Page 1 of 1

Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 2:29 pm
by Ray Wilding
MODIFIER a beater in R5
SUSTAIN a beater in R11

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 2:38 pm
by Tom S
SURLIER as an alternative in R7.

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:07 pm
by Tom S
First time playing against Graeme today, who's quite a solid player, and did beat me in R10 with his DEPUTISE to my DISPUTE. I did like the fact that the first teaser was incorporated to use Mike's name, (is that the first time such has been used with a player in the same game?), but Mike as a player in general was generally alright, with a bit of a bad patch in the early rounds. Also, to put this question out: If I saw a word after the 30 seconds, and I was 2nd to declare, would that be acceptable?, as I saw DISALLOW just as Graeme declared an 8. Many thanks.
My scores for today:
Me: 108-78 (Graeme)
Me: 115-49 (Mike)

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:25 pm
by Johnny Canuck
Tom S wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:07 pm
Also, to put this question out: If I saw a word after the 30 seconds, and I was 2nd to declare, would that be acceptable?, as I saw DISALLOW just as Graeme declared an 8. Many thanks.
I would say that's fair game, provided you also state that your word is not written down.

MUCONATE as a beater and darren in Round 1.

Yet another poacher's goal on the first numbers, as Mike could have simply added 9 - 8 at the end.

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:27 pm
by Tom S
Johnny Canuck wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:25 pm
Tom S wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:07 pm
Also, to put this question out: If I saw a word after the 30 seconds, and I was 2nd to declare, would that be acceptable?, as I saw DISALLOW just as Graeme declared an 8. Many thanks.
I would say that's fair game, provided you also state that your word is not written down.

I thought so, thanks for the clarification :) .

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 8:34 pm
by Elliott Mellor
PEDIFORM R5

Lovely gesture by Graham on the conundrum, if anyone saw.

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 8:34 pm
by Elliott Mellor
Surely the Wiki should mention the aptness of the teaser?

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 9:14 pm
by Johnny Canuck
Elliott Mellor wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 8:34 pm
Surely the Wiki should mention the aptness of the teaser?
I put that on Mike's own page.

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:10 pm
by Tom S
Elliott Mellor wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 8:34 pm
PEDIFORM R5

Lovely gesture by Graham on the conundrum, if anyone saw.
What did he do specifically?

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:53 am
by Martin Hurst
Tom S wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:10 pm
Elliott Mellor wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 8:34 pm
PEDIFORM R5

Lovely gesture by Graham on the conundrum, if anyone saw.
What did he do specifically?
I noticed this too - Mike shouted out the answer before buzzing and instead of Graeme buzzing himself and stealing it, he let Mike buzz properly and take the points. Would be interesting to know what others would have done in this situation - particularly (unlike this occasion) if it was a crucial! :)

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:04 pm
by Philip Wilson
Martin Hurst wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:53 am
Tom S wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:10 pm
Elliott Mellor wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 8:34 pm
PEDIFORM R5

Lovely gesture by Graham on the conundrum, if anyone saw.
What did he do specifically?
I noticed this too - Mike shouted out the answer before buzzing and instead of Graeme buzzing himself and stealing it, he let Mike buzz properly and take the points. Would be interesting to know what others would have done in this situation - particularly (unlike this occasion) if it was a crucial! :)
Yes, noticed that too. Very friendly play!
If it was crucial it would be difficult to say unless actually in that situation I imagine.
Tom, RR said it was the first time a contestant's name was used as a teatime teaser.

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:32 pm
by Elliott Mellor
Philip Wilson wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:04 pm
Martin Hurst wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:53 am
Tom S wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:10 pm

What did he do specifically?
I noticed this too - Mike shouted out the answer before buzzing and instead of Graeme buzzing himself and stealing it, he let Mike buzz properly and take the points. Would be interesting to know what others would have done in this situation - particularly (unlike this occasion) if it was a crucial! :)
Yes, noticed that too. Very friendly play!
If it was crucial it would be difficult to say unless actually in that situation I imagine.
Tom, RR said it was the first time a contestant's name was used as a teatime teaser.
I'd absolutely do the same thing as Graeme - be it crucial or not, for the points record, for octochampdom or whatever - I couldn't nick it considering they had fairly got the answer before me and had just forgotten to buzz. I'd rather lose and be lauded as honest than win and be branded quite frankly a bit of a prick.

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:42 pm
by Tom S
Have seen it again, very nice gesture by Graeme as previously discussed, makes your heart warm seeing that. Nevertheless, there has seemed to be a shortage of twits on this series, which is always nice. Good performance by Graeme again today, certainly Octo material.

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:24 pm
by David Williams
Tom S wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:07 pm
If I saw a word after the 30 seconds, and I was 2nd to declare, would that be acceptable?, as I saw DISALLOW just as Graeme declared an 8.
Been debated in the past. Many would say it was unacceptable. Personally I've always felt it was OK. But hesitate for a nanosecond and it's cheating. And, because it's not written down, you saw it somewhere between 29 seconds and when you actually declared. There's always going to be a suspicion that you only saw it when your opponent declared an eight. Skating on thin ice.

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:46 pm
by Elliott Mellor
David Williams wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:24 pm
Tom S wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:07 pm
If I saw a word after the 30 seconds, and I was 2nd to declare, would that be acceptable?, as I saw DISALLOW just as Graeme declared an 8.
Been debated in the past. Many would say it was unacceptable. Personally I've always felt it was OK. But hesitate for a nanosecond and it's cheating. And, because it's not written down, you saw it somewhere between 29 seconds and when you actually declared. There's always going to be a suspicion that you only saw it when your opponent declared an eight. Skating on thin ice.
I'd have no trouble doing this, in fact I was in Tom's exact position here except I saw a different 8 after he declared, and I'd definitely have no trouble declaring it not written down in the studio. It's not so much cheating as bending the rules slightly, but then technically if you're only going to allow exactly 30 seconds you shouldn't reveal the letters until the clock starts and should have people declare at the same time somehow immediately after the round has ended, which would clearly be a bit weird. I seem to recall you (David) in the past mentioning on another topic about if a contestant declares a 9 and you haven't got one it becomes a conundrum and most of the time you're able to spot it before the other contestant has declared, be interesting to know whether people would declare it not written down or if the circumstances mattered. I think it's slightly different to stalling for loads of time to find one - if you see it immediately fair enough but when it's "a........verrrrrrr-yyyyyyyyy.......dod......gyy eeeighhhtt Iiiiiiii thiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnkkkkkk.....................not wri...tten...down..." it takes the mickey a bit.

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:19 pm
by David Williams
I'll say again. Hesitate for a nanosecond and it's obvious you are trying to match your opponent's word after the time, so you're cheating. If you find yourself in that situation the only thing you can do is say "I'll stick with a safe seven", which at least makes it possible that you had a dodgy eight - SALLOWED, perhaps. But the slightest hesitation followed by DISALLOW, not written down, is just so blatantly obvious on screen even if you get away with it.

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:20 am
by Zubair Patel
With regards to Mike shouting out the answer before buzzing, how would people react had Mike been using his hands to cover up possible prefix/suffixes on the monitor to help him spot the answer and then shouted it out as soon as he solved it? Would you, as his opponent, not feel you could have spotted the conundrum in the time it takes for him to move his hands towards the buzzer and press it?

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:29 am
by L'oisleatch McGraw
imo, Mike still deserves the 10pts in that scenario.

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Sun Dec 24, 2017 7:47 pm
by Gavin Chipper
David Williams wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:19 pm
I'll say again. Hesitate for a nanosecond and it's obvious you are trying to match your opponent's word after the time, so you're cheating. If you find yourself in that situation the only thing you can do is say "I'll stick with a safe seven", which at least makes it possible that you had a dodgy eight - SALLOWED, perhaps. But the slightest hesitation followed by DISALLOW, not written down, is just so blatantly obvious on screen even if you get away with it.
So it's only cheating if it's obvious you're cheating?
Jon Corby wrote:

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Tue Dec 26, 2017 2:45 pm
by David Williams
The rules say that you can declare anything you've seen in the 30 seconds, whether you've written it down or not. But custom and practice seems to allow you to think for a while about whether to go for your safe seven or dodgy eight, whether you are declaring first or deciding whether to match your opponent. Nothing in the rules permitting this as far as I know, but I don't recall anyone ever been pulled up for taking too long. Being allowed to do this and then declare a word not written down is a fairly big loophole.

The other day we had MONRADITE. I take it this is a new word - I certainly didn't know it. So I would have had a couple of eights before the clock started and spent 30 seconds running through, and rejecting, a hundred possible nine letter words, none written down. My opponent declares a confident nine. Can I really honestly go through every word I'd thought of before declaring the least unlikely as a nine, not written down?

As a viewer, I'm suspicious of anyone who hesitates, and I'm not suspicious of anyone who doesn't. If you hesitate a little, but declare a word you have written down, you're off the hook. If you hesitate before declaring a common word, not written down, you're cheating. There's a grey area in between. And I think we established in the past that I found acceptable things that Mr Corby did not.

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Tue Dec 26, 2017 3:35 pm
by David Williams
As a small afterthought, after someone has thought for a while and gone for the 'safe seven', Susie will sometimes ask them what their 'dodgy eight' was. I'd like to see this more often. When they come up with a word it's interesting to find out if it's valid or not. If they don't have a word to offer, it's interesting for a completely different reason.

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Tue Dec 26, 2017 10:01 pm
by Gavin Chipper
David Williams wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 3:35 pm
As a small afterthought, after someone has thought for a while and gone for the 'safe seven', Susie will sometimes ask them what their 'dodgy eight' was. I'd like to see this more often. When they come up with a word it's interesting to find out if it's valid or not. If they don't have a word to offer, it's interesting for a completely different reason.
It used to happen more often before Nick took over I think. From what I remember it was normally the host that asked, but because Nick doesn't really know or care what's going on, this doesn't happen unless Susie takes it upon herself to do so.

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:33 am
by Ian Fitzpatrick
Gavin Chipper wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 10:01 pm
David Williams wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 3:35 pm
As a small afterthought, after someone has thought for a while and gone for the 'safe seven', Susie will sometimes ask them what their 'dodgy eight' was. I'd like to see this more often. When they come up with a word it's interesting to find out if it's valid or not. If they don't have a word to offer, it's interesting for a completely different reason.
It used to happen more often before Nick took over I think. From what I remember it was normally the host that asked, but because Nick doesn't really know or care what's going on, this doesn't happen unless Susie takes it upon herself to do so.
Unfortunately this does appear to be the case.

Re: Spoilers for Monday 13th November 2017 (Series 77, Prelim 94)

Posted: Wed Dec 27, 2017 11:05 am
by Elliott Mellor
David Williams wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 3:35 pm
As a small afterthought, after someone has thought for a while and gone for the 'safe seven', Susie will sometimes ask them what their 'dodgy eight' was. I'd like to see this more often. When they come up with a word it's interesting to find out if it's valid or not. If they don't have a word to offer, it's interesting for a completely different reason.
Absolutely this. There's been many a time when a contestant has said "I'll stick with a safe 8" or whatever and I've wondered what their risky higher length word was.