c4countdown

Saturday Countdown!

I did ((10+5)*6-8)*9+5=743 in the third numbers (round 9 or whatever) - in the time as well!

PELAGES was deemed acceptable by Susie (though not declared by a contestant), but it's not on Apterous. Presumably a borderline mass noun but Lexico doesn't exist any more so I'm shooting in the dark with these now.

Well done to Alan Young on his 8th win.

Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Sat Sep 24, 2022 3:27 pm Saturday Countdown!

I did ((10+5)*6-8)*9+5=743 in the third numbers (round 9 or whatever) - in the time as well!

PELAGES was deemed acceptable by Susie (though not declared by a contestant), but it's not on Apterous. Presumably a borderline mass noun but Lexico doesn't exist any more so I'm shooting in the dark with these now.

Well done to Alan Young on his 8th win.

Nothing mass about it in premium

Definition of pelage in English:
pelage
Pronunciation: /ˈpɛlɪdʒ/
NOUN

Zoology
The fur, hair, or wool of a mammal:
their pelage is soft, thick, and woolly

Interesting, thanks. It seems Apterous is wrong then. (It may have been correct previously of course and then the dictionary definition changed.)

Yep looks that way

https://www.apterous.org/ticket_view.ph ... 625#p61842
https://www.apterous.org/ticket_view.ph ... 624#p61841

Both Ray and Philip ticketed it for removal in 2018, and both said it was clearly marked as a mass noun.


Edit: Have ticketed its addition

That's good you've done it so I don't have to!

Did Colin cost Alan seven points there? If Alan hadn't agreed with him that he was "thinking of putting the 'I' in to make "LUSTIER", would Susie have asked him to spell his word, or would she just have taken it for granted that it was LUSTRE?

Yeah, the whole thing about asking for spellings seems very inconsistent. It's been claimed that Susie asks more than the viewer is aware of and that it's often cut out, but I don't have much confidence in the system.

At least Alan only lost 6 points.

David Williams wrote: ↑Sat Sep 24, 2022 9:27 pm Did Colin cost Alan seven points there? If Alan hadn't agreed with him that he was "thinking of putting the 'I' in to make "LUSTIER", would Susie have asked him to spell his word, or would she just have taken it for granted that it was LUSTRE?

No. Alan cost himself any points at all by declaring 6 instead of 7 and misspelling his 6-letter word. Susie did absolutely the right thing to ask for spelling, as ER/RE can have indentical pronunciations (e.g. DIPOTRE and the US DIOPTER). The discussion about adding the I came after Alan chose his word.

Well done Alan on Octochampdom

Philip A wrote: ↑Sun Sep 25, 2022 12:13 pm

David Williams wrote: ↑Sat Sep 24, 2022 9:27 pm Did Colin cost Alan seven points there? If Alan hadn't agreed with him that he was "thinking of putting the 'I' in to make "LUSTIER", would Susie have asked him to spell his word, or would she just have taken it for granted that it was LUSTRE?

No. Alan cost himself any points at all by declaring 6 instead of 7 and misspelling his 6-letter word. Susie did absolutely the right thing to ask for spelling, as ER/RE can have indentical pronunciations (e.g. DIPOTRE and the US DIOPTER). The discussion about adding the I came after Alan chose his word.

Obviously I meant Colin may have cost him six points, not seven. The point being whether Susie would have asked him to spell his word if Colin hadn't said anything. If she hadn't he would have got six points, no-one would ever have known, and Alan would still think LUSTER is a word. If Susie does routinely ask more often than we see, and this is often cut, then I'm pleased to hear it.

I’m sure Susie would have checked anyway, and she immediately ruled Alan’s spelling invalid as soon as he clarified the spelling so she was probably on the relevant page in the dictionary. I would have done the same if I’d heard CENTRE, DIOPTRE, LUSTRE etc. Colin still made a perfectly reasonable point about Alan’s ‘safe’ bet and the potential wordplay (LUSTER + I) that would have made a 7. I wouldn’t say Colin cost Alan points.

Better to check these things rather than letting them slip by (this applies/happens to all quiz shows). When a contestant says/intends CENTRE, for example, no-one watching at home would know whether they wrote CENTRE or CENTER, so spelling should be checked if the contestant hasn’t already done so. It’s a bit like football referees deciding that play should continue when a player points out that there has been a blatant foul that the cameras didn’t see – or winning £64,000 for saying that the minimum no. of strokes to win a tennis set is 24 when in fact it’s 12 and therefore you should have been going home with £32,000!

The point of checking for spelling in traditional pen and paper Countdown is to check the contestant’s phonetic answer matches their written answer, since nobody sees their paper work – unlike online Countdown, where players see each other’s final answers after each round rather than hear them.

Lexicographers may need an extra prompt or point from someone else (host, contestant, guest, director etc.) in case they forget to check. In 2002 a contestant said RAIMENTS, which was initially accepted until Richard Whiteley raised a point about its validity. Susie Dent checked and realised that RAIMENT was a mass noun and then disallowed it, admitting she allowed it by mistake (FTR, RAIMENTS is now countable in the current dictionary).

Sometimes you just have to check, and then check again. After all, on all TV shows, the people who make them always know more than what the viewers are aware.

GALIPEES in R7

R6 Alt.: (100*9+6*2)/8 = 114

Well done on becoming an octochamp Alan.

Toby McDonald wrote: ↑Sun Sep 25, 2022 9:49 pm R6 Alt.: (100*9+6*2)/8 = 114

Nice.

R6 Alt: (9+2+8)x6 = 114