c4countdown

I think I'm right in saying that irregular plurals such as PHENOMENA are admissible conundrums, as are plurals which don't exist in the singular, such as DROPPINGS. The latter category also includes: BACKWOODS, BIOETHICS, DATACOMMS, MONEYBAGS, NEUROBICS, NOUGHTIES, OUTGOINGS (maybe), OUTSKIRTS, SECATEURS, TELECOMMS, TELESALES and WORRYGUTS. Can anyone think of any more which should be valid?

As a further note, the following not-very-irregular plurals are also theoretically possible, although it's doubtful they'd ever be used: FISHWIVES, FLYLEAVES, OURSELVES, PENKNIVES. Despite appearances, CROSSWAYS and AMIDSHIPS aren't nouns at all and are certainly valid conundrums. Presumably words which are the same in the plural, such as LAZYBONES, would also be allowed.

Charlie Reams wrote:I think I'm right in saying that irregular plurals such as PHENOMENA are admissible conundrums, as are plurals which don't exist in the singular, such as DROPPINGS. The latter category also includes: BACKWOODS, BIOETHICS, DATACOMMS, MONEYBAGS, NEUROBICS, NOUGHTIES, OUTGOINGS (maybe), OUTSKIRTS, SECATEURS, TELECOMMS, TELESALES and WORRYGUTS. Can anyone think of any more which should be valid?

As a further note, the following not-very-irregular plurals are also theoretically possible, although it's doubtful they'd ever be used: FISHWIVES, FLYLEAVES, OURSELVES, PENKNIVES. Despite appearances, CROSSWAYS and AMIDSHIPS aren't nouns at all and are certainly valid conundrums. Presumably words which are the same in the plural, such as LAZYBONES, would also be allowed.

Pretty sure LAZYBONES has been on the show - I'm also thinking Ian Volante was a contestant at the time?

Jon Corby wrote: Pretty sure LAZYBONES has been on the show - I'm also thinking Ian Volante was a contestant at the time?

Actually it was Aaron Webber, but 1 out of 2 isn't bad for a man of your seniority.

Charlie Reams wrote:I think I'm right in saying that irregular plurals such as PHENOMENA are admissible conundrums, as are plurals which don't exist in the singular, such as DROPPINGS. The latter category also includes: BACKWOODS, BIOETHICS, DATACOMMS, MONEYBAGS, NEUROBICS, NOUGHTIES, OUTGOINGS (maybe), OUTSKIRTS, SECATEURS, TELECOMMS, TELESALES and WORRYGUTS. Can anyone think of any more which should be valid?

As a further note, the following not-very-irregular plurals are also theoretically possible, although it's doubtful they'd ever be used: FISHWIVES, FLYLEAVES, OURSELVES, PENKNIVES. Despite appearances, CROSSWAYS and AMIDSHIPS aren't nouns at all and are certainly valid conundrums. Presumably words which are the same in the plural, such as LAZYBONES, would also be allowed.

CASTANETS would be usable also, but i'd avoid using the words mentioned in your second paragraph. LAZYBONES has been used before, which is fair enough as there is no singular. Would avoid using the F to V words on the show also.

Charlie Reams wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:Pretty sure LAZYBONES has been on the show - I'm also thinking Ian Volante was a contestant at the time?

Actually it was Aaron Webber, but 1 out of 2 isn't bad for a man of your seniority.

Seems a bit unkind to namecheck just the contestant who didn't get the conundrum in question.

D Eadie wrote:Would avoid using the F to V words on the show also.

I have to admit I don't really understand this. It's not like anyone would solve OURSELVES by covering the S and spotting OURSELVE, or at least no more so than they might with DROPPINGS. Same with Y plurals like AMNESTIES, really.

Incidentally what's your take on OUTGOINGS? The entry is quite ambiguous.

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Charlie Reams wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:Pretty sure LAZYBONES has been on the show - I'm also thinking Ian Volante was a contestant at the time?

Actually it was Aaron Webber, but 1 out of 2 isn't bad for a man of your seniority.

Seems a bit unkind to namecheck just the contestant who didn't get the conundrum in question.

SLEAZYNOB. Brilliant scramble.

Liam Tiernan wrote:SLEAZYNOB. Brilliant scramble.

Haha yes. I always look forward to the awesome scrambles that Damian has concocted for finals and CoC, but he puts some real gems into ordinary games too sometimes.

Phil Reynolds wrote:Seems a bit unkind to namecheck just the contestant who didn't get the conundrum in question.

So, when are you planning to namecheck Bill "Any relation to Andrew?" Blades then, Phil. I'd like to be here when the post arrives.

Charlie Reams wrote:

Liam Tiernan wrote:SLEAZYNOB. Brilliant scramble.

Haha yes. I always look forward to the awesome scrambles that Damian has concocted for finals and CoC, but he puts some real gems into ordinary games too sometimes.

SLEAZYNOB was thought up by my much missed and much adored former colleague and friend, Michael Wylie. I think he'd have been pretty proud of the one i've conjured up for the forthcoming series final. It's somehow not quite right that it can take almost 4 full days to concoct something that has a maximum 30-second shelf-life. Nice to see Michael's efforts are still held in high regard though. I think we can forgive him TINCLEMEN now.

Charlie Reams wrote:

D Eadie wrote:Would avoid using the F to V words on the show also.

I have to admit I don't really understand this. It's not like anyone would solve OURSELVES by covering the S and spotting OURSELVE, or at least no more so than they might with DROPPINGS. Same with Y plurals like AMNESTIES, really.

Incidentally what's your take on OUTGOINGS? The entry is quite ambiguous.

LOL - of course you understand it. I just think it's perhaps a bit too devious. If people get their tits in a twist over GERANIUMS / MEASURING etc, then WIFE / WIVES and KNIFE / KNIVES might have them burning their bras all the way to Channel 4 HQ.

Droppings is never used in the singular so i think that is fair enough. But fishwives etc are plurals and we have said we wouldn't use plurals. I suppose it does away with any ambiguity if we avoid using them. In any case, you've plastered them all over this forum now, so they've been put back at least 2 years already

OUTGOINGS - i'd have no qualms with classifying this in the same way as droppings, so definitely a potential conundrum, but like above, it'll be out of the running for a long time now.

If you keep going like this with the other 13300 words, it'll be curtains for all of them.

D Eadie wrote:LOL - of course you understand it. I just think it's perhaps a bit too devious. If people get their tits in a twist over GERANIUMS / MEASURING etc, then WIFE / WIVES and KNIFE / KNIVES might have them burning their bras all the way to Channel 4 HQ.

Droppings is never used in the singular so i think that is fair enough.

I thought DROPPINGS and IBUPROFEN were great conundrums, just because I like the element of surprise. You've never said that conundrums can't be plural, on the show or in the contestant guide, it's just a sort of private game that people who pay attention may have picked up on, whereas the single solution thing is fairly solidly embedded in the rules of the game. Personally I think it'd be hilarious if the grand final conundrum was a plural .

If you keep going like this with the other 13300 words, it'll be curtains for all of them.

Haha. Don't tempt me.

Charlie Reams wrote:I thought DROPPINGS and IBUPROFEN were great conundrums, just because I like the element of surprise. You've never said that conundrums can't be plural, on the show or in the contestant guide, it's just a sort of private game that people who pay attention may have picked up on, whereas the single solution thing is fairly solidly embedded in the rules of the game. Personally I think it'd be hilarious if the grand final conundrum was a plural .

There are some pretty nice ones coming up over the next few weeks. Very satisfying at this end to say the least. The plural thing isn't a rule as such, and yes, i actually thought about doing one for the final that was a double bugger, in that the mix would have been a word and the answer a plural. I pictured myself logging in here immediately after the show to read all the furore about it, but then i realised that 99% of you will be in the studio when the show is made, and i want my beer in peace after the finals, thank you very much.

No doubt you'll be rushing to add 'droppings' to apterous any time now, you plagiaristic bastard.

Plural conundrums are shit, they shouldn't be allowed

On for a max game and lost

Kirk Bevins wrote:Plural conundrums are shit, they shouldn't be allowed

On for a max game and lost

Don't think it matters in this case, Kirk. You'd have been hard pressed to beat 0.7 seconds no matter what the answer was. You're past it mate.

A few weeks ago, in a charity shop, I found an almost new copy of the "Countdown Bumper Puzzle Book - Celebrating 20 years on Channel Four" by Michael Wylie and Damian Eadie. At 49p I wasn't going to leave it there.

Quoting from one of the introductory sections: "As a rule of thumb, we never use 8-letter plurals as conundrums - so words like TROMBONES will never appear."

I realise this comes from neither the program nor the guidelines for contestants, so it's not something the program is obliged to adhere to - but it has been said.

Clive Brooker wrote:
I realise this comes from neither the program nor the guidelines for contestants, so it's not something the program is obliged to adhere to - but it has been said.

And has been said many times on here. I was under the inmpression, from what I've read on this forum, that it was stated in the advice to contestants. But there you go!

Jon Corby wrote:

Charlie Reams wrote:I think I'm right in saying that irregular plurals such as PHENOMENA are admissible conundrums, as are plurals which don't exist in the singular, such as DROPPINGS. The latter category also includes: BACKWOODS, BIOETHICS, DATACOMMS, MONEYBAGS, NEUROBICS, NOUGHTIES, OUTGOINGS (maybe), OUTSKIRTS, SECATEURS, TELECOMMS, TELESALES and WORRYGUTS. Can anyone think of any more which should be valid?

As a further note, the following not-very-irregular plurals are also theoretically possible, although it's doubtful they'd ever be used: FISHWIVES, FLYLEAVES, OURSELVES, PENKNIVES. Despite appearances, CROSSWAYS and AMIDSHIPS aren't nouns at all and are certainly valid conundrums. Presumably words which are the same in the plural, such as LAZYBONES, would also be allowed.

Pretty sure LAZYBONES has been on the show - I'm also thinking Ian Volante was a contestant at the time?

Is this the impression I give?

I can see why someone might not want to have conundrums that are just 8-letter nouns with S stuck on the end, but not when they are the same person that allows an ING conundrum or two every week (which is worse if anything).

lol

edit: oh, that lol was to Ian, not Gevin.

Jon Corby wrote:lol

edit: oh, that lol was to Ian, not Gevin.

Hey Jon, you and I seem to be the only cool people on here who aren't out on the razz this Friday evening. Fancy a beer?

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:lol

edit: oh, that lol was to Ian, not Gevin.

Hey Jon, you and I seem to be the only cool people on here who aren't out on the razz this Friday evening. Fancy a beer?

Not tonight mate, I've got some kind of pig flu I think.

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:lol

edit: oh, that lol was to Ian, not Gevin.

Hey Jon, you and I seem to be the only cool people on here who aren't out on the razz this Friday evening. Fancy a beer?

Rhyming slang?

Jon Corby wrote:

Phil Reynolds wrote:Hey Jon, you and I seem to be the only cool people on here who aren't out on the razz this Friday evening. Fancy a beer?

Not tonight mate, I've got some kind of pig flu I think.

Bad luck bro. Just had a bottle of Stella while watching Armstrong & Miller and put another one in the fridge for you, so I'll have it myself when Jonathan Ross comes on.

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:

Phil Reynolds wrote:Hey Jon, you and I seem to be the only cool people on here who aren't out on the razz this Friday evening. Fancy a beer?

Not tonight mate, I've got some kind of pig flu I think.

Bad luck bro. Just had a bottle of Stella while watching Armstrong & Miller and put another one in the fridge for you, so I'll have it myself when Jonathan Ross comes on.

I'm sat here drinking tea and not watching telly

D Eadie wrote:I think we can forgive him TINCLEMEN now.

I disagree.

Gavin Chipper wrote:I can see why someone might not want to have conundrums that are just 8-letter nouns with S stuck on the end, but not when they are the same person that allows an ING conundrum or two every week (which is worse if anything).

They are not the same person. One is called Scott Bentham.

D Eadie wrote:

Gavin Chipper wrote:I can see why someone might not want to have conundrums that are just 8-letter nouns with S stuck on the end, but not when they are the same person that allows an ING conundrum or two every week (which is worse if anything).

They are not the same person. One is called Scott Bentham.

Glad that's cleared up!