couldn't make head nor tail of Dave's post there either.
I don't think anyone was saying you could. :?
To be fair, I can't fault Gavin for pointing that out, so, thanks.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:12 pm
by Matt Morrison
Jon Corby wrote:
Gavin Chipper wrote:
Jon Corby wrote:Yeah, I couldn't make head nor tail of Dave's post there either.
I don't think anyone was saying you could. :?
To be fair, I can't fault Gavin for pointing that out, so, thanks.
I don't think anyone was faulting Gavin, the reaction has been unanimously positive.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:49 pm
by Mark Deeks
Well now this is becoming a spam thread.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:53 pm
by Matt Morrison
WARNING! Off-topic fun detected!

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:55 pm
by Andy Platt
You can't fault people for wanting to have a laugh now and then

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:30 pm
by Zarte Siempre
Andy Platt wrote:You can't fault people for wanting to have a laugh now and then
I FUCKING CAN :evil: :evil: :evil:

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 8:36 pm
by JackHurst
Callum Todd wrote:
Dave Preece wrote:
To be fair, you can't fault Countdown Team for giving us at least a bit of info here, they didn't have to post, so, thanks.
I don't think anyone was faulting them, the reaction has been unanimously positive.
Seems as though Callum and a couple of other have never come across somebody with Dave's phrasing.

"To be fair, I can't fault blah" is just another way of saying something is really good or somebody has done a really good job etc.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 8:38 pm
by JackHurst
Sorry, that sounds like I am having a sly go at Dave for the way he speaks. Thats not what I meant at all, please dont take offence!

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 9:19 pm
by Rhys Benjamin
Zarte Siempre wrote:
Andy Platt wrote:You can't fault people for wanting to have a laugh now and then
I FUCKING CAN :evil: :evil: :evil:
Yes, we all know that Zarte has a soft spot.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:00 pm
by Jon Corby
JackHurst wrote:
Callum Todd wrote:
Dave Preece wrote:
To be fair, you can't fault Countdown Team for giving us at least a bit of info here, they didn't have to post, so, thanks.
I don't think anyone was faulting them, the reaction has been unanimously positive.
Seems as though Callum and a couple of other have never come across somebody with Dave's phrasing.

"To be fair, I can't fault blah" is just another way of saying something is really good or somebody has done a really good job etc.
I am very familiar with the phrasing, its usage jars here IMO.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:44 pm
by Zarte Siempre
Jon Corby wrote:I am very familiar with the phrasing, its usage jars here IMO.
This.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 11:02 pm
by Dave Preece
JackHurst wrote:Sorry, that sounds like I am having a sly go at Dave for the way he speaks. Thats not what I meant at all, please dont take offence!
I'm not as 'butthurt' as some on here think; hope I phrased that OK for you clever kids?

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 11:04 pm
by Dave Preece
Callum Todd wrote:
Dave Preece wrote:
Countdown Team wrote:Pretty sure a C of C will happen again at some point, but it's a headache that can wait for now. Haven't looked into the logistics of who takes part and from when etc, that's a nightmare yet to come, but gut-feeling and immediate instinct at the moment is that it should comprise of non-30th Birthday series contestants, if only to give other people a shot at the glory and turn a new page, so to speak. Would definitely consider Eoin and Oliver, as changes in legislation ruled them out of past contests through no fault of ours or theirs, but beyond that it'll be a no-win situation, as not everyone can be included and there will always be a number of people who think they've been given a bum deal. Likelihood is we'll think about a few weeks at the start of 2015, with 16 participants being the ideal number.
To be fair, you can't fault Countdown Team for giving us at least a bit of info here, they didn't have to post, so, thanks.
I don't think anyone was faulting them, the reaction has been unanimously positive.

Thanks for posting, Countdown Team! Good to hear that another CoC is on the cards.
I think you'll find Countdown Team has been 'faulted' by many on here in the past.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 4:11 pm
by Gavin Chipper
Jon Corby wrote:
JackHurst wrote:Seems as though Callum and a couple of other have never come across somebody with Dave's phrasing.

"To be fair, I can't fault blah" is just another way of saying something is really good or somebody has done a really good job etc.
I am very familiar with the phrasing, its usage jars here IMO.
I thought you were mocking Callum initially with your
Yeah, I couldn't make head nor tail of Dave's post there either.
Or are you just anti-everyone in this thread?

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 5:10 pm
by Jon Corby
I despise Callum, but no, I wasn't mocking him in this instance.

if Dave's point was simply "thanks for the info, Countdown Team" he phrased it in an utterly diabolical manner.

I'm joking about despising Callum as well, obviously. I'm not anti-anybody in this thread.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 5:24 pm
by Jon O'Neill
Jon Corby wrote:I despise Callum, but no, I wasn't mocking him in this instance.

if Dave's point was simply "thanks for the info, Countdown Team" he phrased it in an utterly diabolical manner.

I'm joking about despising Callum as well, obviously. I'm not anti-anybody in this thread.
How bout now

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 9:05 pm
by Matt Morrison
hashtag Team Prees

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 5:06 pm
by Oliver Garner
Certainly flattered to be considered for such a tournament - thought my onscreen Countdown days were over! I would love to do it but it would have to fit with other stuff and it would also mean I'm putting my unbeaten record at risk, which is always my reason (along with exams) whenever people ask why I haven't done a CoC or similar.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 5:26 pm
by Jon O'Neill
Oliver Garner wrote:Certainly flattered to be considered for such a tournament - thought my onscreen Countdown days were over! I would love to do it but it would have to fit with other stuff and it would also mean I'm putting my unbeaten record at risk, which is always my reason (along with exams) whenever people ask why I haven't done a CoC or similar.
Nobody respects an unbeaten record if you bottle the CoC (see Holden, Beevers)

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 6:51 pm
by Oliver Garner
Jon O'Neill wrote: Nobody respects an unbeaten record if you bottle the CoC (see Holden, Beevers)
Yeah, true for people on here. No one else though.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 7:03 pm
by Innis Carson
Oliver Garner wrote:
Jon O'Neill wrote: Nobody respects an unbeaten record if you bottle the CoC (see Holden, Beevers)
Yeah, true for people on here. No one else though.
Yeah, the rest don't even know they have one.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 9:05 pm
by Zarte Siempre
Innis Carson wrote:
Oliver Garner wrote:
Jon O'Neill wrote: Nobody respects an unbeaten record if you bottle the CoC (see Holden, Beevers)
Yeah, true for people on here. No one else though.
Yeah, the rest don't even know they have one.
Lol xD

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 12:43 am
by Mark Deeks
People will love you regardless, Oli. Go for it. No regrets.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 1:45 am
by Jon O'Neill
Mark Deeks wrote:People will love you regardless, Oli. Go for it. No regrets.
Unless you don't go for it, in which case, everyone will hate you :D

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 9:38 am
by Mark Deeks
Ooooh, pressure.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 9:12 pm
by Eoin Monaghan
Woo, super news! Much like Oliver, I'm flattered to be considered, and the scrapping of January modules would help too. :)

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2014 3:46 pm
by Johnny Canuck
Any further (publically announceable) news on this? How long in advance was CoC XIII announced?

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2014 7:26 pm
by Graeme Cole
Johnny Canuck wrote:Any further (publically announceable) news on this? How long in advance was CoC XIII announced?
I don't know about CoC XIII, but the 30th Birthday Championship, which was a bigger event so I expect required a bit more organisation time, was announced in late September 2012, and the first games were recorded about two months after that.

Re: The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 10:38 pm
by Countdown Team
There WILL be another C of C.

Logistics yet to be worked out as we're not that far ahead, but likely on-screen in Jan 2015 for 3 weeks, so just 16 players and definitely excluding 30th birthday participants, for no other reason other than to give different people a chance to play again. Filming would be in November / December.

:o