You Are The Ref

All discussion relevant to Countdown that is not too spoilerific. New members: come here first to introduce yourself. We don't bite, or at least rarely.
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1986
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by JackHurst »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Sat Jul 25, 2020 9:39 am Videprinter?
Come on Gev. You really have been living under a rock if you don't know what this is...
User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7822
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Matt Morrison »

Especially as he probably still goes to Ceefax for his news. Because he is so old. Like Jon Corby.
Conor
Series 54 Champion
Posts: 541
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:29 am
Location: Luton - UK

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Conor »

Graeme Cole wrote: Sat Jul 25, 2020 10:39 am If you show the scores but not the standings, it might solve the error correction problem, but for the prevention of potential tactical antics, that's almost the worst of both worlds. The majority of players, who are just naturally curious about where they're finishing in relation to others, now have that taken away from them, but the one player who's set on gaming the system can still work out the necessary details if they remember the appropriate people's wins and points totals from the previous round.
Well at least then they'd have to work for it. And easy collusion would still be pretty much out the window since two players would have independently needed to do this. And probably the biggest opportunity for gaming the system is when you only have 1 game left to play, and so you'd need to ask around for results (unless it happened to be on your table). On the face of it it's a lot of effort to ensure no gaming takes place, and determined players can always take advantage of it.
Fiona T
Kiloposter
Posts: 1447
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Fiona T »

Graeme Cole wrote: Thu Jul 23, 2020 10:43 pm
You are the tournament organiser. You clearly overhear Cock and Dick agreeing with each other not to buzz for the conundrum, so as to deliberately draw the game, giving them 5½ wins each, putting them both through to the final.

What action, if any, do you take?
Is this hypothetical or has this (or something similar enough to be recognisable) actually happened?
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2025
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Graeme Cole »

Fiona T wrote: Sun Jul 26, 2020 3:00 pm
Graeme Cole wrote: Thu Jul 23, 2020 10:43 pm
You are the tournament organiser. You clearly overhear Cock and Dick agreeing with each other not to buzz for the conundrum, so as to deliberately draw the game, giving them 5½ wins each, putting them both through to the final.

What action, if any, do you take?
Is this hypothetical or has this (or something similar enough to be recognisable) actually happened?
As far as I know, nothing similar to this has happened.
Fiona T
Kiloposter
Posts: 1447
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Fiona T »

Graeme Cole wrote: Sun Jul 26, 2020 3:09 pm
Fiona T wrote: Sun Jul 26, 2020 3:00 pm
Graeme Cole wrote: Thu Jul 23, 2020 10:43 pm
You are the tournament organiser. You clearly overhear Cock and Dick agreeing with each other not to buzz for the conundrum, so as to deliberately draw the game, giving them 5½ wins each, putting them both through to the final.

What action, if any, do you take?
Is this hypothetical or has this (or something similar enough to be recognisable) actually happened?
As far as I know, nothing similar to this has happened.
Good :)
Conor
Series 54 Champion
Posts: 541
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:29 am
Location: Luton - UK

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Conor »

With the collusion case, it might not be explicitly overheard but it would likely be pretty obvious what it is going on at a Lincoln style event. The host would pick up on it and if this was the game to decide who makes the final there’d be some spectators to witness it too. But at a Bristol style event you’d never know.
Conor
Series 54 Champion
Posts: 541
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:29 am
Location: Luton - UK

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Conor »

Conor wrote: Sun Jul 26, 2020 5:20 pm With the collusion case, it might not be explicitly overheard but it would likely be pretty obvious what it is going on at a Lincoln style event. The host would pick up on it and if this was the game to decide who makes the final there’d be some spectators to witness it too. But at a Bristol style event you’d never know.
Unless you looked through the recap afterwards. I think it’s probably a useful exercise to go through all Bristol style events and by looking at the final standings and fixtures, back out any last round games which have had the potential for manipulation, e.g. through conservative play. And then examine the recaps if they are available. Of course nothing can be done retrospectively, but would be good to know who the culprits are.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13214
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Callum Todd wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2020 5:51 am
Noel Mc wrote: Wed Jun 24, 2020 11:28 am Letters round, selection is MNTSWAOIE.

You are declaring second and know there is a 9. Unsure what it is, you write down a few random ones.
WAMNIOTES
MAWSONITE
AWMNIOTES

Player 1 declares a 9, you also declare a 9. Wait for them to declare MAWSONITE.

You then say 'Yep, same word' and point to the correct one. Is that ok?
Absolutely okay. It's just part of the advantage of declaring second. I have done this a couple of times before at co:events (not made up random words, but written a couple of dodgy ones and opted for the one my opponent went with to minimise risk).
This is a perfect example of why Nick should swap the order when asking for the words. If C1 is asked for their length first, and they're the same length, C2 should be asked for their word first.

Watching a repeat today, in one of the rounds, I noted down words like NABBIES and WABBIES. That's quite a common form actually - consonant vowel double consonant IES. Sometimes with poor letters it's all you can see, so you write them all down and look at them to see which is the most plausible. Even better you're declaring second, so if your opponent declares 7 and then you do as well hoping that they pick one from your list. As it is, both Jonathan Wynn and Philip Aston declared a 6 so I took a punt on NABBIES and won the round.

The more I think about it, the more I think how ridiculous the current declaration process is.
Sam Cappleman-Lynes
Enthusiast
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 11:30 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Sam Cappleman-Lynes »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 4:55 pm This is a perfect example of why Nick should swap the order when asking for the words. If C1 is asked for their length first, and they're the same length, C2 should be asked for their word first.
This is the system my wife and I use when we play against each other at home. We can't be bothered with writing anything down so we had to come up with a system that didn't depend on that, and mutual trust clearly wasn't good enough for us, so we started using the reverse order thing.

What is it they say? Necessity is the mother of invention? Maybe we need to manufacture the situation from one of the other questions in this thread and get two contestants with broken arms to play each other. That should be enough to get them using the right system.
Noel Mc
Enthusiast
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2017 8:48 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Noel Mc »

(Maybe the wrong place to ask this)
So I know (I think) there are two conundrum rules:
- No plurals
- Only one valid solution

Are there then any possible 9 letter selections with two valid 9 letter words which could be used as a conundrum?

So imagine SHEEPLANT was a valid word. ELEPHANTS is also valid.

ELEPHANTS can't be a conundrum because it's a plural. Can SHEEPLANT be a conundrum? It's the only non plural arrangement of those letters.

Don't know if I'm conveying what I mean here, but someone might be able to answer!
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2025
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Graeme Cole »

Noel Mc wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 10:14 pm (Maybe the wrong place to ask this)
So I know (I think) there are two conundrum rules:
- No plurals
- Only one valid solution

Are there then any possible 9 letter selections with two valid 9 letter words which could be used as a conundrum?

So imagine SHEEPLANT was a valid word. ELEPHANTS is also valid.

ELEPHANTS can't be a conundrum because it's a plural. Can SHEEPLANT be a conundrum? It's the only non plural arrangement of those letters.

Don't know if I'm conveying what I mean here, but someone might be able to answer!
Yes, it could. As another example, SHAMBOLIC was used as a conundrum even though CHOLIAMBS is a valid word. The contestants are given the rules and are told that the solution to the conundrum will not be a plural ending with S.

However, if they have a conundrum like that they often make the plural word the scramble, which makes clear that the answer isn't that. Examples here and here.
Noel Mc
Enthusiast
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2017 8:48 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Noel Mc »

Ah, excellent!
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13214
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Gavin Chipper »

CHOLIAMBS/SHAMBOLIC caused quite a lot of controversy at the time though.

Damian said in the thread:
You do realise i'm doing these deliberately don't you?
But actually it's a very rare occurrence and I think it was probably accidental with that comment being a bit of shit-stirring, and I don't think they would have SHEEPLANT as a solution knowing that ELEPHANTS was in the selection.
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1986
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by JackHurst »

Graeme Cole wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 10:21 pm
Noel Mc wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 10:14 pm (Maybe the wrong place to ask this)
So I know (I think) there are two conundrum rules:
- No plurals
- Only one valid solution

Are there then any possible 9 letter selections with two valid 9 letter words which could be used as a conundrum?

So imagine SHEEPLANT was a valid word. ELEPHANTS is also valid.

ELEPHANTS can't be a conundrum because it's a plural. Can SHEEPLANT be a conundrum? It's the only non plural arrangement of those letters.

Don't know if I'm conveying what I mean here, but someone might be able to answer!
Yes, it could. As another example, SHAMBOLIC was used as a conundrum even though CHOLIAMBS is a valid word. The contestants are given the rules and are told that the solution to the conundrum will not be a plural ending with S.

However, if they have a conundrum like that they often make the plural word the scramble, which makes clear that the answer isn't that. Examples here and here.
I can't remember the exact wording of the rules, but I always thought the opposite of Graeme here. I though there was a rule saying that the shuffle only has one valid anagram unless it has 2 in which case the shuffle itself will be one of those anagrams.

By Graeme's logic you could set something like RAXELNAST and not give the points when somebody buzzes in with RELAXANTS which would be ridiculous. Remember that TV viewers aren't aware of the plural rule, so they would be outraged.


Also I'm aware that some people in the community take answers in this thread as gospel, including potential Co:Event conundrum setter. To those people: Please do not ever apply the logic from Graeme above to justify setting a conundrum like the example I have given because this would be highly unfair!
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1986
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by JackHurst »

The Shambolic/Choliambs example I don't think should set a precedent here. To me it looked like an oversight from the production team, or a deliberate (sneaky) attempt to challenge Kirk who was at the time on course to break Records and was easily cruising to victory in every game in his Octorun. Special circumstances.
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1986
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by JackHurst »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:43 pm CHOLIAMBS/SHAMBOLIC caused quite a lot of controversy at the time though.

Damian said in the thread:
You do realise i'm doing these deliberately don't you?
But actually it's a very rare occurrence and I think it was probably accidental with that comment being a bit of shit-stirring, and I don't think they would have SHEEPLANT as a solution knowing that ELEPHANTS was in the selection.
Agreed
Sam Cappleman-Lynes
Enthusiast
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 11:30 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Sam Cappleman-Lynes »

JackHurst wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 7:54 amI can't remember the exact wording of the rules, but I always thought the opposite of Graeme here. I though there was a rule saying that the shuffle only has one valid anagram unless it has 2 in which case the shuffle itself will be one of those anagrams.
FWIW here are the rules they sent me earlier in the year:
Countdown wrote: CONUNDRUMS

The conundrum will never end in ‘S’ to make a plural of a singular word, so words like BUNGALOWS will not be used. Some CAN end in ‘S’, but they will not be plurals, ie DIAGNOSIS, HEARTLESS etc.

Whatever comes out in the mixed-up version will never be the answer (so if the conundrum spells out a word when it is first revealed, this won’t be the actual answer – ie – If the conundrum is revealed as GERANIUMS, then the answer will not be GERANIUMS. In this case, it would be MEASURING.
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2025
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Graeme Cole »

JackHurst wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 7:56 am The Shambolic/Choliambs example I don't think should set a precedent here. To me it looked like an oversight from the production team, or a deliberate (sneaky) attempt to challenge Kirk who was at the time on course to break Records and was easily cruising to victory in every game in his Octorun. Special circumstances.
Am I missing something, or does this just make no sense? The SHAMBOLIC/CHOLIAMBS example I linked to is from nearly a year after Kirk's octorun.
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2025
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Graeme Cole »

JackHurst wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 7:54 am By Graeme's logic you could set something like RAXELNAST and not give the points when somebody buzzes in with RELAXANTS which would be ridiculous. Remember that TV viewers aren't aware of the plural rule, so they would be outraged.

Also I'm aware that some people in the community take answers in this thread as gospel, including potential Co:Event conundrum setter. To those people: Please do not ever apply the logic from Graeme above to justify setting a conundrum like the example I have given because this would be highly unfair!
FWIW, I agree with this as far as if I wanted to use TRANSAXLE for a co-event conundrum, I'd make RELAXANTS the scramble. I don't think there's an obligation to do this, though.

Suppose the setter hadn't realised TRANSAXLE has an anagram, and used the scramble RAXELNAST. If someone buzzed with RELAXANTS, would you give them the points?
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1986
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by JackHurst »

Graeme Cole wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:09 am
JackHurst wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 7:54 am By Graeme's logic you could set something like RAXELNAST and not give the points when somebody buzzes in with RELAXANTS which would be ridiculous. Remember that TV viewers aren't aware of the plural rule, so they would be outraged.

Also I'm aware that some people in the community take answers in this thread as gospel, including potential Co:Event conundrum setter. To those people: Please do not ever apply the logic from Graeme above to justify setting a conundrum like the example I have given because this would be highly unfair!
FWIW, I agree with this as far as if I wanted to use TRANSAXLE for a co-event conundrum, I'd make RELAXANTS the scramble. I don't think there's an obligation to do this, though.

Suppose the setter hadn't realised TRANSAXLE has an anagram, and used the scramble RAXELNAST. If someone buzzed with RELAXANTS, would you give them the points?
Yes I would 100% give them the points and I would apologise for setting a shite conundrum.
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1986
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by JackHurst »

Graeme Cole wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 8:51 am
JackHurst wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 7:56 am The Shambolic/Choliambs example I don't think should set a precedent here. To me it looked like an oversight from the production team, or a deliberate (sneaky) attempt to challenge Kirk who was at the time on course to break Records and was easily cruising to victory in every game in his Octorun. Special circumstances.
Am I missing something, or does this just make no sense? The SHAMBOLIC/CHOLIAMBS example I linked to is from nearly a year after Kirk's octorun.
Looks like I completely misremembered this. My bad.
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1986
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by JackHurst »

Graeme Cole wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:09 am

FWIW, I agree with this as far as if I wanted to use TRANSAXLE for a co-event conundrum, I'd make RELAXANTS the scramble. I don't think there's an obligation to do this, though.
Wording of the rules here is ambiguous so if you want to apply the robotic software developer brain (which we both possess) to it then I agree there is no obligation.

If for a you think more like a person and whether this is fair and makes sense, I'd argue that it doesn't. As far as I am concerned you as a setter are obliged to give conundrums that are fair, and exploiting a loophole in the plural rule so disallow an anagram of the shuffle that is in the dictionary (but a plural) is very unfair. Therefore as an event host / tournament conundrum setter, you are strongly encouraged not to do this.
Thomas Cappleman
Series 72 Champion
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:42 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Thomas Cappleman »

Yep, any conundrum where you have to suppress an answer that your brain comes up with due to an arbitrary rule isn't fair. Even having a valid word as the scramble is slightly harsh - I rarely read the scramble directly so may end up buzzing in with it by the time my brain's had a while to work on it.

Alternatively, setting a conundrum with TENSORIAL as the answer at a Bristol-style event (all other anagrams aren't valid conundrum solutions) and watching the carnage unfold would be an excellent troll.
David Williams
Kiloposter
Posts: 1259
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:57 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by David Williams »

JackHurst wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 12:14 pm
Graeme Cole wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:09 am Suppose the setter hadn't realised TRANSAXLE has an anagram, and used the scramble RAXELNAST. If someone buzzed with RELAXANTS, would you give them the points?
Yes I would 100% give them the points and I would apologise for setting a shite conundrum.
And when the opponent says he saw RELAXANTS but rejected it because it's invalid?
User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3101
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Rhys Benjamin »

Graeme Cole wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:09 amif I wanted to use TRANSAXLE for a co-event conundrum, I'd make RELAXANTS the scramble. I don't think there's an obligation to do this, though.
As far as my pie-in-the-sky (for now) ideas of hosting a co-event go, this is something I have very much considered and decided I would do. Even the (in)famous RELAPSING/SPANGLIER example is something I would take full advantage of - any conundrums with two answers can be used as long as you have one of them as the scramble. Surprised the show and co-events don't do this more.

I had this discussion about SANTASITS (Christmas Day 2001) a few years ago and I stand by what I said at the time - the "other" answer is not a valid conundrum.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1986
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by JackHurst »

David Williams wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 11:20 pm
JackHurst wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 12:14 pm
Graeme Cole wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:09 am Suppose the setter hadn't realised TRANSAXLE has an anagram, and used the scramble RAXELNAST. If someone buzzed with RELAXANTS, would you give them the points?
Yes I would 100% give them the points and I would apologise for setting a shite conundrum.
And when the opponent says he saw RELAXANTS but rejected it because it's invalid?
Very good point! Sort of underlines how dumb it is to set these sort of Conundrums in the first place...
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1986
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by JackHurst »

Numbers round

75 1 4 6 7 7 -> 777

Clock finishes:
[P1] 777
[P2] 770

[P1] 75 - 1 = 74
[P1] 6*7 = 42
[P1] 74*42 = ...
[Rachel] 74*42 is?
[P1] hesitates
[Nick] We're going to have to hurry you along now P1, we can't allow hesitation
[P1] Well 74*42 is 777X4 (whatever that is), so I was going to divide the result by the remaining 4.

Sure enough, P1 has (75 - 1) * 6 * 7 / 4 = 777 on their paper.
Last edited by JackHurst on Sat Oct 10, 2020 10:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1986
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by JackHurst »

JackHurst wrote: Sat Oct 10, 2020 8:32 am Numbers round

75 1 4 6 7 7 -> 777

Clock finishes:
[P1] 770
[P2] 777

[P1] 75 - 1 = 74
[P1] 6*7 = 42
[P1] 74*42 = ...
[Rachel] 74*42 is?
[P1] hesitates
[Nick] We're going to have to hurry you along now P1, we can't allow hesitation
[P1] Well 74*42 is 777X4 (whatever that is), so I was going to divide the result by the remaining 4.

Sure enough, P1 has (74 - 1) * 6 * 7 / 4 = 777 on their paper.

Personally I would allow this and give them the points. Declaring a legal method that leads to the target should always be allowed if the contestant has it written down properly, even if they cannot work out the intermediate steps.
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2025
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Graeme Cole »

JackHurst wrote: Sat Oct 10, 2020 8:32 am Numbers round

75 1 4 6 7 7 -> 777

Clock finishes:
[P1] 770
[P2] 777

[P1] 75 - 1 = 74
[P1] 6*7 = 42
[P1] 74*42 = ...
[Rachel] 74*42 is?
[P1] hesitates
[Nick] We're going to have to hurry you along now P1, we can't allow hesitation
[P1] Well 74*42 is 777X4 (whatever that is), so I was going to divide the result by the remaining 4.

Sure enough, P1 has (74 - 1) * 6 * 7 / 4 = 777 on their paper.
Disallow because P1 declared 770.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13214
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Yeah, I don't think you need to know the intermediate totals.

Although declaring 770 and writing down 74-1 could count against you.
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1986
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by JackHurst »

Whoops. Post edited to make sense now.
Fred Mumford
Enthusiast
Posts: 425
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 2:32 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Fred Mumford »

In the famous James Martin 952 game he didn't know the intermediate total, and it would have been unfair to have expected him to know it.
User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3101
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Rhys Benjamin »

You have to train yourself not to say intermediate totals, because if you know it it's out of force of habit, and very easy to cock it up and have it disallowed.

If you make a mistake it's harder to "undo" it if you get the intermediate wrong because nowadays declaring an intermediate total is counted as a "step". In the 30BC was it Darryl Francis who said "... is 611" and it was actually 511? He could have fudged if I remember correctly had he not said "... is 611".

Equally, if Jono had said (eg) 1825 rather than 1625 in his 813 solve (unlike J Martin) then I suspect he'd have been disallowed.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...
Patrick Thompson
Newbie
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 12:49 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Patrick Thompson »

Player A vs Player B

Selection is O E M I I T S L L

Player A leans back straight away, player B is sure there is a nine there but unsure whether it’s mollisite or mollities. He knows that player A will have it right and writes both down.

Player A declares first with mollities, player B declares the same and pushes his paper across with both words next to each other. Player A objects. What happens next?
User avatar
Jon Corby
Moral Hero
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Jon Corby »

A numbers round?
Patrick Thompson
Newbie
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 12:49 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Patrick Thompson »

I knew I should have been more specific
User avatar
Jon O'Neill
Ginger Ninja
Posts: 4545
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:45 am
Location: London, UK

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Jon O'Neill »

Patrick Thompson wrote: Tue Oct 27, 2020 1:26 pm Player A vs Player B

Selection is O E M I I T S L L

Player A leans back straight away, player B is sure there is a nine there but unsure whether it’s mollisite or mollities. He knows that player A will have it right and writes both down.

Player A declares first with mollities, player B declares the same and pushes his paper across with both words next to each other. Player A objects. What happens next?
See the replies to this post:
Noel Mc wrote: Wed Jun 24, 2020 11:28 am Letters round, selection is MNTSWAOIE.

You are declaring second and know there is a 9. Unsure what it is, you write down a few random ones.
WAMNIOTES
MAWSONITE
AWMNIOTES

Player 1 declares a 9, you also declare a 9. Wait for them to declare MAWSONITE.

You then say 'Yep, same word' and point to the correct one. Is that ok?
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13214
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Gavin Chipper »

You're playing at a Bristol-style event (so no host beyond the two players). It's a numbers round and the target is 500. C1 declares 500; C2 declares 501, not written down. C1 realises they've gone wrong during their solution. C2 now needs to do their 501 solution.

C2: "Erm, one second. I just need to remember what I've done..."

C1: "I'm going to have to hurry you... Right, too late. I'm timing you out."

C2: "I don't think that's fair. I only got my solution right at the end of the time - which is why I didn't write it down - and so it was still a bit fragile in my mind. In any normal game - with an actual host - I would have completely ignored you going through your solution and gone through my own solution in my head. But instead I had to listen to you trying to bumble your way to 500 and concentrate on that and so I needed a few seconds to reconstruct my own method afterwards."

You are the ref.
User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3101
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Rhys Benjamin »

I think C1 is jumping the gun a little bit, but nonetheless I still would have C2 disallowed.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13214
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Gavin Chipper »

I think it highlights a potential flaw in Bristol-style events. I think a not-written-down solution should probably be written down immediately following the declaration.
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1986
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by JackHurst »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:59 pm I think it highlights a potential flaw in Bristol-style events. I think a not-written-down solution should probably be written down immediately following the declaration.
Hearing declarations from other tables is the main flaw.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13214
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Gavin Chipper »

JackHurst wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:29 am
Gavin Chipper wrote: Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:59 pm I think it highlights a potential flaw in Bristol-style events. I think a not-written-down solution should probably be written down immediately following the declaration.
Hearing declarations from other tables is the main flaw.
Yeah, there is that too.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13214
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Sam Cappleman-Lynes wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 5:55 pm
Gavin Chipper wrote: Thu Jul 30, 2020 4:55 pm This is a perfect example of why Nick should swap the order when asking for the words. If C1 is asked for their length first, and they're the same length, C2 should be asked for their word first.
This is the system my wife and I use when we play against each other at home. We can't be bothered with writing anything down so we had to come up with a system that didn't depend on that, and mutual trust clearly wasn't good enough for us, so we started using the reverse order thing.

What is it they say? Necessity is the mother of invention? Maybe we need to manufacture the situation from one of the other questions in this thread and get two contestants with broken arms to play each other. That should be enough to get them using the right system.
In your quarter final it sounded like Damien (looking at him, Matt Bayfield's older brother presumably) offered the same word as you deliberately due to declaring second in round 13.
Sam Cappleman-Lynes
Enthusiast
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 11:30 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Sam Cappleman-Lynes »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Mon Dec 14, 2020 9:21 pm In your quarter final it sounded like Damien (looking at him, Matt Bayfield's older brother presumably) offered the same word as you deliberately due to declaring second in round 13.
At 40 points behind I don't mind what anyone does. It's not like it's gaming the system to try and gain an advantage, more likely he altered his assessment of how likely his word was based on the fact that I also had an 8.
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1986
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by JackHurst »

Spoilerz
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13214
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Sam Cappleman-Lynes wrote: Mon Dec 14, 2020 11:27 pm
Gavin Chipper wrote: Mon Dec 14, 2020 9:21 pm In your quarter final it sounded like Damien (looking at him, Matt Bayfield's older brother presumably) offered the same word as you deliberately due to declaring second in round 13.
At 40 points behind I don't mind what anyone does. It's not like it's gaming the system to try and gain an advantage, more likely he altered his assessment of how likely his word was based on the fact that I also had an 8.
Yeah, I didn't think of it as underhand. It just reminded me of this discussion.
JackHurst wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 12:04 pmSpoilerz
I think my post was vague enough for it to not matter. Sam's on the other hand - well!
User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3101
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Rhys Benjamin »

Based on the reverse declaration discourse going on at the moment...

It is the final numbers game in a 15-rounder, and C1 is trailing 76-84. The selection is 100 75 50 25 10 1 --> 813. C1 is sure they can do 811, and may be able to do 813 but isn't sure. The time runs out and the host asks C1 for their declaration. C1 says this isn't fair as it's C2's pick (because, although they don't say it, they want to know what C2 is declaring before they declares 813 or 811). C2 says that the declaration order isn't specified in the rules and C1 should declare their total now. C1 says C2 should declare first. What do you do?
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...
Marc Meakin
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 6238
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Marc Meakin »

Rhys Benjamin wrote: Wed Jan 27, 2021 5:01 pm Based on the reverse declaration discourse going on at the moment...

It is the final numbers game in a 15-rounder, and C1 is trailing 76-84. The selection is 100 75 50 25 10 1 --> 813. C1 is sure they can do 811, and may be able to do 813 but isn't sure. The time runs out and the host asks C1 for their declaration. C1 says this isn't fair as it's C2's pick (because, although they don't say it, they want to know what C2 is declaring before they declares 813 or 811). C2 says that the declaration order isn't specified in the rules and C1 should declare their total now. C1 says C2 should declare first. What do you do?
I think i would make them declare one answer at the point of being asked.
So, for example I would say, what is it to be 813 or 811 before asking his opponents declaration
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2025
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Graeme Cole »

Rhys Benjamin wrote: Wed Jan 27, 2021 5:01 pm Based on the reverse declaration discourse going on at the moment...

It is the final numbers game in a 15-rounder, and C1 is trailing 76-84. The selection is 100 75 50 25 10 1 --> 813. C1 is sure they can do 811, and may be able to do 813 but isn't sure. The time runs out and the host asks C1 for their declaration. C1 says this isn't fair as it's C2's pick (because, although they don't say it, they want to know what C2 is declaring before they declares 813 or 811). C2 says that the declaration order isn't specified in the rules and C1 should declare their total now. C1 says C2 should declare first. What do you do?
Declaration order matters much less with numbers than it does with letters. Also, as you say, I don't think the declaration order is actually specified in the show's rules - it's just an established convention. If C1 is asked to declare their numbers total first then they should.

If it had been a letters round I think C1 would have more of a case to ask C2 to declare first if it's C2's turn to declare first.
User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3101
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Rhys Benjamin »

Adapted from my dream from last night... (my subconsciousness's answer is contained in that link)

In the final 8 prelims of a series, a player comes along and smashed out their first seven games. Being the final 8 prelims, they know the leaderboard situation, and know the #8 seed is a very good player who is FAR better than #8 (kind of like a Philip Aston situation). So the 7-time winner, who already has a huge points total, in the final prelim, deliberately throws their last game so as not to be #1 seed and instead go in as #2 seed, duly losing 120-0.

The leaderboard now looks something like this:

#1 seed 8 wins, 710 points
#2 seed 7 wins, 851 points
#3 seed 6 wins, some points
#4 seed 6 wins, some points
#5 seed 4 wins, some points
#6 seed 4 wins, some points
#7 seed 3 wins, 291 points
#8 seed 2 wins, 400 points

So as the production team...

Do you play things out as normal and allow them to get away with it?
Do you force them to play the game again?
Do you remove them from the series outright and Harry Peters the situation?
Do you swap #1 and #2 seed (or #7 and #8 seed) artificially?
Do you sort the leaderboard solely by points for this series to solve the problem, thus making the cheater #1 seed and the stupidly good #8 seed move up to #5/#6/#7?
... or some other method? (Like the one my subconsciousness came up with, for example...)
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13214
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Rhys Benjamin wrote: Sun Apr 18, 2021 11:00 pm Adapted from my dream from last night... (my subconsciousness's answer is contained in that link)

In the final 8 prelims of a series, a player comes along and smashed out their first seven games. Being the final 8 prelims, they know the leaderboard situation, and know the #8 seed is a very good player who is FAR better than #8 (kind of like a Philip Aston situation). So the 7-time winner, who already has a huge points total, in the final prelim, deliberately throws their last game so as not to be #1 seed and instead go in as #2 seed, duly losing 120-0.

The leaderboard now looks something like this:

#1 seed 8 wins, 710 points
#2 seed 7 wins, 851 points
#3 seed 6 wins, some points
#4 seed 6 wins, some points
#5 seed 4 wins, some points
#6 seed 4 wins, some points
#7 seed 3 wins, 291 points
#8 seed 2 wins, 400 points

So as the production team...

Do you play things out as normal and allow them to get away with it?
Do you force them to play the game again?
Do you remove them from the series outright and Harry Peters the situation?
Do you swap #1 and #2 seed (or #7 and #8 seed) artificially?
Do you sort the leaderboard solely by points for this series to solve the problem, thus making the cheater #1 seed and the stupidly good #8 seed move up to #5/#6/#7?
... or some other method? (Like the one my subconsciousness came up with, for example...)
There are similarities between this and the general discussion that was had from Graeme's post down. It was generally decided that actual collusion is worse than one player deliberately manipulating the situation to their own ends. I'd say allow it, although really it's a bit of a stupid way to have done it, since they only had to lose at all, not by 120 points!

Of course, you could change the example so that number 1 seed is on 7 wins with one more point than the current champion, who is on 6 wins. Then they do want to lose with a score of zero. I'd say allow it anyway, though it does look bad.
User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3101
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Rhys Benjamin »

A couple of these that came up on Saturday:

As a host, if both players declare the same length I will flip the declaration as a further no-cheating measure. This was something that I was challenged on when hosting on Saturday, and I was surprised at that given it’s how it’s been done on telly.

Example:
C1: “8.”
C2: “8.”
Host: “OK, C2, let’s have your 8 first, then.”

Surely I’m fine to do that?

Second question - how long should a conundrum buzz be allowed to go “err” for before you time them out?
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13214
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Gavin Chipper »

I always swap them over. I think it got discussed in this thread. As for the conundrum buzz, it's more subjective. It's difficult to say an exact amount of time.
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2025
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Graeme Cole »

Rhys Benjamin wrote: Mon Apr 11, 2022 11:27 am A couple of these that came up on Saturday:

As a host, if both players declare the same length I will flip the declaration as a further no-cheating measure. This was something that I was challenged on when hosting on Saturday, and I was surprised at that given it’s how it’s been done on telly.

Example:
C1: “8.”
C2: “8.”
Host: “OK, C2, let’s have your 8 first, then.”

Surely I’m fine to do that?
IMO yes, that's fine. Although the principle that person who picked the selection declares their length first is pretty well established now*, the question of which player gets asked for their word first if the lengths are equal is much less well defined. It's certainly not written in any official rules I've seen. The order of asking for words is up to the host, but they should do it fairly (i.e. not ask the same person first all the time).

I think I ask the first declarer for their word first, but if I declared second and the host asked me for my word first I'd just tell them my word rather than sit there trying to make up rules that don't exist.

* Established, but still arbitrary, like the rule that white moves first in chess. Jeff Stelling - consistently, and therefore fairly - always asked for declarations the other way round.
Rhys Benjamin wrote: Mon Apr 11, 2022 11:27 am Second question - how long should a conundrum buzz be allowed to go “err” for before you time them out?
After the player has buzzed, and the host has asked for their answer (either by pointing, or saying the player's name, or hoisting a flag, or whatever), I don't think there's much patience expected here. It's difficult to put an actual time on it, but maybe a couple of seconds max?
User avatar
Johnny Canuck
Kiloposter
Posts: 1647
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
Location: Montréal 😃, Québec 😕, Canada 😃

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Johnny Canuck »

Both contestants declare the same result on a numbers game. The first contestant presents, and then the second contestant is asked to go. They hesitate repeatedly before starting their workings, almost getting timed out by the host. It is clear they have not written anything down or indeed found the target within the 30 seconds. Just before patience runs out, they quickly rattle off a solution that is identical to the first contestant's except with the order of the final two added numbers reversed. Do you allow the second contestant's solution? Would you still keep allowing it if they develop a habit of doing this repeatedly?
I'm not dead yet. In a rut right now because of stress from work. I'll be back later in S89. I also plan to bring back the Mastergram - if I can find a way to run a timer or clock through pure MediaWiki without having to upload to Vimeo every time.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13214
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Johnny Canuck wrote: Mon Jul 11, 2022 4:56 pm Both contestants declare the same result on a numbers game. The first contestant presents, and then the second contestant is asked to go. They hesitate repeatedly before starting their workings, almost getting timed out by the host. It is clear they have not written anything down or indeed found the target within the 30 seconds. Just before patience runs out, they quickly rattle off a solution that is identical to the first contestant's except with the order of the final two added numbers reversed. Do you allow the second contestant's solution? Would you still keep allowing it if they develop a habit of doing this repeatedly?
They're supposed to say if it's not written down. If you suspect that they've just copied their opponent ask to see their paper, and disqualify if it's not there.
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1986
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by JackHurst »

Johnny Canuck wrote: Mon Jul 11, 2022 4:56 pm Both contestants declare the same result on a numbers game. The first contestant presents, and then the second contestant is asked to go. They hesitate repeatedly before starting their workings, almost getting timed out by the host. It is clear they have not written anything down or indeed found the target within the 30 seconds. Just before patience runs out, they quickly rattle off a solution that is identical to the first contestant's except with the order of the final two added numbers reversed. Do you allow the second contestant's solution? Would you still keep allowing it if they develop a habit of doing this repeatedly?
Disallow and chastise.
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1986
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by JackHurst »

You are running a co event, and observe the following

Host reveals crucial conundrum: HRRAAEIOD
C1 "Diarrhoea" (pronounced correctly)
C2 "Spell it"
C1 "D I A H R R O E A"
H "I'm afraid that's not the right spelling"
C2 "Diarrhoea D I A R R H O E A"
H "Correct. 10 pts to C2"
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1986
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: You Are The Ref

Post by JackHurst »

JackHurst wrote: Tue Jul 12, 2022 7:02 am You are running a co event, and observe the following

Host reveals crucial conundrum: HRRAAEIOD
C1 "Diarrhoea" (pronounced correctly)
C2 "Spell it"
C1 "D I A H R R O E A"
H "I'm afraid that's not the right spelling"
C2 "Diarrhoea D I A R R H O E A"
H "Correct. 10 pts to C2"
I would overturn the conundrum and award to C1. AFAIK, on the tv show they never ask contestants to spell conundrum guesses. It should be obvious if they are right or wrong. If you have to ask then it's a sign that you picked a bad conundrum.
Post Reply