30BC - a better way of drawing the contestants?

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.
Post Reply
User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3101
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm

30BC - a better way of drawing the contestants?

Post by Rhys Benjamin »

I know I'm being wise 7 years after the fact, but I was just having a look at the Supreme Championship, in the days of a strict once-every-four-series CoC schedule, and "Group X" of the Supreme Championship was COC8; entrants in those four series went into that group, and the winner of COC8 went into the quarter finals.

I wonder if a similar thing could have been done for 30BC. Although the broadcast order wasn't "in groups", obviously a straight knockout is a straight knockout, so I wonder if contestants from Series 60-66 could have been put in a separate COC, and then the winner moving on? It would have allowed those contestants to have the title of a COC to their credit?

Let's say that that COC took up the first three weeks of 30BC, and thus left 5 weeks for the rest of it. Would this have changed the overall winner? Probably not, but may have changed the finalists.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: 30BC - a better way of drawing the contestants?

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Yes, that and a more proactive approach to find old contestants so they weren't all Apterites/c4cers or Scrabblers.
User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3101
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: 30BC - a better way of drawing the contestants?

Post by Rhys Benjamin »

Right, so...

If you put the winner of that group directly into the 30BC QFs as per the Supreme Championship, that leaves 25 people in 7 groups, I believe. So therefore 4 groups of 4, and 3 groups of 3. The groups of 4 can be done as SF/SF/GF; the "groups" of 3 gives one person as a bye, so each group has 2 or 3 matches regardless. That's 18 episodes, which can then be followed by a QF/SF/GF, to work perfectly as 25.

So using the original draw that can be found here, that would leave things as follows:

Group CoC: All contestants Series 60-66
Group A: Kai Laddiman, Jon O'Neill, Chris Hawkins, Jill Bright
Group B: Martin Bishop, Chris Wills, David Williams, Christine Hunt
Group C: Sandie Simonis, Dave Hoskisson, Mike Whiteoak, John Ashmore
Group D: David O'Donnell, Tom Hargreaves, Wayne Kelly, Nick Wainwright
Group E: Ben Wilson, Conor Travers, Mark Tournoff
Group F: Nick Deller, Darryl Francis, David Webb
Group G: Jackie McLeod, Barry Grossman, Steven Briers

For byes in Groups E-G, what I've done is done with the player with the best record prior to 30BC, excluding specials and Masters:
Group E: Mark Tournoff
Group F: Darryl Francis
Group G: Steven Briers

That would leave the fixture list as follows:
CoCQP1: Peter Lee vs Tom Rowell
CoCQP2: Chris Davies vs Innis Carson
CoCQP3: Adam Gillard vs Paul Keane
CoCQP4: Neil Zussman vs Graeme Cole
CoCQP5: Jack Worsley vs Kirk Bevins
CoCQP6: Nicki Sellars vs Mark Deeks
CoCQP7: Jack Hurst vs Andrew Hulme
CoCQP8: Ed McCullagh vs Jonathan Rawlinson
CoCQF1: CoCQP1 vs CoCQP2
CoCQF2: CoCQP3 vs CoCQP4
CoCQF3: CoCQP5 vs CoCQP6
CoCQF4: CoCQP7 vs CoCQP8
CoCSF1: CoCQF1 vs CoCQF2
CoCSF2: CoCQF3 vs CoCQF4
CocGF: CoCSF1 vs CoCSF2
aSF1: Kai Laddiman vs Jon O'Neill
aSF2: Chris Hawkins vs Jill Bright
aGF: aSF1 vs aSF2
bSF1: Martin Bishop vs Chris Wills
bSF2: David Williams vs Christine Hunt
bGF: bSF1 vs bSF2
cSF1: Sandie Simonis vs Dave Hoskisson
cSF2: Mike Whiteoak vs John Ashmore
cGF: cSF1 vs cSF2
dSF1: David O'Donnell vs Tom Hargreaves
dSF2: Wayne Kelly vs Nick Wainwright
dGF: dSF1 vs dSF2
eSF: Ben Wilson vs Conor Travers
eGF: eSF vs Mark Tournoff
fSF: Nick Deller vs David Webb
fGF: fSF vs Darryl Francis
gSF: Jackie McLeod vs Barry Grossman
gGF: gSF vs Steven Briers
QF1: CoCGF vs aGF
QF2: bGF vs cGF
QF3: dGF vs eGF
QF4: fGF vs gGF
SF1: QF1 vs QF2
SF2: QF3 vs QF4
GF: SF1 vs SF2

Some of these match-ups were played on the show so we can track their progress:

CoCQP1: Peter Lee vs Tom Rowell
CoCQP8: Ed McCullagh vs Jonathan Rawlinson
aSF1: Kai Laddiman vs Jon O'Neill
aSF2: Chris Hawkins vs Jill Bright
bSF1: Martin Bishop vs Chris Wills
dSF1: David O'Donnell vs Tom Hargreaves
dSF2: Wayne Kelly vs Nick Wainwright
eSF: Ben Wilson vs Conor Travers
eGF: Conor Travers vs Mark Tournoff
gSF: Jackie McLeod vs Barry Grossman

But we can only go so far. So, just a bit of fun, who would have made the final 8 in this draw? I have no doubt Conor would have won outright...
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: 30BC - a better way of drawing the contestants?

Post by Gavin Chipper »

The thing is when you've got just 41 contestant slots, I'm not sure I'd want to commit 16 of them to the CoC. When they did the supremes, there were 61 contestants, only 8 of which formed part of the CoC. I've just had a look at my list of which 41 contestants I would have picked (which didn't assume a CoC), and actually 11 of them came since the most recent CoC at that point. But I also didn't include anyone from series 67 (the series immediately before the 30th birthday thing) because the decision of which contestants to include was made before it was finished. However, if I was going to incorporate a CoC, I would consider these players, and at least include Paul James, who won.

In any case, it would be quite a coincidence if there were exactly 16 players from that range of series, and if there weren't you must have changed the line-up in some way. Who did you exclude/include and why? I can't see any mention of it. Although I have noticed Adam Gillard in the draw, who didn't play. Who's been booted?

Edit - Oh, Adam did play didn't he? But came in as a late reserve. So this massive coincidence did exist, you took full advantage of it, and yet made no mention of it? Fucking Hell.
User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3101
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: 30BC - a better way of drawing the contestants?

Post by Rhys Benjamin »

I did exactly what the Team did from that list, I replaced Marcus Hares with Adam Gillard and Robert Richland with Darryl Francis.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: 30BC - a better way of drawing the contestants?

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Rhys Benjamin wrote: Tue May 12, 2020 5:32 pm I did exactly what the Team did from that list, I replaced Marcus Hares with Adam Gillard and Robert Richland with Darryl Francis.
Yeah I get it. But you said nothing like "Very fortunately for me and my proposed system, there were 16 players from series 60 onwards in the tournament anyway so I don't need to add/remove any players."
User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3101
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: 30BC - a better way of drawing the contestants?

Post by Rhys Benjamin »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Tue May 12, 2020 5:42 pm
Rhys Benjamin wrote: Tue May 12, 2020 5:32 pm I did exactly what the Team did from that list, I replaced Marcus Hares with Adam Gillard and Robert Richland with Darryl Francis.
Yeah I get it. But you said nothing like "Very fortunately for me and my proposed system, there were 16 players from series 60 onwards in the tournament anyway so I don't need to add/remove any players."
I thought that was a deliberate ploy from the beginning, though?
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: 30BC - a better way of drawing the contestants?

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Maybe then. If I ever knew that, I forgot it long ago.
User avatar
Thomas Carey
Kiloposter
Posts: 1478
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 4:17 pm
Location: North-West of Bradford
Contact:

Re: 30BC - a better way of drawing the contestants?

Post by Thomas Carey »

Rhys Benjamin wrote: Tue May 12, 2020 3:42 pm CoCQP5: Jack Worsley vs Kirk Bevins
Domino's is the pizza place for the ExtravaganZZa Feast® pizza, when we combine beef with loads of pepperoni, ham, Italian sausage, fresh onions, green peppers, mushrooms, and black olives, all topped with extra 100 percent real mozzarella cheese.
cheers maus
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2025
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: 30BC - a better way of drawing the contestants?

Post by Graeme Cole »

Thomas Carey wrote: Wed May 13, 2020 6:51 am
Rhys Benjamin wrote: Tue May 12, 2020 3:42 pm CoCQP5: Jack Worsley vs Kirk Bevins
Domino's is the pizza place for the ExtravaganZZa Feast® pizza, when we combine beef with loads of pepperoni, ham, Italian sausage, fresh onions, green peppers, mushrooms, and black olives, all topped with extra 100 percent real mozzarella cheese.
What?
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: 30BC - a better way of drawing the contestants?

Post by Callum Todd »

I believe Tom is posting the description of a meat feast pizza to imply that a hypothetical match-up between Jack and Kirk would be 'meaty'.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Post Reply