Wednesday 22nd May 2013 (Series 68, Prelim 45)

Round-by-round summaries of every game in recent series; for every series in the last 5 years, try cdb, the Countdown database. Obviously this forum contains spoilers!

Moderator: James Robinson

Post Reply
User avatar
Andy Platt
Kiloposter
Posts: 1091
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 3:00 pm
Location: Wirral

Wednesday 22nd May 2013 (Series 68, Prelim 45)

Post by Andy Platt »

Countdown recap for Wednesday 22 May 2013.

C1: Champion Joe McGonigle (4 wins, 362 points), the returning champion after yesterday's defeat of Jonny Walker
C2: Challenger Mark Ivey, one of our own and a big fan of science fiction and fantasy conventions. He also has goth friends that have attended the Whitby goth convention that Nick talks about.
DC: Susie Dent and Janet Street-Porter.
RR: Rachel Riley.
OT: Other words or solutions.

R01: R E T A B I Z E C
R02: R G M O A G R I N
R03: 50, 25, 10, 4, 4, 5. Target: 920.
TTT: CROSSFEE - "These paintings sound like they belong to Al"
R04: L E U D F R I N T
R05: L E C O N I T E D
R06: 75, 4, 2, 10, 3, 5. Target: 943.
R07: H M N T A O E R I
R08: N K A U L T I N S
R09: 50, 100, 5, 8, 10, 8. Target: 636.
TTT: HARPNETS - "Forget snooker but think about the pink and the black"
R10: P A E J M O A T Y
R11: D S N E O E M S O
R12: R V G U E S D O R
R13: W A S I H E F R B
R14: 25, 1, 4, 2, 8, 7. Target: 825.
R15: C O S I M A T H S (conundrum)


And now a brief interlude before our main feature:

SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER

Enjoy the show.

Nick starts us off today by telling us that it is World Goth Day. Can't say I've noticed the difference. I still feel just as suicidal as normal - in fact, if anything, slightly less so.

Round 1: R E T A B I Z E C

C1: CREATE (6)
C2: CREATE (6)
DC: BEATER (6) BERATE (6)
OT: BAITER (6) BARITE (6) BITZER (6) ECARTE (6) REBATE (6) RECITE (6) TIERCE (6)
Score: 6–6 (max 6)

Yep. Solid start for both contestants there in a round where 90% of us were surely thinking "there MUST be a 7 there". There was not.

Round 2: R G M O A G R I N

C1: ROAMING (7)
C2: ROAMING (7)
DC: ROARING (7)
OT: GROGRAM (7) MARRING (7)
Score: 13–13 (max 13)

A couple of sevens there but the contestants both take arguably the easiest of the bunch with ROAMING. One alternative 7 there, a GROGRAM, is a coarse silk fabric.
Both contestants are still on for A MAX GAME :D :mrgreen: :geek: 8-) :lol: ;) :) :P

Round 3: 50, 25, 10, 4, 4, 5. Target: 920.

C1: 925. Timed out by Nick.
C2: 920. Mistake in working.
RR: 920. (50 - 4) x 4 x 5 (10)
Score: 13–13 (max 23)

Unlucky there for mark who presumably was about to do (25 - 10/5) x 4 x 10 ... or indeed (25 - 10/5) x (50 - 10), but there is only one ten.
Joe had 5 away but was timed out by Nick - interested to hear your thoughts on this. Personally I think it's a good move if a contestant is taking too long. I wasn't in the studio so don't have the full picture but I think I'll say the team was right to chalk off his points here.


Teatime teaser: CROSSFEE -> FRESCOES


Round 4: L E U D F R I N T

C1: FLIRTED (7)
C2: intern
DC: TRIFLED (7) INTRUDE (7)
OT: UNDERLIT (8) URNFIELD (8)
Score: 20–13 (max 31)

Mark used the N twice unfortunately, as Joe FLIRTED his way to a 7-point lead. Dictionary Corner chip in with two more sevens of their own but there are a couple of eights hidden away there with UNDERLIT, which means exactly what it sounds like, and URNFIELD, which is kind of like a graveyard, but instead of burying the bodies in coffins, they are cremated and laid to rest in cinerary urns. Quite popular in Europe during the late Bronze Age and Iron Age apparently.

Round 5: L E C O N I T E D

C1: ELECTION (8)
C2: TOILED (6)
DC: DELETION (8)
OT: DENTICLE (8)
Score: 28–13 (max 39)

You'd be forgiven for thinking there might have been a 9 hidden away there, but there isn't, and Joe expertly unravels one of the eights available. Mark only managed to toil his way to a 6 in that round, perhaps looking too hard for the non-existent 9? A DENTICLE is not the offspring of Susie and her husband, it is (as you might have guessed from the Latin root, and root is not a deliberate subtle pun, but I'll take it if you think I'm being clever...) a small tooth or tooth-like projection.

Round 6: 75, 4, 2, 10, 3, 5. Target: 943.

C1: 944. (5 x 4 + 75) x 10 - 3 x 2 (7)
C2: -
RR: 943. (75 + 4) x (10 + 2) - 5 (10)
Score: 35–13 (max 49)

A tricky numbers game leaves Mark stumped, while Joe's one away is good enough to sweep up the round with another seven points. Rachel expertly demonstrates one of the correct solutions there.


Usually I talk about the guest section here, but as it is, today's guest is Janet Street-Porter, so, moving swiftly on ...


Round 7: H M N T A O E R I

C1: ANTHEM (6)
C2: ROMAINE (7)
DC: ANOTHER (7) HAIRNET (7)
OT: THERMION (8)
Score: 35–20 (max 57)

Joe goes blank in quite a favourable letters round, leaving Mark to clear up with one of the many sevens available. Perhaps surprisingly given how good the letters look at first, there's only one eight there, and it's THERMION, which is a subatomic particle that is emitted at a high temperature.

Round 8: N K A U L T I N S

C1: SULTAN (6)
C2: LINKS (5)
DC: INSULANT (8)
OT: UNINSTAL (8)
Score: 41–20 (max 65)

Joe takes 6 points to zero from a consonant-heavy round there as Mark is struggling - but Susie comes up with a great eight in the corner. UNINSTAL is there as well, which totally isn't a word, I mean, is listed as an alternative form of the verb UNINSTALL.

Round 9: 50, 100, 5, 8, 10, 8. Target: 636.

C1: 636. (100 + 50 - 10) x 5 - 8 x 8 (10)
C2: 638.
Score: 51–20 (max 75)

A very tricky numbers here, but Joe is absolutely all over it. Awesome solve by the casino worker, and one which leaves Mark with a lot of work to do in the final section of the game.


Teatime teaser: HARPNETS -> PANTHERS


Round 10: P A E J M O A T Y

C1: MEATY (5)
C2: POET (4)
DC: PYJAMA (6) TEAPOY (6)
Score: 56–20 (max 81)

PYJAMA doesn't look like it should be OK but it apparently is! TEAPOY is another good spot from the corner, bit of a Countdown/Apterous favourite, that one.

Round 11: D S N E O E M S O

C1: MOONED (6)
C2: DEMONS (6)
DC: MOONSEEDS (18)
Score: 62–26 (max 99)

Both the contestants come out with sixes there to tie the round, perhaps praying for an I at the end there for DEMONISES, a word that comes up a fair bit in its various forms. Janet first mentions SOMEONE as a good solid seven, but then Susie casually tosses out the awesome MOONSEEDS for 9. It's a climbing plant found in North America.


In Origins of Words, Susie talks about the origins of the word DIGS, relating to accommodation, which was adapted from the lodgings that miners were given when working out on excavations #. BOUDOIR is derived from the French to pout or to sulk, which is apparently appropriate because that is where some privileged women used to spend time while doing just that.


Round 12: R V G U E S D O R

C1: GROVES (6)
C2: SURGED (6)
OT: DEVOURS (7) DROGUES (7) DROVERS (7) GOURDES (7) GROUSED (7) GROUSER (7)
Score: 68–32 (max 106)

The contestants can only derive sixes from that round, and Dictionary Corner fare no better. Susie mentions GOURDS for six, but apparently the E can be squeezed in there too.

Round 13: W A S I H E F R B

C1: WASHER (6)
C2: WASHIER (7)
OT: WHARFIES (8)
Score: 68–39 (max 114)

Joe misses a trick and throws away seven points here as Mark goes one better than him by sandwiching the I into his risky 7. Nothing risky at all about it, a great spot. There is a DC beater apparently, with WHARFIES. It's the plural of a slang term used in Australia/New Zealand for a waterside labourer. Obviously.

Unfortunately though, it's game over for Mark, who needed a 9 in that round to stay in the game. If there isn't one available then there's not much you can do.

Round 14: 25, 1, 4, 2, 8, 7. Target: 825.

C1: 825. (8 x 4 + 1) x 25 (10)
C2: 825. ((4 + 1) x 7 - 2) x 25 (10)
Score: 78–49 (max 124)

Both contestants figure out what is needed to multiply by 25 to make 825, and that is 33. Joe's method is slightly more efficient than Mark's, but there's no points for style. It's not a gymnastics competition. That would be kind of fun though. Perhaps it can be implemented instead of a tiebreak conundrum situation? Hmm. Anyway. Conundrum time.

Round 15: C O S I M A T H S

No one buzzes. The answer was MASOCHIST.
Final Score: 78–49 (max 134)

It's a tough one, and neither contestant gets it, leaving a rather sheepish redhead girl in the audience to solve it. She seems a bit embarrassed about it though. Just pretending that she isn't into that sort of thing, though, I bet.

All in all another win for Joe, and commiserations to Mark, who probably would have taken Joe down if he was the relaxed one on 4 wins rather than the other way around. That puts Joe onto 5 wins and surely he is now safe for the QF stage? I'll leave that one to Graeme or James.

Join us tomorrow for Joe's next game, and I think it will be James Roper making his recapping debut so keep an eye out for that one.

# is this even close to correct? I couldn't hear it all.

Further summaries are at:
http://www.apterous.org/cdb/series.php?series=68
Mark Ivey
Rookie
Posts: 70
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2012 10:28 pm

Re: Wednesday 22nd May 2013 (Series 68, Prelim 45)

Post by Mark Ivey »

Thanks Andy for a great recap.

As I posted in the spoiler section (not to take away from Joe who's a great player), if I'd had a couple of better letters rounds and wasn't so nervous I might have been able to pull out a win but c'est la vie. It was a great day, and you never know... I may be allowed to reapply in about ten years or so.

And yes, she was very embarrassed. Dudley and Nick referring to her as 'Masochist Girl' afterwards didn't help. Still, not to worry. It was only in front of about two million people.
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2025
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: Wednesday 22nd May 2013 (Series 68, Prelim 45)

Post by Graeme Cole »

Andy Platt wrote:Round 14: 25, 1, 4, 2, 8, 7. Target: 825.

C1: 825. (8 x 4 + 1) x 25 (10)
C2: 825. ((4 + 1) x 7 - 2) x 25 (10)
Score: 78–49 (max 124)

Both contestants figure out what is needed to multiply by 25 to make 825, and that is 33. Joe's method is slightly more efficient than Mark's, but there's no points for style. It's not a gymnastics competition. That would be kind of fun though. Perhaps it can be implemented instead of a tiebreak conundrum situation?
Interestingly, Paroliamo, the Italian version of Countdown, has (or at least had, in 1988) an an extra means of breaking a tie on the numbers. If both players declared the same total, the player who had used fewest numbers won the round.

Also on Paroliamo...
User avatar
Mark Deeks
Fanatic
Posts: 2443
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am

Re: Wednesday 22nd May 2013 (Series 68, Prelim 45)

Post by Mark Deeks »

Still, not to worry. It was only in front of about two million people.
Studio must have been packed that day because Countdown hasn't churned out those numbers in about 85 years. Don't you read the Daily Mail?
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark
Philip Wilson
Devotee
Posts: 642
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 6:41 pm

Re: Wednesday 22nd May 2013 (Series 68, Prelim 45)

Post by Philip Wilson »

Andy Platt wrote:Countdown recap for Wednesday 22 May 2013.

Round 3: 50, 25, 10, 4, 4, 5. Target: 920.

C1: 925. Timed out by Nick.
C2: 920. Mistake in working.
RR: 920. (50 - 4) x 4 x 5 (10)
Score: 13–13 (max 23)

Unlucky there for mark who presumably was about to do (25 - 10/5) x 4 x 10 ... or indeed (25 - 10/5) x (50 - 10), but there is only one ten.
Joe had 5 away but was timed out by Nick - interested to hear your thoughts on this. Personally I think it's a good move if a contestant is taking too long. I wasn't in the studio so don't have the full picture but I think I'll say the team was right to chalk off his points here.

Teatime teaser: CROSSFEE -> FRESCOES

Round 4: L E U D F R I N T
Hi
It looked pretty fair as Joe did seem to stare at the board for a long time before offering any explanation. I seem to recall Eileen being disqualified at some point during her reign when she just slipped up by saying the wrong sign between two numbers and wasn't allowed to correct herself, which was harsher than what happened today imho.
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2025
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: Wednesday 22nd May 2013 (Series 68, Prelim 45)

Post by Graeme Cole »

Philip Wilson wrote:
Andy Platt wrote:Countdown recap for Wednesday 22 May 2013.

Round 3: 50, 25, 10, 4, 4, 5. Target: 920.

C1: 925. Timed out by Nick.
C2: 920. Mistake in working.
RR: 920. (50 - 4) x 4 x 5 (10)
Score: 13–13 (max 23)

Unlucky there for mark who presumably was about to do (25 - 10/5) x 4 x 10 ... or indeed (25 - 10/5) x (50 - 10), but there is only one ten.
Joe had 5 away but was timed out by Nick - interested to hear your thoughts on this. Personally I think it's a good move if a contestant is taking too long. I wasn't in the studio so don't have the full picture but I think I'll say the team was right to chalk off his points here.

Teatime teaser: CROSSFEE -> FRESCOES

Round 4: L E U D F R I N T
Hi
It looked pretty fair as Joe did seem to stare at the board for a long time before offering any explanation. I seem to recall Eileen being disqualified at some point during her reign when she just slipped up by saying the wrong sign between two numbers and wasn't allowed to correct herself, which was harsher than what happened today imho.

If a contestant misspeaks, e.g. "six times seven - sorry, six plus seven", I think it's fine to accept the corrected version as long as they correct the mistake immediately, rather than when they're well into the next step. The occasional slip of the tongue shouldn't itself be penalised. A couple of times in the last year or so, a contestant has gone back to an earlier step and said they meant to say plus rather than minus or whatever, and Rachel has asked them what they've got written down. That seems a sensible way of handling it. On one occasion the contestant's written version had the same mistake, so it was disallowed.

A year or two ago, one contestant took the mickey a bit. As I recall, he declared his total, started saying how he got it, stopped, corrected something, stopped again, then when he'd used two or three numbers, went right back to the start and set off again on an entirely different route. Nick timed him out and said something like "we'll have to draw a line under that, I'm afraid". And it turned out the number he'd declared wasn't even possible. It was soon after then when Rachel started asking contestants what they had written down if they tried to correct an earlier step.

Regarding Joe today, it's difficult to know to what extent it's been edited, if at all, so we might not be seeing the whole picture. But purely based on what was shown, he hadn't written down his answer, and when Nick asked for his working it consisted of "um" followed by four seconds of silence. I didn't get the impression he was trying to fudge it - I think he'd genuinely forgotten his working - but Nick was right to time him out. You've got to answer promptly, just like in any other quiz.
Mark Ivey
Rookie
Posts: 70
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2012 10:28 pm

Re: Wednesday 22nd May 2013 (Series 68, Prelim 45)

Post by Mark Ivey »

I have been trying really hard to remember exactly what happened in regards to Joe's first numbers... from what I can recall, after I'd messed up and Nick asked him to declare his working, Joe just stared at the board for several seconds before Nick stopped him and told him he'd taken too long. But my memory of the incident is very fuzzy so I could be wrong and should not be accepted as fact.
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2025
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: Wednesday 22nd May 2013 (Series 68, Prelim 45)

Post by Graeme Cole »

Mark Ivey wrote:I have been trying really hard to remember exactly what happened in regards to Joe's first numbers... from what I can recall, after I'd messed up and Nick asked him to declare his working, Joe just stared at the board for several seconds before Nick stopped him and told him he'd taken too long. But my memory of the incident is very fuzzy so I could be wrong and should not be accepted as fact.
Seems like just the same as what we saw on the show then.

Bad luck today Mark, you beat Joe on a couple of rounds, and no shame in losing to him.
Mark Ivey
Rookie
Posts: 70
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2012 10:28 pm

Re: Wednesday 22nd May 2013 (Series 68, Prelim 45)

Post by Mark Ivey »

Thanks Graeme :)
User avatar
Peter Fenton
Rookie
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:19 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Wednesday 22nd May 2013 (Series 68, Prelim 45)

Post by Peter Fenton »

Graeme Cole wrote:
Philip Wilson wrote:
Andy Platt wrote:Countdown recap for Wednesday 22 May 2013.

Round 3: 50, 25, 10, 4, 4, 5. Target: 920.

C1: 925. Timed out by Nick.
C2: 920. Mistake in working.
RR: 920. (50 - 4) x 4 x 5 (10)
Score: 13–13 (max 23)

Unlucky there for mark who presumably was about to do (25 - 10/5) x 4 x 10 ... or indeed (25 - 10/5) x (50 - 10), but there is only one ten.
Joe had 5 away but was timed out by Nick - interested to hear your thoughts on this. Personally I think it's a good move if a contestant is taking too long. I wasn't in the studio so don't have the full picture but I think I'll say the team was right to chalk off his points here.

Teatime teaser: CROSSFEE -> FRESCOES

Round 4: L E U D F R I N T
Hi
It looked pretty fair as Joe did seem to stare at the board for a long time before offering any explanation. I seem to recall Eileen being disqualified at some point during her reign when she just slipped up by saying the wrong sign between two numbers and wasn't allowed to correct herself, which was harsher than what happened today imho.

If a contestant misspeaks, e.g. "six times seven - sorry, six plus seven", I think it's fine to accept the corrected version as long as they correct the mistake immediately, rather than when they're well into the next step. The occasional slip of the tongue shouldn't itself be penalised. A couple of times in the last year or so, a contestant has gone back to an earlier step and said they meant to say plus rather than minus or whatever, and Rachel has asked them what they've got written down. That seems a sensible way of handling it. On one occasion the contestant's written version had the same mistake, so it was disallowed.

A year or two ago, one contestant took the mickey a bit. As I recall, he declared his total, started saying how he got it, stopped, corrected something, stopped again, then when he'd used two or three numbers, went right back to the start and set off again on an entirely different route. Nick timed him out and said something like "we'll have to draw a line under that, I'm afraid". And it turned out the number he'd declared wasn't even possible. It was soon after then when Rachel started asking contestants what they had written down if they tried to correct an earlier step.

Regarding Joe today, it's difficult to know to what extent it's been edited, if at all, so we might not be seeing the whole picture. But purely based on what was shown, he hadn't written down his answer, and when Nick asked for his working it consisted of "um" followed by four seconds of silence. I didn't get the impression he was trying to fudge it - I think he'd genuinely forgotten his working - but Nick was right to time him out. You've got to answer promptly, just like in any other quiz.


Yeah, I reckon that sounds about right - pretty easy to forget your working in that situation. In my first numbers round of my first game I started off by saying '10 x 2 = 50' but managed to correct myself pretty quickly. I think it was fairly obvious in that situation that I didn't actually miscalculate and it was rather a case of me getting ahead of myself.

On the other hand, the guy in the Italian countdown link you posted quite rightly didn't get the points for misdeclaring. Can't believe he had the cheek to argue it when he had 684 clearly written on his etcho-sketchy thingy!
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Wednesday 22nd May 2013 (Series 68, Prelim 45)

Post by Gavin Chipper »

I remember once in the Carol days someone had a solution disallowed because it looked like he'd just accidentally missed out a step. Basically he'd said something like 5... when there wasn't a 5 but there was an unused 3 and 2. If Carol had noticed straight away she would have asked how he made the 5, he would have said and that would have been that. But she didn't notice until the whole solution was complete and then it was noticed that he'd used a number that wasn't there and it was disallowed. I thought it was inconsistent and unfair.
Post Reply