Contestant guidelines - dictionary differences

[Fiona T]

Having now got my mitts on a recent copy, a few things jump out as inconsistent

Some of the examples -

They give BOATLESS and REWATCH are given as examples of -less and re- words that are not allowed, but both are now in the dictionary

They give SUNCREAM/SUNCREAMS in the example of mass nouns where the plural will be allowed, but SUNCREAM is two words.


The examples of things that are allowed include GINGHAMS, MUSICS - these aren't in apto but I can't find the ticket removing them - do they need re-adding?

The dictionary differences are probably even more important now that there's no lexico - your average punter has no way of checking. I think they'd have a good reason to be miffed if they got beaten by BOATLESS!

Probs worth a look at least at the validity of the examples Countdown Team

[Callum Todd]

SUNCREAM was valid once upon a time so perhaps these guidelines were once totally accurate and the result of painstaking research into the intricacies of the dictionary, but now dictionary changes have rendered them incorrect. So difficult to keep track of (at least for the "average punter") now Lexico has been deaded* (*not valid).

[Philip A]

I think guidelines change over time. In the 30th Birthday Championship, Conor Travers scored 18 points for FLORUITED. That episode was repeated during 2020 lockdown and they have since considered it incorrect. I was given guidelines in 2017 and it ruled out EXEUNTED. Now they’ve added FLORUITED to the list.

[Fiona T]

I think guidelines change over time. In the 30th Birthday Championship, Conor Travers scored 18 points for FLORUITED. That episode was repeated during 2020 lockdown and they have since considered it incorrect. I was given guidelines in 2017 and it ruled out EXEUNTED. Now they’ve added FLORUITED to the list.

Yep these examples are from the current set.

I've ticketed EXEUNTED and FLORUITED for removal on apto but haven't ticketed MUSICS and GINGHAMS for addition - not sure when/why they were removed?

[L'oisleatch McGraw]

So difficult to keep track of (at least for the "average punter")

Yep. But the people who put the contestant guidelines together are probably as far as it is possible to get from an average punter, and they REALLY need to get their shit together.
As regards clarity in word adjudication across various word games, Countdown must be the duskest of all.

[JackHurst]

You are inferring solutions from one problem and trying to apply them as rules to solve another problem which is not the same.

Damian Eadie's problem: I have 2500 letters rounds of Countdown to produce a year for TV and 200 contestant to keep happy. How can I succinctly write a set of rules to keep prospective contestants informed and that I can probably reuse for 5 years without rewriting because I have other more important stuff to do then checking and rewriting them every year?

Problems faced by a Countdown game developer: I need a definitive text file of valid words so that my game can be used to instantly give definitive solutions to the millions of letters rounds that will be played on my game.


It reminds me a bit of that Simpsons episode where the bacteria build a colony in Lisa's tooth. You guys discussing this shit are the bacteria and Damian Eadie is Lisa:

https://youtu.be/9xfWevkR2iI

[JackHurst]

If the contestant guidelines said you get 18 points for sticking your head in the oven during a around, half of you would do it during an Apterous game and wonder why it didn't work.

[Fiona T]

Well of course we are trying to apply the rules to apterous, but ignoring apterous completely, they're in danger of misleading contestants (i.e. wrong). I did read all the rules carefully before I filmed, and had remembered some things that were not allowed. A contestant that, having read the rules, declared suncream would rightly be very aggrieved to have it disallowed.

[L'oisleatch McGraw]

It reminds me a bit of that Simpsons episode where the bacteria build a colony in Lisa's tooth. You guys discussing this shit are the bacteria and Damian Eadie is Lisa.

Sorry, no.
He doesn't have "more important things to be doing" than not being shit at his job.
Are you yet another one of those dopes who sees Damian Eadie as an unaccountable God figure who should be allowed do whatever he pleases? Why are so many people in the CD community of that opinion? Personally, I am convinced it's because they feel if they brownnose him enough, they stand a better chance of being asked back for specials or for Catsdown. Maybe that will work out for you (maybe it already has!), and it's your prerogative to talk that way, but don't expect normal non-brownnosing people to agree.

My feeling in this is that Damian (and the other people on his team) were not aware of any errors in the guidelines, and that if this gets pointed out, they will be very grateful to whoever brings it to their attention, and happy to revise it. I doubt any of them actively want to be bad at their jobs. If they were on minimum wage, maybe. If their job was boring, maybe.

[JackHurst]

A contestant that, having read the rules, declared suncream would rightly be very aggrieved to have it disallowed.

Very true. But also shit happens.

[JackHurst]

My feeling in this is that Damian (and the other people on his team) were not aware of any errors in the guidelines, and that if this gets pointed out, they will be very grateful to whoever brings it to their attention, and happy to revise it.

Agree 100% with this post.

Strongly disagree with the idea that because there is a mistake in the guidelines you need to go and fiddle with the rules of Apterous, hence the Simpsons comment.

[Fiona T]

My feeling in this is that Damian (and the other people on his team) were not aware of any errors in the guidelines, and that if this gets pointed out, they will be very grateful to whoever brings it to their attention, and happy to revise it.

Agree 100% with this post.

Strongly disagree with the idea that because there is a mistake in the guidelines you need to go and fiddle with the rules of Apterous, hence the Simpsons comment.

Don't think that's what I was proposing - MUSICS and GINGHAMS seem perfectly plausible plurals to me and I'm pretty sure they used to be good, so was hoping someone could enlighten me as to why they were removed when the guidelines explicitly allow them - if no-one does then I'll ticket them to get added.

I wasn't proposing we add SUNCREAM or remove BOATLESS or REWATCH.

I did ticket removing EXEUNTED/ING/S and FLORUITED/ING/S, but even on that ticket Ray pointed out FLORUTED and ING are used in the example sentences so seems strange to disallow them.

The purpose of the post was twofold - one to politely bring to Countdown Team's attention that the guidelines no longer match the dictionary so they can be reviewed if the desire is there to have them correct, and secondly to work out what to do with MUSICS and GINGHAMS and any other discrepancies in apto.

[L'oisleatch McGraw]

It is a pipe dream that CD start using CSW, so the worlds of Scrabble and Countdown can merge into one massive orgy of top anagramming, but - I dunno - is the link between CD and Oxford too strong to sever?

As an alternative, if a dedicated and authoritative word list (like CSW) were to be published specifically to adjudicate Countdown so that the TV show and all associated games sites and apps could sing from the same hymn sheet. (probably also a pipe dream)

[Fiona T]

It is a pipe dream that CD start using CSW, so the worlds of Scrabble and Countdown can merge into one massive orgy of top anagramming, but - I dunno - is the link between CD and Oxford too strong to sever?

As an alternative, if a dedicated and authoritative word list (like CSW) were to be published specifically to adjudicate Countdown so that the TV show and all associated games sites and apps could sing from the same hymn sheet. (probably also a pipe dream)

As someone who had recently started to dabble in scrabble it's a massive barrier to crossover. When you play RIGOLET and declare 78! and it gets removed from the board it's a tad depressing! I have no luck persuading my scrabble club associates to try their hand on countdown simply because of dictionaries.

But whatever the dictionary used, if the rules of the game are the words, then a lack of a definitive list is a barrier. I'm guessing countdown wasn't originally intended for people who studied to master it, but that is what it's become - and the production of a board game needs to have associated rules too.

It would be entertaining if an overnight change was announced - would certainly throw cat among pigeons with the apto-trained folk!

[L'oisleatch McGraw]

It would be entertaining if an overnight change was announced - would certainly throw cat among pigeons with the apto-trained folk!

Imagine if they made the switch to CSW a few days before some misfortunate big hitter was about to record...
Someone massively invested, like e.g. Ronan / Zohaib.
There might be tears.

[Fiona T]

It would be entertaining if an overnight change was announced - would certainly throw cat among pigeons with the apto-trained folk!

Imagine if they made the switch to CSW a few days before some misfortunate big hitter was about to record...
Someone massively invested, like e.g. Ronan / Zohaib.
There might be tears.

They'd still smash it

[L'oisleatch McGraw]

They'd still smash it

Of course, but having one or more of PORTAINER, RESPONAUT, PROMNESIA, POSTERIAD, MATERNISE, ORVIETANS, UNREALIST, GINORITES, ORANGITES, REDITIONS, ROMANITES, ACRIDONES, ADORNATES, NODULATES, MOGANITES, PATRONEES, PANDEIROS, MONRADITE etc. dqed could see them just miss out on beating Elliott's Octorun record.
Ouchie!

[Phil Hulme]

The new Dictionary.com doesn't include a shedload of words that were in Lexico.com. Is Dictionary.com the online source that Suzie Dent will use for word checking?

[Fiona T]

The new Dictionary.com doesn't include a shedload of words that were in Lexico.com. Is Dictionary.com the online source that Suzie Dent will use for word checking?

We're pretty sure she won't. It's a completely different dictionary and also has lots of words that aren't in ODO/lexico

Unfortunately there isn't now a free source for most users.

You can get some info if you scroll down and use the 'try the API' function on this page, but it's far from ideal.

https://developer.oxforddictionaries.com/

[Philip A]

The new Dictionary.com doesn't include a shedload of words that were in Lexico.com. Is Dictionary.com the online source that Suzie Dent will use for word checking?

No. Susie Dent uses Oxford Dictionaries Premium (formerly called Oxford Dictionaries Online, Premium version, but still the same thing) for adjudication, as it has done for the last 8 years (possibly under different names, but still the same site). https://premium.oxforddictionaries.com/ < This requires an annual subscription or a library card to access.

Lexico was formerly called Oxford Dictionaries, Free version, but it wasn’t as voluminous nor as accurate as the Premium version.

Dictionary.com is an American website.

[Countdown Team]

Sorry, no.
He doesn't have "more important things to be doing" than not being shit at his job.
Are you yet another one of those dopes who sees Damian Eadie as an unaccountable God figure who should be allowed do whatever he pleases? Why are so many people in the CD community of that opinion? Personally, I am convinced it's because they feel if they brownnose him enough, they stand a better chance of being asked back for specials or for Catsdown. Maybe that will work out for you (maybe it already has!), and it's your prerogative to talk that way, but don't expect normal non-brownnosing people to agree.

Unaccountable? Haha, if only you knew.
Lovely rant though.

[Ahmed M]

[]

[Philip A]

@Countdown Team, trivial question, but if a contestant declared 1 in a letters round, and their opponent’s word was disallowed, would the contestant score 1 point?

[Ahmed M]

@Countdown Team, trivial question, but if a contestant declared 1 in a letters round, and their opponent’s word was disallowed, would the contestant score 1 point?

Why wouldn't they?

[Philip A]

@Countdown Team, trivial question, but if a contestant declared 1 in a letters round, and their opponent’s word was disallowed, would the contestant score 1 point?

Why wouldn't they?

They’d probably score 1 for the word ‘a’. Every letter in the dictionary is given as a noun but the letters themselves and their plurals are not words so they probably wouldn’t score 1 or 2 for those. But I wonder if any 1-letter word is allowed at all.