c4countdown

IMHO what would be quite interesting to do, would be to simulate a whole series of countdown on apterous, with a randomly generated order of play, and see what happens. I don't think the guys with the highest ratings would necessarily run away it.

Andrew Hulme tm.


I would love to do this. Probably starting after the Apterous Masters. Fairly simple idea, start with two challengers and continue like the series would do with the winner staying on until they lose or win 8 games. Culminating eventually in a series finals.

Please declare an interest and ask useful questions!

I'd play in this, and can provide any technical assistance you might need. Are you going to separate the big hitters at all, as they allegedly do on the show?

Brilliant idea.

Thanks Charlie.

Are you going to separate the big hitters at all, as they allegedly do on the show?

Not sure. Maybe not. There are so many of them after all.

I'd be totally up for this.

A possible (obvious yet neat) name, perhaps: Simdown

To create a bit off tension, Apterites should be encouraged to spectate whilst the games are in progress.

I'd defo be up for this!

Kieran Child can be Dudley "entertaining" us all in chat.

Sounds like fun! And I'd sure like to give it a try if it goes ahead.

The organisation could be tricky, though, and not just in who goes where. It's often difficult to pin down opponents to a time for apterous tournaments. So, if one game had to be held before the next one could, and so on and so on, instead of a group of games every week, all the participants would have to be very sure of their availability.

Julie T wrote:Sounds like fun! And I'd sure like to give it a try if it goes ahead.

The organisation could be tricky, though, and not just in who goes where. It's often difficult to pin down opponents to a time for apterous tournaments. So, if one game had to be held before the next one could, and so on and so on, instead of a group of games every week, all the participants would have to be very sure of their availability.

I think you have to give people a 2 day window in which to play their game and then knock them out if they don't turn up, or it'll turn into a farce a la the Countdown league.

Charlie Reams wrote:

Julie T wrote:Sounds like fun! And I'd sure like to give it a try if it goes ahead.

The organisation could be tricky, though, and not just in who goes where. It's often difficult to pin down opponents to a time for apterous tournaments. So, if one game had to be held before the next one could, and so on and so on, instead of a group of games every week, all the participants would have to be very sure of their availability.

I think you have to give people a 2 day window in which to play their game and then knock them out if they don't turn up, or it'll turn into a farce a la the Countdown league.

Seems like a fair solution, as long as you only knock out the one of the pair (if it is only one) who doesn't turn up. Presumably what you meant, anyway.

Charlie, would you be able to plug this on apterous.org at some point?

No rush obviously.

Thanks.

I've thought about this idea before and the main problem I thought of was - what's in it for the last few contestants who can't get enough wins to make the quarters or will there definitely be another series?

I'm there. Fantastic idea.

Gavin Chipper wrote:I've thought about this idea before and the main problem I thought of was - what's in it for the last few contestants who can't get enough wins to make the quarters or will there definitely be another series?

Or you could automatically give the person who wins the last heat the 8th seed place if they haven't got enough wins to be seeded already. Obviously it's a bit generous to the last few players but I think it's better than leaving them hanging.

Gavin Chipper wrote:I've thought about this idea before and the main problem I thought of was - what's in it for the last few contestants who can't get enough wins to make the quarters or will there definitely be another series?

I think so GC. If we get right to the end it will have gone well and therefore we'll do it all again.

Would there be a lottery to decide who plays when, or would it be on a first come first served basis?
Or will Apterous have its own version of Damo to decide.

Sounds good, I'm in.

I'm in please.

Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeennnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn! (in)

AwEsOmE

If in Normal Countdown, there is around 110 contestants per series, which is the number of different players who played yesterday. Since there will probably be less than 110 people playing, might it be a good idea to reduce the number of wins for 'octochampdom' since if there are only 40 people, you might only get 5 people winning all the games, which kinda defeats the point of the idea of it.

Oliver Garner wrote:Since there will probably be less than 110 people playing, might it be a good idea to reduce the number of wins for 'octochampdom' since if there are only 40 people, you might only get 5 people winning all the games, which kinda defeats the point of the idea of it.

So back to viscounts, then?

Meh iz inn

Me too, why not.

I'll put my name down. Sounds interesting.

Yep, i'd love a go thanks.

I'm in.

count myself in

In me please

I'd be up for this but it'd be an organizational nightmare.

yez please

Sounds like an intriguing idea.

I think that Ollie's raised one of the most interesting questions. For a conventional series, to fill the finals with octochamps takes 64 games, which is just over half of the total number of preliminaries. That "just over half" ratio seems to work well, and it might be sensible to try to repeat it in this competition. With a lot fewer entrants, that "just over half" ratio could be achieve in two ways, reduce the number of finalists to four (as was done on one of the short tv series), or as has been discussed, reduce the number of wins before retiring to six, or even lower - the actual number could be determined once the total number of entrants has been confirmed.

Another question regards the position of the winner of the final preliminary. Giving that person the number eight seed place seems very unfair on the person who would otherwise have come eighth. I'd favour copying the tv series, and carrying over their number of wins to the start of the next series.

If it runs for four series, could we then have a COC?

There's one way in which this competition will not be able to emulate the tv programme, and that is in the balance of quality. Ours will definitely be top-heavy. And so, in order to redress the balance just a little bit, I'll put myself forward as cannon fodder.

I'm in, but only if all the bots are in too

Rex would piss it, despite only being 4 ahead of Kirk on the ratings.
Who was the last person to beat Rex in a fifteen rounder?

Marc Meakin wrote:Rex would piss it, despite only being 4 ahead of Kirk on the ratings.
Who was the last person to beat Rex in a fifteen rounder?

Exactly, it'll give Kirk a chance to feel what the rest of us feel.

Howard Somerset wrote:Sounds like an intriguing idea.

I think that Ollie's raised one of the most interesting questions. For a conventional series, to fill the finals with octochamps takes 64 games, which is just over half of the total number of preliminaries. That "just over half" ratio seems to work well, and it might be sensible to try to repeat it in this competition. With a lot fewer entrants, that "just over half" ratio could be achieve in two ways, reduce the number of finalists to four (as was done on one of the short tv series), or as has been discussed, reduce the number of wins before retiring to six, or even lower - the actual number could be determined once the total number of entrants has been confirmed.

Another question regards the position of the winner of the final preliminary. Giving that person the number eight seed place seems very unfair on the person who would otherwise have come eighth. I'd favour copying the tv series, and carrying over their number of wins to the start of the next series.

If it runs for four series, could we then have a COC?

There's one way in which this competition will not be able to emulate the tv programme, and that is in the balance of quality. Ours will definitely be top-heavy. And so, in order to redress the balance just a little bit, I'll put myself forward as cannon fodder.

But they did have the same octochamp system with the 3-month series as well. And I don't think it was too bad like that.

If Howard's willing to put himself forward as cannon fodder, I'm prepared to join him. I've been meaning to figure out how to play the letters on Apterous sometime.

Gavin Chipper wrote:But they did have the same octochamp system with the 3-month series as well. And I don't think it was too bad like that.

If you imagine chopping a recent series in half, the effect would be that players who've won perhaps 2 games with high scores would probably make the finals. No problem with that of course - it would just be different. The important thing is that the big hitters would still be coming through at the same rate, whereas in the Apterous simulation they could easily crush the life out of everyone else.

Cool idea - count me in.

Perhaps those who wish to register leave a mobile number, when it's their turn to play, a text is generated automatically and they get say an hour to log in and start - saves others waiting for them to play?

Jennifer Bett wrote:Cool idea - count me in.

Perhaps those who wish to register leave a mobile number, when it's their turn to play, a text is generated automatically and they get say an hour to log in and start - saves others waiting for them to play?

Surely not everyone is available to be called upon at any given hour?

Count me in please!

Would need a few days' notice at least, owing to work/travel/life etc, but happy to receive a PM or email with notification.

Cheers
Jeff

Needless to say you can count me in on this one.

I'll give this a go.

I'll have a go at this please.

With regard organising, would it not be easiest to tell te next, say four players they needed to play at the same time in the next two days?

i.e. Kirk Bevins Vs Charlie Reams
Winner Vs Innis Carson
Winner Vs Junaid Mubeen

To be played before midnight 9th March & champion to post all three results

I'd be up for this.

me three please

I've already said I'm in, but I'm tempted to wait for a second series, as I don't want to shoot my entertainment bolt early as it were. Let's see what numbers are looking like...

Hopefully I'm not too late to be included in this.

Sounds well cool. I'd like to enter please.

If we are indeed going ahead with this, I'd love to join in!

Right - as the Apto Masters heads towards it's final stages. I'm ready to do an initial draw for the simulation.

Still room for several more entrants.


Someone hit me on msn to give me a fair hand. (atalanta855@hotmail.com)

Right Simulants,

The whole draw so far has been done. We are going all out. Octochamps et al
We'll see if it works well. I will announce one week at a time and we will work our way through. If people back out of playing, they will be eliminated forever.

Good luck all.

---------------------------

Opening Match

Oliver Garner vs Charlie Reams

Challengers in order

Ryan Taylor
Jon O'Neill
Innis Carson
Sue Sanders


No great rush to play the games especially with Jono still in the Masters but the path has begun and is in fact opened.

I already asked to be included, then was too lazy to check whether i had, so did again here, then checked anyway and saw i had, so now have ended up typing this here instead. Don't mind me, i don't mind myself.

Ian Dent wrote:Right Simulants,

The whole draw so far has been done. We are going all out. Octochamps et al
We'll see if it works well. I will announce one week at a time and we will work our way through. If people back out of playing, they will be eliminated forever.

Good luck all.

---------------------------

Opening Match

Oliver Garner vs Charlie Reams

Challengers in order

Ryan Taylor
Jon O'Neill
Innis Carson
Sue Sanders


No great rush to play the games especially with Jono still in the Masters but the path has begun and is in fact opened.

Right so I assume it isn't seeded then? Good luck Charlie, you might just need it!!

How many entrants are there?

Loads and loads.

Just thinking, giving that there's a finite pool of us available for such a thing as thing, it would be difficult to run this a second time unless repeat entries were allowed.

Ian Volante wrote:Just thinking, giving that there's a finite pool of us available for such a thing as thing, it would be difficult to run this a second time unless repeat entries were allowed.

Jon O'Neill wrote:

Ian Volante wrote:Just thinking, giving that there's a finite pool of us available for such a thing as thing, it would be difficult to run this a second time unless repeat entries were allowed.

I want ALL the fun

Is it too late to enter this?