c4countdown

So, it's here at last, the Series 71 finals, and what a cracker they look set to be

And today's first match, on paper at least, has all the hallmarks of being a cracker, as we have the #1 seed, Dan McColm, taking on the father of the champion of 5 series ago (whose name escapes me....... ), the #8 seed, Paul Worsley.

Statistics Corner:

Firstly, No.1 Seed Dan "The Kineton Kolossus" McColm - 8 Wins, 942 Points. (Average: 117.75)
Highest Score: 137 vs. Harry Jarrett (6th Game)
Lowest Score: 92 vs. Ben Hodgson (2nd Game)
9's Achieved: 4/5
Total Points/Max/%: 942/1026 (92%)
Letters Points/Max/%: 580/629 (92%)
Numbers Points/Max/%: 302/317 (95%)
Conundrum Points/Max/%: 60/80 (75%)

Secondly, No.8 Seed Paul "The Blackpool Behemoth" Worsley - 6 Wins, 647 Points. (Average: 92.43)
Highest Score: 108 vs. Kieran O'Driscoll (4th Game)
Lowest Score: 70 vs. Michael McDowell (7th Game)
9's Achieved: 1/5
Total Points/Max/%: 647/901 (72%)
Letters Points/Max/%: 436/551 (79%)
Numbers Points/Max/%: 191/280 (68%)
Conundrum Points/Max/%: 20/70 (29%)

I'll be around for the recap later.

DEAFEST appropriate 7 in R1

Always thought numbers was Dan's weakness - a not too hard standard method beats him (assuming 4L has the same standard method as 3L). Unlucky for Paul there.

I am assuming the teaser answer is not MATINESS but the other 8.

TILAPIA in round 10.

Jack Worsley wrote:TILAPIA in round 10.

I am told THALAMI is also valid there (plural of THALAMUS).

Was hoping Dan would say DITTO to Paul's TOWAI, just to see what would have happened.

Well done to Dan for a convincing win; well done to Paul for getting into the 8+ Club.

My mum spotted Tilapia from the audience, Damian refused to believe it

These finals have six people that are worth cheering for but not the other two. One is only there due to blatant cheating which is especially disgusting and the other is only there because of a pathetic and terrible decision by Dictionary Corner. The fact is there should be two other much more worthy contestants in there, so lets root for everyone except for those two.

Well played chaps. Congrats to Dan for getting through to the semis and to Paul for making the last eight.

Jordan Leckonby wrote:These finals have six people that are worth cheering for but not the other two. One is only there due to blatant cheating which is especially disgusting and the other is only there because of a pathetic and terrible decision by Dictionary Corner. The fact is there should be two other much more worthy contestants in there, so lets root for everyone except for those two.

I'm getting the popcorn in, this is going to be great.

As Tony correctly points out, there was a standard method for the 4L - I was overcomplicating it by looking for a route via 175*5 or 125*7.

Jordan Leckonby wrote:These finals have six people that are worth cheering for but not the other two. [...] the other is only there because of a pathetic and terrible decision by Dictionary Corner. The fact is there should be two other much more worthy contestants in there, so lets root for everyone except for those two.

No chance, #Team George!

Fred Mumford wrote:

Jordan Leckonby wrote:These finals have six people that are worth cheering for but not the other two. One is only there due to blatant cheating which is especially disgusting and the other is only there because of a pathetic and terrible decision by Dictionary Corner. The fact is there should be two other much more worthy contestants in there, so lets root for everyone except for those two.

I'm getting the popcorn in, this is going to be great.

Blatant trolling. No-one should waste their time responding to it properly.

Jordan Leckonby wrote:These finals have six people that are worth cheering for but not the other two. One is only there due to blatant cheating which is especially disgusting and the other is only there because of a pathetic and terrible decision by Dictionary Corner. The fact is there should be two other much more worthy contestants in there, so lets root for everyone except for those two.

Hahaha! For one thing, Tricia completely deserves her place in the finals, a brilliant player with an amazing octorun including some of the best spots EVER (what the hell is DESPOTISM??). Sure, I got lucky in one round, but remember that there were 119 other rounds in my run, and I'm really happy with how I played. Support whoever you want to, but I think me and Tricia are very deservant of our finals spots.

Have a great Christmas you miserable berk

That conundrum. Wow.

There is one comment on this thread that I am assuming is there to cause a drama as is completely unjustified, insulting, and frankly rude. I would have been nearer Paul's score today than Dan ' s ..very impressive

And I am looking forward to the impressive displays from George, Tricia et al

Great game etc. A few difficult rounds meant Paul lost by more than he probably normally would have done, and Dan did very well to get everything he did.

But I agree with everyone else. That post was blatant trolling, Fred knows there should have been a semicolon in his sentence.

I'm hoping for a George v Antoinette final but I think Dan is far too strong... I was amazed both missed the easy first numbers!

What was the pathetic decision?

Jon Corby wrote:What was the pathetic decision?

Your decision to join this discussion.

Gavin Chipper wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:What was the pathetic decision?

Your decision to join this discussion.

I think he meant when they disallowed Jonny's HEADWAYS

I noticed that Sam Turley is a fan of Dan on Twitter. Shame it wasn't Billy

Well played both today. I was delighted to see you in the finals Paul after some fantastic games in your original run. I'm sure Jack was really proud of you and quite right too.

Looking forward to seeing some real cracking contests over the next week and a half- particularly to seeing Antoinette and George again who as well as being excellent players both seem to really enjoy the experience.

Both played well, although it must be said that the previous day's prelim was probably played to an even higher standard. I bet that doesn't happen very often.

George Pryn wrote:

Gavin Chipper wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:What was the pathetic decision?

Your decision to join this discussion.

I think he meant when they disallowed Jonny's HEADWAYS

Ah yeah, I remember now. I don't think I matched it up because it seems at odds with Jordan's insistence that we should "not get behind" George because of it, who was undoubtedly an excellent contestant (in all aspects) and very worthy of a finals place. He's right about Tricia though, of course.

Gavin, I would appreciate it if you could refrain from making unprovoked insults, they especially seem out of place in threads related to the finals, which should be a celebration of the game and the finalists, and should not resemble the school playground (apart from when Conor and Kai were on). Are there posting guidelines actually for this forum? If so, they should cover things like this. Maybe I should write some, to go with the new forum software?

Jon Corby wrote: Gavin, I would appreciate it if you could refrain from making unprovoked insults, they especially seem out of place in threads related to the finals, which should be a celebration of the game and the finalists, and should not resemble the school playground (apart from when Conor and Kai were on). Are there posting guidelines actually for this forum? If so, they should cover things like this. Maybe I should write some, to go with the new forum software?

Maybe you should. It's difficult to know what to post sometimes. I have my own flowchart of how to respond to posts and I normally follow it through unthinkingly but I had a proper look at it and it does seem to suggest that I'm supposed to insult "Jon Corby" more often than one would expect.

None of that (or this bit) is true. I just followed the flowchart as usual to make this post.

On checking your flowchart were you not also surprised by the enormous number of "post like a complete dick" outcomes?

Jon Corby wrote:On checking your flowchart were you not also surprised by the enormous number of "post like a complete dick" outcomes?

Only mildly.

Fantastic performance Dan, well done!

(100*50+25)/5-75-7 is the standard method for round 3 (I got it by this way in the 30 seconds and completely missed the way Rachel did it!)

My invalid declaration of logboats^ brought to end to my scoring run - before that round, I had scored in 102 consecutive rounds.

Dan McColm wrote:My invalid declaration of logboats^ brought to end to my scoring run - before that round, I had scored in 102 consecutive rounds.

This was such a huge surprise.

At least I waited until after my last heat game had been broadcast to ask that!