c4countdown

Today we should see two forum members in action, as I believe James is being joined by Jack, who some of us met at CoNot on Saturday.

Best of luck to both of you.

OVARITIS as a beater, rd 4.

SHUTSERUP with a nine in round 3

Simpler first numbers:

75x7 + 50 - 6/6

RIGADOON - round 1.

Barry Cryer told that ventriloquist's story the last time he was on. As I recall Kai was the champion at the time.

You should see him down the pub...

close one this... that's not Jack from apterous is it? Missed the start...

I would have been 100 percent on that...

ooh... tense. I wonder did James have a 6 there? Obviously not... polite was an easy enough spot...

I'd never in a million years write 'per cent' as two words. Plus I've never come across this one before; American words are allowed, but American spellings are not. So I suppose 'percent' is the American spelling of 'per cent' - it doesn't matter than 'per cent' is two words not one. But I'm amazed it's not it.

Andy Wilson wrote:ooh... tense. I wonder did James have a 6 there? Obviously not... polite was an easy enough spot...

Yeah, there were lots of easy 6s (PLANET was another one), and there was also POLENTA for 7 - Jack obviously lost focus for a moment there.

ARSETEARS

What a game... WELL DONE JAMES!!!

Ouch, unlucky Jack.

I don't post in these threads very often... but that was awesome!!

Bout time there was a good quality close encounter.

Well done James. Great Win

Ben Wilson wrote:Ouch, unlucky Jack.

Yes, if only he hadn't messed up the last numbers round he'd have been safe going into the conundrum. Well played by both players but congratulations especially for a brilliant fight back by the DOD-a-like.

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Andy Wilson wrote:ooh... tense. I wonder did James have a 6 there? Obviously not... polite was an easy enough spot...

Yeah, there were lots of easy 6s (PLANET was another one), and there was also POLENTA for 7 - Jack obviously lost focus for a moment there.

IMPLANT, TOENAIL, ELATION etc - I think that round is the one that Jack would look back on as the decider, unlucky Jack.

Great game. Well done James, and real bad luck Jack.

Thanks guys, at least I lost in a good game!

There were actually FOUR conundrums, a countdown record. Due to time constraints they cut two of them out, including one with me incorrectly guessing "puppeter" when the answer was "puppeteer". Shame they cut those, but oh well.

Well played James for coming back like that!

4 conundrums!

Awesome... how long was left after you guessed PUPPETER for James to buzz in with the right answer?!

Martin Gardner wrote:I'd never in a million years write 'per cent' as two words. Plus I've never come across this one before; American words are allowed, but American spellings are not. So I suppose 'percent' is the American spelling of 'per cent' - it doesn't matter than 'per cent' is two words not one. But I'm amazed it's not it.

Would Susie have checked PERCENT had Jeff not interjected?

Or would someone had told her anyway and it would have been edited

*snigger*

Well done James, great game. Bad luck Jack, really felt for you there.

Darren Carter wrote:

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Andy Wilson wrote:ooh... tense. I wonder did James have a 6 there? Obviously not... polite was an easy enough spot...

Yeah, there were lots of easy 6s (PLANET was another one), and there was also POLENTA for 7 - Jack obviously lost focus for a moment there.

IMPLANT, TOENAIL, ELATION etc - I think that round is the one that Jack would look back on as the decider, unlucky Jack.

Ooh, PTOMAINE then.

(Sorry, I haven't watched it yet)

Jack Morgan wrote:There were actually FOUR conundrums, a countdown record. Due to time constraints they cut two of them out...

This seems wrong to me. A bit ironic that it happened on a day when the DC yarn was a repeat (allegedly).

Edit: Thanks for telling us Jack. Exciting game and very bad luck.

Unlucky Jack, great game and very well played to you both

Four conundrums!
A tight finish such as that is so rare - and yet they decide not to show us.
I think that is unfair and silly.
Great game James and Jack.

And had Jack risked REMODEL he would have won it too. No offence to James but I thought that was Jack's game in the bag, easily. Can't believe he lost it. Unlucky mate - what a game.

marc meakin wrote:

Martin Gardner wrote:I'd never in a million years write 'per cent' as two words. Plus I've never come across this one before; American words are allowed, but American spellings are not. So I suppose 'percent' is the American spelling of 'per cent' - it doesn't matter than 'per cent' is two words not one. But I'm amazed it's not it.

Would Susie have checked PERCENT had Jeff not interjected?

Or would someone had told her anyway and it would have been edited

upstairs had already spotted it, jeff justs looks bad for asking on tv

Andrew Hulme wrote:4 conundrums!

Awesome... how long was left after you guessed PUPPETER for James to buzz in with the right answer?!

I had already buzzed at this stage, being so hyped up from still being in the game (luckily), seeing letters that weren't even there

Kirk Bevins wrote:And had Jack risked REMODEL he would have won it too. No offence to James but I thought that was Jack's game in the bag, easily. Can't believe he lost it. Unlucky mate - what a game.

yeah, but if I stuck with the words I had in part two I would have won, what happened happened and made it a great game to watch (not to take part in though)

Saving the best for last:
Jack has to be one of the nicest people i've ever had the pleasure to meet, shame one of us had to lose but he took really well, much much better than I would have, thoroughly enjoyed spending the day in the studios with him and if your reading this Jack, drop me a line so we can stay in touch

Martin Gardner wrote:I've never come across this one before; American words are allowed, but American spellings are not.

Seriously? You've never heard that before? That's been the rule since Whiteley's days. Do you watch the programme at all?

Peonies for another 7 in round 2

I had no idea the Jack from CoNot was on today until 3:26pm - did you trek to Notts from Whitstable?!

One of the best games to watch this year, and it's a shame the full conundrum saga couldn't have been played out. To lose on a crucial conundrum has got to be tough, but to lose on 4 of them?

Well played to James though, the two conundrum spots shown were very quick under such pressure.

I think that it would be a good idea if challengers, who get beaten by a tiebreak conundrum, automatically get another chance in the next series

Does anybody else agree ?

Andy Thomson wrote:

Martin Gardner wrote:I've never come across this one before; American words are allowed, but American spellings are not.

Seriously? You've never heard that before? That's been the rule since Whiteley's days. Do you watch the programme at all?

You've actually missed the emphasis (or it was a deliberate joke, in which case I've missed it too). I mean, obviously stuff like FLAVOR/FLAVOUR it's a pretty clear cut case, but what happens when one word becomes two? Can you consider something to be a 'variant spelling' in this case? I'm not aware of anything specific that covers this in the rules, but I reckon they got this one right. Somewhat astoundingly, PERCENT isn't in my older ODE at all. Surely this is just a really bad omission.

marc meakin wrote:I think that it would be a good idea if challengers, who get beaten by a tiebreak conundrum, automatically get another chance in the next series

Does anybody else agree ?

I'm sure someone agrees, just not me.

Martin Gardner wrote:Somewhat astoundingly, PERCENT isn't in my older ODE at all. Surely this is just a really bad omission.

Why? PER CENT is the standard spelling in British English. If PERCENT is creeping in as a variant, then it's fair enough that newer editions list it as such, but the compilers of older editions weren't clairvoyant.

Well, this version was published in 1998. Searching for "percent" on Google books between 1500 and 1998 gets 188,536 hits (English only) while "percent" gets 157,600 (English only). So even before 1998, percent was the more common spelling. When I say 'per cent' it makes me pause between the words, while percent I stress the last syllable.

I'm trying to think of an occasion I have had cause to write 'per cent' instead of just %, none is coming to me...

Martin Gardner wrote:When I say 'per cent' it makes me pause between the words, while percent I stress the last syllable.

Really? So does the space "make you" pause between the words when you say per minute, per month, per diem, per annum etc? And why should per cent be a special case and spelled as one word when all the others are two?

marc meakin wrote:I think that it would be a good idea if challengers, who get beaten by a tiebreak conundrum, automatically get another chance in the next series

Does anybody else agree ?

Yeah, I think so. But I'm pretty sure if such a person reapplied they'd be given another chance anyway, so it just filters out people who weren't that fussed anyway.

Michael Wallace wrote:I'm trying to think of an occasion I have had cause to write 'per cent' instead of just %, none is coming to me...

FWIW it's a lot easier on a phone, at least on my model, to type words than to find symbols.

Charlie Reams wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:I'm trying to think of an occasion I have had cause to write 'per cent' instead of just %, none is coming to me...

FWIW it's a lot easier on a phone, at least on my model, to type words than to find symbols.

I think I'd always go for the symbol option on the grounds of character-saving, although I suppose if your message was something short like "I'm 100% sure I'm right" then it's not that big a dael.

Phil Reynolds wrote:And why should per cent be a special case and spelled as one word when all the others are two?

That's just how English works. We went from "to morrow" to "to-morrow" to "tomorrow", same with "alone" (used to be "all one") and many other examples. "Alright" is now pretty standard, and other words that commonly occur together, including "per cent" will tend to undergo the same process.

marc meakin wrote:I think that it would be a good idea if challengers, who get beaten by a tiebreak conundrum, automatically get another chance in the next series

Does anybody else agree ?

I disagree, because all appearances on Countdown are at the discretion of the organisers.

Carrying on from my previous post, from 1998-2009, 'percent' is more than six-times as common as 'per cent'.

Michael Wallace wrote:"I'm 100% sure I'm right" then it's not that big a dael.

You can never be 100% sure of anything according to Charlie.

Kirk Bevins wrote:You can never be 100% sure of anything according to Charlie.

Is he certain of that?

Kirk Bevins wrote:You can never be 100% sure of anything according to Charlie.

Are you certain of that?

Kirk Bevins wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:"I'm 100% sure I'm right" then it's not that big a dael.

You can never be 100% sure of anything according to Charlie.

...and anyone who understands maths. Did you spot that Raccoon was mocking you in the OP?

Just caught up with this game online. Quality stuff! As someone else mentioned above I really thought Jack had it in the bag but well done to James. Very eerie that you should manage 89 after it was mentioned in the introduction! Just about to watch your 4th game now.

Phil Reynolds wrote:brilliant fight back by the DOD-a-like.

Strange I thought he looked a bit like Jonathon Coles. Now I'm wondering what really went on during their quarter-final
Just to add, Jack it was great to meet you at CONOT and hope to see you at the next one. Speaking of CONOT, despite the flattish rounds today there were a few Countdown Whatever! 9s: ANTIVIRUS, BEDJACKET, RECEPTION, PTOMAINES/MELANOTIC/PLANETOID etc and having read Chris Davies post RIGADOONS?