c4countdown

Has there ever been a series that has concluded in a foregone way? By that, I mean was there one series in which the winner was already determined before the Conundrum? If that is the case, do they even play the Conundrum?

Yes.

Do they play the Conundrum in that case?

Yes.

So, unless the Conundrum is crucial, it's all about bragging rights for the losing contestant, isn't it?

Yes.

I trust you both. I figure you've both seen several series' endings.

So far there have been 57 series completed. Full details are available for the final in every series except the first.

Only in 21 of those series has the conundrum been crucial. Indeed, in 25 of the finals the winner has been determined before the last numbers round. And in one final, the result was a foregone conclusion before the last letters round.

Howard Somerset wrote:So far there have been 57 series completed. Full details are available for the final in every series except the first.

Only in 21 of those series has the conundrum been crucial. Indeed, in 25 of the finals the winner has been determined before the last numbers round. And in one final, the result was a foregone conclusion before the last letters round.

Forgive my pedanticness but 21 + 25 + 1 = 47. What were the other 10 finals?

I'm assuming they were determined by the result of the last numbers round.

I think.

Joseph Bolas wrote:

Howard Somerset wrote:So far there have been 57 series completed. Full details are available for the final in every series except the first.

Only in 21 of those series has the conundrum been crucial. Indeed, in 25 of the finals the winner has been determined before the last numbers round. And in one final, the result was a foregone conclusion before the last letters round.

Forgive my pedanticness but 21 + 25 + 1 = 47. What were the other 10 finals?

Non-crucial conundrums decided after the last numbers?

jimbentley wrote:I'm assuming they were determined by the result of the last numbers round.

I think.

Exactly

Question 1: What's the earliest round at which a game has ever been decided?

Question 2: What's the earliest round at which a game has ever been decided given the selections that actually came out?

Just to clarify (regarding finals):

1 - don't know (series 1)
1 - winner determined before final letters round
25 - winner determined before final numbers round (includes the 1 above)
35 - winner determined before conundrum (includes the 25 above)
21 - crucial conundrum

21 + 35 + 1(the don't know) = 57

And to add something.

Of the 21 crucial conundrums in series finals:

6 - the player who was trailing got the conundrum, and won from behind
8 - the player who was leading got the conundrum
7 - neither player got the conundrum. In 6 of these, the player already leading won the series. In the seventh, as they were already level, the series was decided on a tie-break conundrum.

Charlie Reams wrote:Question 1: What's the earliest round at which a game has ever been decided?

Question 2: What's the earliest round at which a game has ever been decided given the selections that actually came out?

Question 1 - probable answer is "before the penultimate letters round". If it's any earlier than that, the leading contestant would have to be 75 points ahead going into round 11.

We need recaps of JF's octochamp run, particularly the 138-29 which might have fulfilled that criterion (I know for sure he cocked up the final numbers so didn't score there, so was therefore 99+ ahead after round 13).

Yes, I was asking whether or not the winner of a season was determined by the last numbers round.

And whose initials are J.F.?

Jason Larsen wrote:And whose initials are J.F.?

Julian Fell. see here.

The Countdown king and prodigy, yes.

I think we've seen him here before.

Ben Wilson wrote:We need recaps of JF's octochamp run, particularly the 138-29 which might have fulfilled that criterion (I know for sure he cocked up the final numbers so didn't score there, so was therefore 99+ ahead after round 13).

Julian Fell was 97-23 up after 10 rounds, so his opponent "could" have scraped a draw.

I'm just curious.

Did Julian Fell appear on Countdown during the time contestants could be co-champions?

Jason Larsen wrote:Did Julian Fell appear on Countdown during the time contestants could be co-champions?

...huh?

There was a time in which both contestants could come back after tying a game as co-champions. This was instead of playing the tie-breaking conundrum as they do now.

Was Julian Fell on during that time?

oh right - I thought you had dreamed about an age of countdown where two people would try and sit in the champion chair and get to fend off the challenger as a team (a la blockbusters, I suppose...)

Jason Larsen wrote:There was a time in which both contestants could come back after tying a game as co-champions. This was instead of playing the tie-breaking conundrum as they do now.

Was Julian Fell on during that time?

The tie-break conundrums came in a whike before Julian's time.

No new contestants have ever been introduced to determine a Countdown game's result, Michael.

Jason Larsen wrote:No new contestants have ever been introduced to determine a Countdown game's result, Michael.

Yes, Michael.

That's like starting a whole new game.