c4countdown

Rare that I get to do a Monday thread, but James is still on vacation it appears, so why not?

Welcome to new format debut day! For those who are not yet aware, you will see a slight change in the structure of the Countdown format starting today. It's still a 15 round style; however, there will now be one less letters game, and one more numbers game in its place. The game will now proceed as: LLNLLNLLNLLLLLNC. And the first champion to try this new style is aptoforumite Andy Platt, who has won four games so far in convincing fashion, averaging just under 111 points per game, and winning by a mere 102 points in Friday's affair. He's the number one seed in the series so far, but I bet he'd like to keep it going with a 5th win. Can he do it? In the corner this week is, as far as I know, a first time guest in Dictionary Corner, and a person I've never heard of before, entertainment reporter Richard Arnold.

Join Graeme for the recap later.

Graeme Cole wrote:FLORUITED and EXEUNTED will no longer be accepted.

I was a bit surprised that this (from the "Good News, Gevin!" thread) attracted no comment at all. I'm guessing that it means that all derivatives, not just plurals of mass nouns and comparatives/superlatives of single syllable adjectives, must from now on justify themselves against the complete definition of the parent word.

Clive Brooker wrote:

Graeme Cole wrote:FLORUITED and EXEUNTED will no longer be accepted.

I was a bit surprised that this (from the "Good News, Gevin!" thread) attracted no comment at all. I'm guessing that it means that all derivatives, not just plurals of mass nouns and comparatives/superlatives of single syllable adjectives, must from now on justify themselves against the complete definition of the parent word.

It's just English conjugations of Latin verbs that are now banned.

Watching on freeview, sound is out of sync. The Sound is slightly ahead of the pictures. Most disconcerting!

r6 - ((75*2)-25)*4+(8/8)

(posted that before RR did that, didn't know if it'd get shown)

Nice solve Zarte, was that pretty quick?

I noticed (25*2+75)*4 + 8/8 is possible too, afterwards. Was bloody hard to get to 500 without using the two 8's (the logical way of making the 1) under TV pressure.

Bout 20s, worked out you needed the 8/8 and played trial and error from there.

unmeant in r12

Well, I didn't count the conundrum as it had been mentioned to me previously that it had come up, and I wouldn't have got it otherwise, but what was the max, cause I had 110 for the first 14 rounds, I think?

Zarte Siempre wrote:Well, I didn't count the conundrum as it had been mentioned to me previously that it had come up, and I wouldn't have got it otherwise, but what was the max, cause I had 110 for the first 14 rounds, I think?

If you matched me on everything but then beat me on the numbers I missed and nailed UNMEANT then you had 14 maxes.

Not bad I guess

Good format, even picks for each contestant. I would prefer seeing 5 rounds for each part though.

Loved the way Andy fished for the A to make HIDALGO and finally got it.

The four R round reminded of the infamous fourth round at COREA last year RRRUUUBIU.

Andy Platt wrote:

Zarte Siempre wrote:Well, I didn't count the conundrum as it had been mentioned to me previously that it had come up, and I wouldn't have got it otherwise, but what was the max, cause I had 110 for the first 14 rounds, I think?

If you matched me on everything but then beat me on the numbers I missed and nailed UNMEANT then you had 14 maxes.

Not bad I guess

Didn't know if there were any DC-beaters apart from unmeant, if there weren't, booyah

Zarte Siempre wrote:

Andy Platt wrote:

Zarte Siempre wrote:Well, I didn't count the conundrum as it had been mentioned to me previously that it had come up, and I wouldn't have got it otherwise, but what was the max, cause I had 110 for the first 14 rounds, I think?

If you matched me on everything but then beat me on the numbers I missed and nailed UNMEANT then you had 14 maxes.

Not bad I guess

Didn't know if there were any DC-beaters apart from unmeant, if there weren't, booyah

No, UNMEANT was the only one, well done. Did anyone get the conundrum? I was nowhere near.

And well played again Andy!

Fair play to the woman in the audience who solved it - most deserved Countdown mug of all time. 10/10 difficulty.

I even saw it at the start of February, probably didn't note it down thinking 'ah that's too hard, Damian would never set that'

Edit:

Tony Atkins wrote:Loved the way Andy fished for the A to make HIDALGO and finally got it.

Cheers, only just seen this. I had three vowel fishes come off in this show, it was like playing goatdown!
Round 5, wanted A for HIDALGO, Round 11, A or I for NACREOUS or INSOURCE/CONIFERS, Round 13, I for DEVIATES (although.... if the K hadn't already come out I might have pushed the boat out and looked for the K - I think there's only one K in the pack?)

Yeah well done that lady, get her on the show.

John Garcia wrote:Watching on freeview, sound is out of sync. The Sound is slightly ahead of the pictures. Most disconcerting!

The C4 continuity announcer apologized at the end saying there were some sound problems, so that was probably it.

Tony Atkins wrote: The four R round reminded of the infamous fourth round at COREA last year RRRUUUBIU.

Brrr, that's a cold selection!

Mark Ivey wrote:The C4 continuity announcer apologized at the end saying there were some sound problems, so that was probably it.

Yeah I thought it was that they were referring to, but wasn't 100% sure. Glad they fixed the problem.

Unbelievable! After years of trying, we finally have a new high score!

Eoin Monaghan wrote:Unbelievable! After years of trying, we finally have a new high score!

Lawl

Well played Andy ... another very good win to maintain the run of centuries.

Liked the George Michaelesque designer stubble that you have developed over the "weekend". What did the Continuity Dept think of that?

Lol, nobody was really bothered / could remember

Tony Atkins wrote:

Clive Brooker wrote:

Graeme Cole wrote:FLORUITED and EXEUNTED will no longer be accepted.

I was a bit surprised that this (from the "Good News, Gevin!" thread) attracted no comment at all. I'm guessing that it means that all derivatives, not just plurals of mass nouns and comparatives/superlatives of single syllable adjectives, must from now on justify themselves against the complete definition of the parent word.

It's just English conjugations of Latin verbs that are now banned.

Sounds a bit ridiculous to me. I always thought the "ORIGIN" section was for information only. These two words aren't exactly common in English, but there could be an example that is and people might start using the past tense even if wasn't used in Latin. What then? The dictionary wouldn't indicate this because it doesn't indicate -ED words, so would it be disallowed despite being a common word? There might be an example out there.

Gavin Chipper wrote:

Tony Atkins wrote:It's just English conjugations of Latin verbs that are now banned.

Sounds a bit ridiculous to me. I always thought the "ORIGIN" section was for information only. These two words aren't exactly common in English, but there could be an example that is and people might start using the past tense even if wasn't used in Latin. What then? The dictionary wouldn't indicate this because it doesn't indicate -ED words, so would it be disallowed despite being a common word? There might be an example out there.

Sounds sensible to me. Well, more sensible than "flourisheded".

I'm really ambivalent about the 'correct v. common usage' question. Do we just say "so what?" when we see "paninis" being advertised, or do we try to explain? Language does change, but does that mean we just resign ourselves to it, and accept linguistic nonsense as soon as one person utters it?

On a related note, how soon before ^FORECASTED is accepted as the normal past tense of FORECAST? I still haven't got over the logical impossibility of UNCREATE from a year or three ago (I was reminded, as it was in one of the selections last week, I think.) I really have problems with language when logic flies out of the window, especially in the temporal implications. A double past tense (in the case of FLORUITED) 'doesn't compute' in my head, any more than uncreating something.

On a non-grumpy note - well done Andy so far - really impressive.

Cheers for your kind words Brian (& others, naturally), and some good points on the ongoing language debate.

Brian Moore wrote:

Gavin Chipper wrote:

Tony Atkins wrote:It's just English conjugations of Latin verbs that are now banned.

Sounds a bit ridiculous to me. I always thought the "ORIGIN" section was for information only. These two words aren't exactly common in English, but there could be an example that is and people might start using the past tense even if wasn't used in Latin. What then? The dictionary wouldn't indicate this because it doesn't indicate -ED words, so would it be disallowed despite being a common word? There might be an example out there.

Sounds sensible to me. Well, more sensible than "flourisheded".

I'm really ambivalent about the 'correct v. common usage' question. Do we just say "so what?" when we see "paninis" being advertised, or do we try to explain? Language does change, but does that mean we just resign ourselves to it, and accept linguistic nonsense as soon as one person utters it?

On a related note, how soon before ^FORECASTED is accepted as the normal past tense of FORECAST? I still haven't got over the logical impossibility of UNCREATE from a year or three ago (I was reminded, as it was in one of the selections last week, I think.) I really have problems with language when logic flies out of the window, especially in the temporal implications. A double past tense (in the case of FLORUITED) 'doesn't compute' in my head, any more than uncreating something.

On a non-grumpy note - well done Andy so far - really impressive.

The main issue is the consistency. I'm quite happy for FLORUITED to be disallowed if there is a sensible rule in place that covers it and all other words without arbitrary add-ons. Really it's up to the dictionary to specify. If it doesn't, it should be allowed. I'd rather have words that "aren't really words" allowed than have arbitrary judgement calls.

Gavin Chipper wrote:The main issue is the consistency. I'm quite happy for FLORUITED to be disallowed if there is a sensible rule in place that covers it and all other words without arbitrary add-ons. Really it's up to the dictionary to specify. If it doesn't, it should be allowed. I'd rather have words that "aren't really words" allowed than have arbitrary judgement calls.

Fair point - agreed. The programme of Countdown is not the place to be having philosophical debates about the finer logical points of language.

Was thinking about GAMELIKE in one of the rounds. Prob risky but i mighthave been tempted.
Supertough conundrum! Worthy of 30BC that one!
Well played again Andy. On target for a great octotal. Has anyone done 8 tons?

Cheers Grant.

8 centuries (enuretics) has been done 6 times previously I'm told. I would love to add my name to the list, although I think it could potentially be devalued as a statistic by getting only 100 in the new format (I took an average of 9.25 from the numbers rounds and just 6.3 from the letters rounds - so that translates to a probable 97 in old format rules). But who's to say I won't lose 110-40 tomorrow

Grant Waters wrote:Was thinking about GAMELIKE in one of the rounds. Prob risky but i mighthave been tempted.
Supertough conundrum! Worthy of 30BC that one!
Well played again Andy. On target for a great octotal. Has anyone done 8 tons?

Andrew Hulme has. Don't know about any others.

Played Andy, already one of my favourite contestants just recently?

Hulme
Hurst
Monaghon
Fell
Beevers
Gillard

Are the only players to have bagged eight centuries out of eight!

Beevers
Fell
Hurst

All got 11/11 series centuries and more impressively 42/42 centuries between them in total for their careers!

Brian Moore wrote:

Gavin Chipper wrote:The main issue is the consistency. I'm quite happy for FLORUITED to be disallowed if there is a sensible rule in place that covers it and all other words without arbitrary add-ons. Really it's up to the dictionary to specify. If it doesn't, it should be allowed. I'd rather have words that "aren't really words" allowed than have arbitrary judgement calls.

Fair point - agreed. The programme of Countdown is not the place to be having philosophical debates about the finer logical points of language.

If you were talking about Apterous or Co-events or Scrabble I'd wholeheartedly agree, but Countdown the programme is a TV entertainment show, needing to maintain the support of all it's viewers. No doubt many were offended by FLORUITED, and some of those will have written in. It may not be your preference, but Countdown is very much the place for such debates.

Clive Brooker wrote:

Brian Moore wrote:

Gavin Chipper wrote:The main issue is the consistency. I'm quite happy for FLORUITED to be disallowed if there is a sensible rule in place that covers it and all other words without arbitrary add-ons. Really it's up to the dictionary to specify. If it doesn't, it should be allowed. I'd rather have words that "aren't really words" allowed than have arbitrary judgement calls.

Fair point - agreed. The programme of Countdown is not the place to be having philosophical debates about the finer logical points of language.

If you were talking about Apterous or Co-events or Scrabble I'd wholeheartedly agree, but Countdown the programme is a TV entertainment show, needing to maintain the support of all it's viewers. No doubt many were offended by FLORUITED, and some of those will have written in. It may not be your preference, but Countdown is very much the place for such debates.

Wrong thread tho