c4countdown

LUKE JOHNSON-DAVIES
Highest score: 143 vs Gagan Singh Gill, game 6
Lowest score: 113 vs Jim Torpey, game 3
Score: 1,160
Average: 128.89
Max faced: 1,265
% score: 91.7%
Raw score: 1,160
Raw average: 128.89
Raw % score: 91.7%
Conundrums: 7/9

IAN VOLANTE
Highest score: 119 vs Josh Parmley, game 3
Lowest score: [strike]78 vs Bradley Cates[/strike] 82 vs Ryan Styles, Quarter Final
Score: 908
Average: 100.89
Max faced: 1,164
% score: 78.0%
Raw score: 967
Raw average: 107.44
Raw % score: 83.1%
Conundrums: 6/9

((100-8)×10+4+8)/4 = 233 as my alternative in round 3. (I had it typed out in case Rachel didn't get it and I thought it would be a shame to waste it.)

The second numbers didn't actually require saving the 75 as the only odd number to add at the end as in Ian's method.

(75-4)×8+8-10/2 = 571.

Well done Luke- another strong showing. Very well done throughout Ian - you came across very well and I'm sure you can hold your head up high knowing that you took Luke to his lowest score, as well as being the 1st person in his run to beat him in a round where he has given a valid declaration

Good game. Ian played very well all series and it was good to see someone who has been part of this community for the best part of 20 years do so well, but Luke was just too strong on the day.

That numbers was the first round which Luke has lost despite having a valid word/numsol. i.e. the first time he has scored raw points that haven't also scored properly.

Chinks in the armour?

If Sam beats Leo tomorrow with a 95%+ game he may become statistical favourite.

180th Episode of the Series, and we've got Levi Roots here again, never knew how he derived the word "Reggae" up until today; I guess it's nice and fitting when people pay tribute to moments in history.

Letters: Ian goes once again with POUTINE as like yesterday and Luke with a good spot of PINETUM in Round 1, but then after the first Teatime Teaser, Luke deals Ian with heavy blows by getting SOAPINESS and then AUMBRIES in Rounds 4 and 5 respectively The former then spots UNHOPED in Round 11 to widen the gap even further. Alas, Ian couldn't keep up after that and tried to risk a nine in Round 13, but it didn't work out and gave Luke over 100 points by that point.

Numbers: Luke still plays it simple with his usual one large combination, but it was quite tricky in Round 3 with double fours and double eights that no one got it perfectly; fortunately Round 9 was much, much simpler. On the other hand, Ian goes with one large and succeeds in getting it perfectly in Round 6 whereas Luke couldn't much to everyone's surprise on the daily chat! Finally, before bowing out for the second time, he picks six small despite the game being up for him and well done to both for getting the solution (although I personally preferred his solution of 16 squared.)

Conundrum: Seems like the difficulty of the Conundrum is increasing and this was no easy one as well; you know it must be tough when even Luke can't solve it, and even Susie did mention it's a rare word after the answer turned out to be MACABRELY. Now you wonder what could possibly come out tomorrow and the day after at this rate...

I predicted that Luke would win somewhat comfortably with a margin of around 30 points. However, the margin was far wider at 47 points (identical to that of the first Quarter-Finals as well!). So, it's goodbye to Ian for the second time in 13 years. But, just like Phil, you came back and did a lot better. You fought off quite well yesterday, but perhaps all that energy was consumed in that nail-biting match resulting in the outcome today Not all is lost though, you did deny Luke a Numbers round, and he was unstoppable up until now so well done, at least you got something out of it! I hope to see you around in the community and continue to be active!

This is only the first Semi-Final and there's the other one tomorrow! Will it be Sam or Leo who would appear alongside Luke in the final episode on Friday? Stay tuned!

Progress:
QF1 (10 December): Luke Johnson-Davies (#1) vs David Kempshall (#8) (136 - 89)
QF2 (11 December): Sam Cappleman-Lynes (#2) vs Damien Doughty (#7) (121 - 71)
QF3 (14 December): Leo Smith (#3) vs Phil Hulme (#6) (91 - 80)
QF4 (15 December): Ian Volante (#4) vs Ryan Styles (#5) (82 - 76)
SF1 (16 December): Luke Johnson-Davies (QF1 Winner) vs Ian Volante (QF4 Winner) (112 - 65)
SF2 (17 December): Sam Cappleman-Lynes (QF2 Winner) vs Leo Smith (QF3 Winner)
GF (18 December): Luke Johnson-Davies (SF1 Winner) vs (SF2 Winner)

R5: Subedari

Also happy to say I got the con in about 12 secs. Shame I can't do that in a game!

It should be noted that I had the 8 in R13, but I went for the hail Mary to give myself the slimmest of chances if it worked. That brings the margin down below 40 at least. And only AUMBRIES was beyond me - everything else was gettable and at my best, I would have had a crucial to lose on.

Ian Volante wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:38 pm It should be noted that I had the 8 in R13, but I went for the hail Mary to give myself the slimmest of chances if it worked. That brings the margin down below 40 at least. And only AUMBRIES was beyond me - everything else was gettable and at my best, I would have had a crucial to lose on.

You did a great job Ian - was proper impressed by that numbers solve under pressure.

No point going down the "what if" road - you should be rightly proud of your SF achievement.

I have it on good authority that some of next week's shirts will make your sartorial choice yesterday look subdued

Ian Volante wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:38 pm It should be noted that I had the 8 in R13, but I went for the hail Mary to give myself the slimmest of chances if it worked. That brings the margin down below 40 at least. And only AUMBRIES was beyond me - everything else was gettable and at my best, I would have had a crucial to lose on.

You did very well there Ian getting to the semi finals, this is something you should be proud of.

(100*10-4)/4-8-8 also for 233. 10/10 nines for Luke, incredible! Also Ian you should be very pleased to make it this far in such a tough series, great play

Rhys Benjamin wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 3:05 pm That numbers was the first round which Luke has lost despite having a valid word/numsol. i.e. the first time he has scored raw points that haven't also scored properly.

Chinks in the armour?

I don't know - it's not as if he maxed every round before this game, and unless you do that, there's always a chance someone can beat you. And it's more like to happen with the higher level of competition in the latter stages.

So I'd say it's a bit early to start talking about rogue Chinamen hiding in his chain mail.

I was feeling well pleased with myself for having "solved" the conundrum with CREAMABLY.

R9 Alt.: (5+2)*(9-1)*3

Phil H wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 10:21 pm I was feeling well pleased with myself for having "solved" the conundrum with CREAMABLY.

That's what I got!

Just posting to say well played to Luke and Ian, and that I also got CREAMABLY. There's enough of us that it almost qualifies as a R15 alt.

Very well played Luke, and unlucky Ian. Luke again maxing all the letters rounds!

Rhys Benjamin wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 3:05 pm That numbers was the first round which Luke has lost despite having a valid word/numsol. i.e. the first time he has scored raw points that haven't also scored properly.

Chinks in the armour?

If Sam beats Leo tomorrow with a 95%+ game he may become statistical favourite.

What's the basis for this statistical assertion?

Thanks all. He is a machine on them letters.

Conor wrote: ↑Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:18 am Very well played Luke, and unlucky Ian. Luke again maxing all the letters rounds!

Rhys Benjamin wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 3:05 pm That numbers was the first round which Luke has lost despite having a valid word/numsol. i.e. the first time he has scored raw points that haven't also scored properly.

Chinks in the armour?

If Sam beats Leo tomorrow with a 95%+ game he may become statistical favourite.

What's the basis for this statistical assertion?

I'm assuming you mean the last line here, Conor?

Well, I always tend to look at tv % of the max as to who is the "favourite" for a game; that's how I correctly predicted Ed McCullagh would beat Adam Gillard in the S64 final, even though Adam was the higher seed. By doing this, it corrects the points totals for strength of opponent and exceedingly low/high maxes.

Sam has a "game in hand" as I write this, as it were, but in terms of raw score, Luke has scored 1,279 out of a possible 1,400 (91.4%), whereas Sam has scored 1,074 out of a possible 1,178 (91.2%), so even though Luke's average score (127.9) is far higher than Sam's (119.3), I surmise that this is mainly because Luke has had a higher max available to him than Sam. So if Sam can boost his % today up above Luke's, I'd make him the favourite for the final.

Well played Ian. An excellent game. The only thing I have to say for myself is that I got the conundrum. Apart from that I was beaten miserably.......