Page 1 of 1

Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:16 am
by Jordan F
This is going to be a hell of a series. The standard in just these first 3 prelims has been insane. And we have another good match-up today. This one features two of the youngest series champions. First, we have the series 46 champion, Ben Wilson, who won his series when he was only 18 years old. Secondly, we have Conor Travers, the series 54 champion, who was the youngest ever series champion at 14 years old. Both of them were strong very young, we'll see how they do at an older age.

Join James for the recap later.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 am
by James Robinson
Here are the stats of the wonderkids:

Firstly, Series 46 Champion & CoC XI Quarter-Finalist Ben Wilson - 11 Games, 10 Wins, 1,030 Points. (Average: 93.64)
Highest Score: 102 vs. Jeanette Littlejohn (2nd Game)
Lowest Score: 83 vs. Simon Cartwright (Quarter-Final)
9's Achieved: 1/7
Total Points/Max/%: 1030/1398 (74%)
Letters Points/Max/%: 673/961 (70%)
Numbers Points/Max/%: 287/327 (88%)
Conundrum Points/Max/%: 70/110 (63%)

Secondly, Series 54 Champion & CoC XII Semi-Finalist Conor Travers - 14 Games, 13 Wins, 1,546 Points. (Average: 102.10) (I've not included the 12-round 25th Birthday Special)
Highest Score: 124 vs. Andrew Christley (6th Game), Paul Howe (Semi-Final) & John Hunt (CoC Prelim)
Lowest Score: 98 vs. Matthew Shore (Grand Final)
9's Achieved: 6/11
Total Points/Max/%: 1546/1787 (87%)
Letters Points/Max/%: 1093/1236 (88%)
Numbers Points/Max/%: 343/411 (83%)
Conundrum Points/Max/%: 110/140 (79%)

Lucky me getting to recap the Deeks v Hurst match and this one in consecutive days. 8-) 8-) 8-)

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:40 pm
by Martin Long
Another awesome match up. I'm really looking forward to this one! :D

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:46 pm
by Jon Corby
Martin Long wrote:Another awesome match up. I'm really looking forward to this one!:D
Looking forward to it immensely, but I'll be gobsmacked by anything other than a comfortable Conor victory. Sorry Neb.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 2:51 pm
by Ryan Taylor
Tidbit of an interesting fact: a final vowel pick in R1 would have given DEATHLIKE for 9.

Terribly excited by this contest today. Enjoying it already!

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:00 pm
by Jordan F
Could you have had VIRAGOES with an E for an equaller in the FORGIVES round?

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:01 pm
by Michael Wallace
SCENES :o

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:11 pm
by szodiac
Round 9: BUTEO (as in the hawk? Subbuteo !!)

Mauro

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:25 pm
by Jordan F
Another hell of a game here. Very well done Conor, in particular FLORUITED is one of the best spots I've ever seen. Commiserations Ben, you did very well and probably could have won against a lot of the field with a performance like that.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:26 pm
by szodiac
Another fantastic game - well done both Ben and Conor!!

Mauro

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:28 pm
by Martin Long
Another awesome game as expected.

Can someone provide me with the 2nd numbers game selection please? I was channel-hopping when Origins of Words came on and didn't switch back over in time.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:34 pm
by Ryan Taylor
Martin Long wrote:Another awesome game as expected.

Can someone provide me with the 2nd numbers game selection please? I was channel-hopping when Origins of Words came on and didn't switch back over in time.
75 3 5 7 9 4 > 359

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:35 pm
by Jojo Apollo
Another great game, well done both. Conor brilliant as ever, I like the bit about abstract nonsense and symbols, very true. :lol:

No crucials so far this week, maybe tomorrow will be the first one.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:35 pm
by Ben Wilson
Cheers guys- I knew I'd be fighting an uphill battle before I'd even begun so going ahead early was a shock and a half. FLORUITED was the killer blow- id never even heard of it but suspected Conor had something when I looked over at him halfway through the game. I only had fours when going for UPVOTE and was sure Conor had a five or better, and when you're 10+ down you have to try something at some point. To the extent I was even tempted by AUTOIRONS in the final letters round.

Two things-

'5 small and another small one' just beat out 'any six of your choice from the same row'.

'at least I got the teapot' was a line I thought of immediately after losing my coc match against Tom in 2003 and have been kicking myself ever since for not coming up with it quicker. I finally get the chance to say it and it turns out it isn't that funny anyway. Oh well.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:39 pm
by Martin Long
Ryan Taylor wrote:
Martin Long wrote:Another awesome game as expected.

Can someone provide me with the 2nd numbers game selection please? I was channel-hopping when Origins of Words came on and didn't switch back over in time.
75 3 5 7 9 4 > 359
Thanks very much.

When I play Omelette Numbers Attacks, I love selections like these. :D

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:47 pm
by Mark Deeks
STOTTY was excellent. The Aptoflange present were all way impressed at that. Well done gents.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 4:22 pm
by Michael Wallace
Yep, cracking game, the early STOTTY set it up very nicely, although the 6 small pick really surprised me given apto-stats on it. I guess the plan was volaitility?

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:08 pm
by Jon Corby
Well played Ben - not as 'comfortable' as I'd anticipated, and I'm sure as Conor would've liked. Totally swung on the niner (never heard of it), as you say the UPVOTE risk got you back within 10 if it came off, and still left you needing two round wins if it didn't, so definitely worth the punt.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:23 pm
by Johnny Canuck
COMMUNARD, EMBARGOED and now BOURGEOIS. Glad I know my politics.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 9:35 pm
by Rhys Benjamin
Johnny Canuck wrote:COMMUNARD, EMBARGOED and now BOURGEOIS. Glad I know my politics.
Easter egg?

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 9:38 pm
by Rhys Benjamin
The thing is, after four great games, I lose the chance to link to this.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:12 pm
by Matt Morrison
Great stuff both of you - unlucky Ben, pretty grand effort.
Ben Wilson wrote:'at least I got the teapot' was a line I thought of immediately after losing my coc match against Tom in 2003 and have been kicking myself ever since for not coming up with it quicker. I finally get the chance to say it and it turns out it isn't that funny anyway. Oh well.
Didn't help that Nick spoke over you too, and continued onto one of the weirdest monologues ever heard on Countdown. I liked your response: "Yes".

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 10:21 am
by John Garcia
Matt Morrison wrote: Didn't help that Nick spoke over you too, and continued onto one of the weirdest monologues ever heard on Countdown. I liked your response: "Yes".
I'm glad someone else noticed that! This in the same week as his Cuba rant. Someone really needs to tell him to leave off the politics. Either that or just have more judicious editing.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 10:22 am
by Jon Corby
Haha, yeah I tuned out a bit as he went on, but Ben's baffled face was classic: "what the hell am I meant to say to that?".

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 11:34 am
by Adam Gillard
Another cracking game, well done to both of you! Conor, you did well to keep your composure after falling behind early on and you came up with some very nice words along the way. Ben, that was a great performance to keep Conor on his toes - STOTTY was an excellent spot. Interesting to hear Rachel giving some context to the relative strength of people within this very strong field of contestants, obviously she knows her stuff.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 12:52 pm
by Grant Waters
Jon Corby wrote: Ben's baffled face was classic: "what the hell am I meant to say to that?".
That's the face I had on all 9 of my shows!!

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 2:02 pm
by Jack Worsley
Great play from both in another fantastic game! Congrats to Conor; that nine was a fantastic spot and swung the game in your favour. Right now I think you're the man to beat. Ben also played very well and to still be in contention against the tournament favourite with two rounds to go is an achievement in itself. Awesome standard so far, let's hope it continues!

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 2:34 pm
by Peter Mabey
Great win, Conor, but you were lucky to get away with FLORUITED! I agree that ODE lists FLORUIT as a verb, but as the derivation points out, it is already in the past tense ("he or she flourished"), so it doesn't make sense to append the -ED, despite the usual rules for verbs.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 2:59 pm
by Jon O'Neill
Peter Mabey wrote:Great win, Conor, but you were lucky to get away with FLORUITED! I agree that ODE lists FLORUIT as a verb, but as the derivation points out, it is already in the past tense ("he or she flourished"), so it doesn't make sense to append the -ED, despite the usual rules for verbs.
Are you saying it should've been disallowed based on the "ORIGIN" section? Or just that there is some poor lexicography going on here?

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 3:01 pm
by Clive Brooker
Peter Mabey wrote:Great win, Conor, but you were lucky to get away with FLORUITED! I agree that ODE lists FLORUIT as a verb, but as the derivation points out, it is already in the past tense ("he or she flourished"), so it doesn't make sense to append the -ED, despite the usual rules for verbs.
I just logged in to make the same point. There was a similar debate a while ago about EXEUNTS. Is Susie able to disallow derivations of words (other than mass noun plurals) where the definition of the base word makes it clear they are nonsensical?

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 3:05 pm
by Jon O'Neill
I think the dictionary does have a system of labels for situations where derived forms make no sense. Whether they are applied correctly and consistently is another issue entirely (they're not.)

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 4:24 pm
by Graeme Cole
Clive Brooker wrote:
Peter Mabey wrote:Great win, Conor, but you were lucky to get away with FLORUITED! I agree that ODE lists FLORUIT as a verb, but as the derivation points out, it is already in the past tense ("he or she flourished"), so it doesn't make sense to append the -ED, despite the usual rules for verbs.
I just logged in to make the same point. There was a similar debate a while ago about EXEUNTS. Is Susie able to disallow derivations of words (other than mass noun plurals) where the definition of the base word makes it clear they are nonsensical?
I think this is a difficult one. The dictionary says the literal meaning of FLORUIT is "he or she flourished", but just because it's past tense in Latin, that doesn't necessarily mean it has to be past tense in English.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 5:03 pm
by Heather Styles
I disagree that Conor was lucky to get away with FLORUITED. When words come into English from other languages, all sorts of seemingly nonsensical (but in fact correct) things can happen to them, can't they?

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:26 pm
by Brian Moore
Graeme Cole wrote:I think this is a difficult one. The dictionary says the literal meaning of FLORUIT is "he or she flourished", but just because it's past tense in Latin, that doesn't necessarily mean it has to be past tense in English.
Indeed interesting - I've always thought of it being a synonym of flourished, so floruited doesn't make any logical sense (flourisheded?). I'll accept that logic often takes a back seat in language questions, but we haven't really got usage to back up any assertions: OED doesn't recognise it, and Google doesn't find any meaningful matches. But it was still a brilliant spot, even if it is on the front end of acceptability for CD.

Anyway, whatever, just to say how brilliant this game, and all the others have been - truly riveting stuff so far. I've been glueded to my chair watching each one.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:38 pm
by James Robinson
Brian Moore wrote:
Graeme Cole wrote:I think this is a difficult one. The dictionary says the literal meaning of FLORUIT is "he or she flourished", but just because it's past tense in Latin, that doesn't necessarily mean it has to be past tense in English.
Indeed interesting - I've always thought of it being a synonym of flourished, so floruited doesn't make any logical sense (flourisheded?). I'll accept that logic often takes a back seat in language questions, but we haven't really got usage to back up any assertions: OED doesn't recognise it, and Google doesn't find any meaningful matches. But it was still a brilliant spot, even if it is on the front end of acceptability for CD.

Anyway, whatever, just to say how brilliant this game, and all the others have been - truly riveting stuff so far. I've been glueded to my chair watching each one.
Of course, if it had been disallowed, it would've been 99-99, so a crucial conundrum would've needed..................... :? :shock: :o :roll:

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:54 pm
by David Williams
One wonders if there was a debate about this at the time that we didn't get to see. We need to remember that acceptability on apterous has no relevance. Sometimes you need to know what a word means, and decide whether Susie will allow it or not. I think she has to go with the dictionary, even if it's a nonsense. I tried to think of something similar, and looked up 'NEE' (born), but bizarrely it's an adjective. So the silent E at the end gives us NEER and NEEST, I suppose.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:17 pm
by Brian Moore
David Williams wrote:One wonders if there was a debate about this at the time that we didn't get to see. We need to remember that acceptability on apterous has no relevance. Sometimes you need to know what a word means, and decide whether Susie will allow it or not. I think she has to go with the dictionary, even if it's a nonsense. I tried to think of something similar, and looked up 'NEE' (born), but bizarrely it's an adjective. So the silent E at the end gives us NEER and NEEST, I suppose.
I would hope that Susie wouldn't allow words whose parallel would be 'borner' and 'bornest' (i.e. allowing comparatives of an either/or state). She does allow a little logic to come in the subject of mass nouns that could be ordered in a restaurant, so I hope the same type of reasoning would apply here. It would make the game's link to an actual language more tenuous than it is now.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 9:05 pm
by Mark Deeks
David Williams wrote:One wonders if there was a debate about this at the time that we didn't get to see.
There wasn't.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 9:42 pm
by Peter Mabey
I've now had a look at Oxford Dictionaries Pro and discover that the word has actually been used, so must withdraw my objection :? :oops: :geek:

floruit

Pronunciation:/ˈflɒrʊɪt, ˈflɔː-/
(abbreviation: fl. or flor.)
verb
example:
used in conjunction with a specified period or set of dates to indicate when a particular historical figure lived, worked, or was most active.
The principal German type was the three- or four-voice Tenorlied, which floruited c 1450- c 1550.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2013 10:28 am
by Clive Brooker
I still don't think that the ODE entry (I'm looking at the original NODE, but I can't imagine it's changed) support this usage, making reference only to its use in formal record-keeping. Using it less formally and introducing derivatives, as no doubt happens from time to time, arguably gets no more support from the ODE than do words like NICERER and MOSTEST, which perhaps are used enough to jusitfy inclusion.
David Williams wrote:One wonders if there was a debate about this at the time that we didn't get to see. We need to remember that acceptability on apterous has no relevance. Sometimes you need to know what a word means, and decide whether Susie will allow it or not. I think she has to go with the dictionary, even if it's a nonsense. I tried to think of something similar, and looked up 'NEE' (born), but bizarrely it's an adjective. So the silent E at the end gives us NEER and NEEST, I suppose.
I'm pretty sure that one-syllable participial adjectives, like born, rent, spilt, etc., are amongst the exclusions from the automatic -ed and -est rule, so presumably NEER and NEEST would fail for the same reason. Perhaps, if you find yourself far enough ahead sometime in the next few weeks and you have the right letters, you could try one of these to see what Susie does. That would be well worth watching.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2013 3:19 pm
by JackHurst
PEDANTRY.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:29 pm
by Martin Bishop
Matt Morrison wrote:Great stuff both of you - unlucky Ben, pretty grand effort.
Ben Wilson wrote:'at least I got the teapot' was a line I thought of immediately after losing my coc match against Tom in 2003 and have been kicking myself ever since for not coming up with it quicker. I finally get the chance to say it and it turns out it isn't that funny anyway. Oh well.
Didn't help that Nick spoke over you too, and continued onto one of the weirdest monologues ever heard on Countdown. I liked your response: "Yes".
Since I actually work in pensions I was expecting him to say something like that to me. Now I know why he didn't. I found it hilarious watching him talk at you like that when your job has nothing to do with pensions.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu May 07, 2020 2:55 pm
by Rhys Benjamin
UPVOTE is now in, thanks (most likely) to the advent of Reddit since ODE3 came out.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu May 07, 2020 4:03 pm
by Gavin Chipper
Matt Morrison wrote: Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:12 pm Great stuff both of you - unlucky Ben, pretty grand effort.
Ben Wilson wrote:'at least I got the teapot' was a line I thought of immediately after losing my coc match against Tom in 2003 and have been kicking myself ever since for not coming up with it quicker. I finally get the chance to say it and it turns out it isn't that funny anyway. Oh well.
Didn't help that Nick spoke over you too, and continued onto one of the weirdest monologues ever heard on Countdown. I liked your response: "Yes".
And it was just as weird the second time round. I came here to post about it anyway, so I'm glad it already got mentioned at the time.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu May 07, 2020 4:10 pm
by Gavin Chipper
So much discussion spawned by FLORUITED over the years.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu May 07, 2020 4:14 pm
by James Robinson
Preliminary 4 2020 Word Update

The max would have increased by 1 point (from 126 to 127) if played today thanks to a 6 available in R9 that wasn't around in 2013.

Even though there would've been a word allowed now, as opposed to then like with yesterday's show, this time the result wouldn't have altered, as even though there would've been a 10 point swing in Ben's favour, Conor would still have won 113-97, rather than 117-91.

New Words Now Allowed:

R1: ADITHER, AKILTER, RATLIKE, REDTAIL, TALKIER, TRAIKED
R3: AUDIENT, IDEATUM, MAUNTED, METWAND, UNMATED
R8: SUBSCALE, UPSCALES
R9: UPVOTE (increasing MAX up to 6, and would've given Ben more points.)
R12: ONLINER, PLERION

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Thu May 07, 2020 11:45 pm
by Rhys Benjamin
I could have sworn blind the contestant guidelines sent to me in early 2015 explicitly disallowed FLORUITED, but I can't find anyone who will corroborate this.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Fri May 08, 2020 2:23 pm
by Gavin Chipper
Rhys Benjamin wrote: Thu May 07, 2020 11:45 pm I could have sworn blind the contestant guidelines sent to me in early 2015 explicitly disallowed FLORUITED, but I can't find anyone who will corroborate this.
Graeme Cole said here that it would no longer be allowed. And here it is being said in the chat logs.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday January 10th (Birthday Prelim 4)

Posted: Sun May 10, 2020 7:34 pm
by Conor
Gavin Chipper wrote: Thu May 07, 2020 4:10 pm So much discussion spawned by FLORUITED over the years.
Personally I see it as an open and shut case, and anyone who thinks it should be disallowed is an idiot and a savage.

No, but really, I'm surprised there was ever so much discussion. 2 of the 3 Lexico example sentences use an inflected form of the verb floruit, so it's clear why it's allowed now. But in the OED example sentences 'floruited' was also used. And I don't see why it's necessarily past tense in English if it's past tense in Latin.

In one of my heat games, the word CHLORINES was offered by DC since it wasn't tagged as a mass noun in the dictionary. This is a pretty clear dictionary error: all the other halogens are mass nouns, and indeed this error was fixed in later editions, but afaik there was nothing in the contestants' guidelines disallowing it until the next release. If so many people complained about FLORUITED, it's only because so many people wanted to show off their own knowledge of Latin without actually knowing how language works.