Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Moderator: James Robinson
-
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3661
- Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:18 pm
Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
I have a massive headache from playing Crash Bandicoot Warped all day. As such today's recap will be brief, very brief.
Countdown recap for Tuesday 1 February 2011.
C1: Champion Dave Dyer (1 win, 89 points.)
C2: Challenger Thom Archer.
DC: Susie Dent and Gregg Wallace.
RR: Rachel Riley.
OT: Other words or solutions.
R01: S X E O R T A M E
R02: E I A R N V H E D
R03: Q A O P L N I W S
R04: R T O U G D E I S
R05: 25, 1, 10, 4, 10, 5. Target: 818.
TTT: TOMGRINS - "Norman blazes off after a terrific performance"
R06: O E L V O T C S E
R07: R Z C A I O F S A
R08: R N S P E I E T N
R09: S R A E M L U C L
R10: 50, 75, 6, 9, 8, 7. Target: 935.
TTT: REDWHITE - "Red or white it's still extremely dry"
R11: W J K A E A Y R N
R12: D I E T G D O B I
R13: D P T U A E G M O
R14: 25, 75, 7, 8, 10, 1. Target: 999.
R15: R E C A P G A S P (conundrum)
And now a brief interlude before our main feature:
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
Dave Dyer impressed yesterday on his debut. Can he continue that way?
Thom Archer a music technology student at Leeds Metropolitan faces Dave. He has 3 wishes in life, solve world hunger, world peace and win a teapot. Hmmm...
Enjoy the show.
Round 1: S X E O R T A M E
C1: MAESTRO (7)
C2: MOATS (5)
DC: REMOTES (7) STEAMER (7)
OT: EMOTERS (7) METEORS (7) EXTREMA (7) ROSEATE (7) TEAMERS (7)
Score: 7–0 (max 7)
Maxed.
Round 2: E I A R N V H E D
C1: HEAVIER (7)
C2: DRIVEN (6)
DC: RAVINED (7) REINVADE (8)
Score: 14–0 (max 15)
Beaters.
Round 3: Q A O P L N I W S
C1: PLAINS (6)
C2: plows
DC: inlaws
OT: LOWANS (6) NOPALS (6) PIANOS (6) SPINAL (6) POWANS (6)
Score: 20–0 (max 21)
Americanness.
Round 4: R T O U G D E I S
C1: OUTRIDES (8)
C2: STORED (6)
OT: OUTSIDER (8) STODGIER (8)
Score: 28–0 (max 29)
Bagel!
Round 5: 25, 1, 10, 4, 10, 5. Target: 818.
C1: 815. (4*25-10)*(10-1)+5 (7)
C2: 825.
OT: 819. (10*5-10-1)*(25-4) (7)
Score: 35–0 (max 36)
Impossible.
DC Guest Time: Gregg talks about food.
Teatime teaser: TOMGRINS -> STORMING
Round 6: O E L V O T C S E
C1: COOLEST (7)
C2: CLOVES (6)
DC: OCELOTS (7)
Score: 42–0 (max 43)
Anagrams.
Round 7: R Z C A I O F S A
C1: FRACAS (6)
C2: -
DC: SCARF (5) FIASCO (6)
OT: FACIAS (6) FASCIA (6) SAFARI (6) SCORIA (6)
Score: 48–0 (max 49)
Sixes.
Round 8: R N S P E I E T N
C1: PRESENT (7)
C2: respin
DC: SPINNERET (18)
Score: 55–0 (max 67)
Niner.
Round 9: S R A E M L U C L
C1: CALLERS (7)
C2: MUSCLE (6)
DC: CELLARS (7) MULLERS (7)
OT: ALLURES (7) LAURELS (7) RECALLS (7) SCLERAL (7) CULLERS (7) SCULLER (7) MACULES (7) MALLEUS (7) MARCELS (7) RECUSAL (7) SECULAR (7) SMALLER (7)
Score: 62–0 (max 74)
Flattie.
Origin's of Words Susie talks about MUSSEL.
Round 10: 50, 75, 6, 9, 8, 7. Target: 935.
C1: 934. (6+7)*75-50+9 (7)
C2: -
RR: 935. (50+75-7)*8-9 (10)
Score: 69–0 (max 84)
Toughie.
Teatime teaser: REDWHITE -> WITHERED
Round 11: W J K A E A Y R N
C1: WANKER (6)
C2: AWAKEN (6)
DC: YAWNER (6)
OT: AWEARY (6)
Score: 75–6 (max 90)
Bleeped.
Round 12: D I E T G D O B I
C1: BIGOTED (7)
C2: BIGOTED (7)
Score: 82–13 (max 97)
Standout.
Round 13: D P T U A E G M O
C1: OUTAGE (6)
C2: UPDATE (6)
OT: DOTAGE (6) MOATED (6) POMADE (6) POTAGE (6) POUTED (6) TAMPED (6)
Score: 88–19 (max 103)
Boring.
Round 14: 25, 75, 7, 8, 10, 1. Target: 999.
C1: 999. (75+25)*10-1 (10)
C2: 999. (75+25)*10-1 (10)
Score: 98–29 (max 113)
Emergency.
Round 15: R E C A P G A S P
C1 buzzes on 5 seconds to say SCRAPPAGE which is correct.
Final Score: 108–29 (max 123)
Personal?
Dave finishes with 12 maxes. Thom finishes without a teapot.
Tarrah!
Further summaries are at:
http://www.apterous.org/cdb/series.php?series=64
Countdown recap for Tuesday 1 February 2011.
C1: Champion Dave Dyer (1 win, 89 points.)
C2: Challenger Thom Archer.
DC: Susie Dent and Gregg Wallace.
RR: Rachel Riley.
OT: Other words or solutions.
R01: S X E O R T A M E
R02: E I A R N V H E D
R03: Q A O P L N I W S
R04: R T O U G D E I S
R05: 25, 1, 10, 4, 10, 5. Target: 818.
TTT: TOMGRINS - "Norman blazes off after a terrific performance"
R06: O E L V O T C S E
R07: R Z C A I O F S A
R08: R N S P E I E T N
R09: S R A E M L U C L
R10: 50, 75, 6, 9, 8, 7. Target: 935.
TTT: REDWHITE - "Red or white it's still extremely dry"
R11: W J K A E A Y R N
R12: D I E T G D O B I
R13: D P T U A E G M O
R14: 25, 75, 7, 8, 10, 1. Target: 999.
R15: R E C A P G A S P (conundrum)
And now a brief interlude before our main feature:
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
Dave Dyer impressed yesterday on his debut. Can he continue that way?
Thom Archer a music technology student at Leeds Metropolitan faces Dave. He has 3 wishes in life, solve world hunger, world peace and win a teapot. Hmmm...
Enjoy the show.
Round 1: S X E O R T A M E
C1: MAESTRO (7)
C2: MOATS (5)
DC: REMOTES (7) STEAMER (7)
OT: EMOTERS (7) METEORS (7) EXTREMA (7) ROSEATE (7) TEAMERS (7)
Score: 7–0 (max 7)
Maxed.
Round 2: E I A R N V H E D
C1: HEAVIER (7)
C2: DRIVEN (6)
DC: RAVINED (7) REINVADE (8)
Score: 14–0 (max 15)
Beaters.
Round 3: Q A O P L N I W S
C1: PLAINS (6)
C2: plows
DC: inlaws
OT: LOWANS (6) NOPALS (6) PIANOS (6) SPINAL (6) POWANS (6)
Score: 20–0 (max 21)
Americanness.
Round 4: R T O U G D E I S
C1: OUTRIDES (8)
C2: STORED (6)
OT: OUTSIDER (8) STODGIER (8)
Score: 28–0 (max 29)
Bagel!
Round 5: 25, 1, 10, 4, 10, 5. Target: 818.
C1: 815. (4*25-10)*(10-1)+5 (7)
C2: 825.
OT: 819. (10*5-10-1)*(25-4) (7)
Score: 35–0 (max 36)
Impossible.
DC Guest Time: Gregg talks about food.
Teatime teaser: TOMGRINS -> STORMING
Round 6: O E L V O T C S E
C1: COOLEST (7)
C2: CLOVES (6)
DC: OCELOTS (7)
Score: 42–0 (max 43)
Anagrams.
Round 7: R Z C A I O F S A
C1: FRACAS (6)
C2: -
DC: SCARF (5) FIASCO (6)
OT: FACIAS (6) FASCIA (6) SAFARI (6) SCORIA (6)
Score: 48–0 (max 49)
Sixes.
Round 8: R N S P E I E T N
C1: PRESENT (7)
C2: respin
DC: SPINNERET (18)
Score: 55–0 (max 67)
Niner.
Round 9: S R A E M L U C L
C1: CALLERS (7)
C2: MUSCLE (6)
DC: CELLARS (7) MULLERS (7)
OT: ALLURES (7) LAURELS (7) RECALLS (7) SCLERAL (7) CULLERS (7) SCULLER (7) MACULES (7) MALLEUS (7) MARCELS (7) RECUSAL (7) SECULAR (7) SMALLER (7)
Score: 62–0 (max 74)
Flattie.
Origin's of Words Susie talks about MUSSEL.
Round 10: 50, 75, 6, 9, 8, 7. Target: 935.
C1: 934. (6+7)*75-50+9 (7)
C2: -
RR: 935. (50+75-7)*8-9 (10)
Score: 69–0 (max 84)
Toughie.
Teatime teaser: REDWHITE -> WITHERED
Round 11: W J K A E A Y R N
C1: WANKER (6)
C2: AWAKEN (6)
DC: YAWNER (6)
OT: AWEARY (6)
Score: 75–6 (max 90)
Bleeped.
Round 12: D I E T G D O B I
C1: BIGOTED (7)
C2: BIGOTED (7)
Score: 82–13 (max 97)
Standout.
Round 13: D P T U A E G M O
C1: OUTAGE (6)
C2: UPDATE (6)
OT: DOTAGE (6) MOATED (6) POMADE (6) POTAGE (6) POUTED (6) TAMPED (6)
Score: 88–19 (max 103)
Boring.
Round 14: 25, 75, 7, 8, 10, 1. Target: 999.
C1: 999. (75+25)*10-1 (10)
C2: 999. (75+25)*10-1 (10)
Score: 98–29 (max 113)
Emergency.
Round 15: R E C A P G A S P
C1 buzzes on 5 seconds to say SCRAPPAGE which is correct.
Final Score: 108–29 (max 123)
Personal?
Dave finishes with 12 maxes. Thom finishes without a teapot.
Tarrah!
Further summaries are at:
http://www.apterous.org/cdb/series.php?series=64
Last edited by Ryan Taylor on Sat Feb 26, 2011 9:48 am, edited 3 times in total.
-
- Rookie
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 8:54 pm
- Location: Wolverhampton
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Not sure how you managed to make a one word summary of each round as humorous as you did, but that's probably the most enjoyable recap I've read for ages!
- Joseph Krol
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1063
- Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 6:47 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 1
In round four I presume STODGIER has been removed?
- James Hall
- Acolyte
- Posts: 143
- Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 6:26 pm
- Location: Portsmouth
- Contact:
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
R4: Stodgier?
______________
___________
________
_____
__
___________
________
_____
__
- Graeme Cole
- Series 65 Champion
- Posts: 2040
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Nope, it's still in. And in any case, I think the recap writer still uses ODE2r. Not sure why the word hasn't shown up in this one.Joseph Krol wrote:In round four I presume STODGIER has been removed?
-
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3661
- Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:18 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
That would be me not pressing the right button! Now I can't use the "Darren!" comment. Harrumph.Graeme Cole wrote:Nope, it's still in. And in any case, I think the recap writer still uses ODE2r. Not sure why the word hasn't shown up in this one.Joseph Krol wrote:In round four I presume STODGIER has been removed?
- James Robinson
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 10580
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:38 pm
- Location: Mirfield, West Yorkshire
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Not necessarily at you, though....Ryan Taylor wrote:Round 15: R E C A P G A S P
C1 buzzes on 5 seconds to say SCRAPPAGE which is correct.
Final Score: 108–29 (max 123)
Personal?
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
It was 11 really though. I don't count the first numbers as a max. Other than that, great recap!Ryan Taylor wrote:Dave finishes with 12 maxes.
-
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3661
- Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:18 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
If it was on apterous it would be bold. I use the Apteorus Scale of Maxes to adjudicate such a thing.Gavin Chipper wrote:It was 11 really though. I don't count the first numbers as a max. Other than that, great recap!Ryan Taylor wrote:Dave finishes with 12 maxes.
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Something I don't think people have noticed but might be worth adding to the recap (if I'm wrong, let me know), but Dave is actually an Apterite.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Round 19. Pwned.Ryan Taylor wrote:If it was on apterous it would be bold. I use the Apteorus Scale of Maxes to adjudicate such a thing.Gavin Chipper wrote:It was 11 really though. I don't count the first numbers as a max. Other than that, great recap!Ryan Taylor wrote:Dave finishes with 12 maxes.
Last edited by Gavin Chipper on Wed Feb 02, 2011 3:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Matt Morrison
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 7822
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: London
- Contact:
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Quoted so you can't escape the irony of doing yourself. Here's your to-the-round link, by the way: http://apterous.org/viewgame.php?game=2 ... 8#r4062788.Gavin Chipper wrote:[ur=http://apterous.org/viewgame.php?game=286768l]Round 19[/url]. Pwned.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Don't know what you're talking about.Matt Morrison wrote:Quoted so you can't escape the irony of doing yourself. Here's your to-the-round link, by the way: http://apterous.org/viewgame.php?game=2 ... 8#r4062788.Gavin Chipper wrote:[ur=http://apterous.org/viewgame.php?game=286768l]Round 19[/url]. Pwned.
Red hides the lack of boldness though.
This is getting sadder post by post.
This is like a Ralph Gillions post.
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Bold aside, getting 7 points on a round when the maximum you can score is 7 is clearly a 'max'. Your objective is to score as many points as possible, not get as close to the target as you can.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
I suppose, but since the objective is to score as many points as possible, why do we distinguish between a 10-max score of 100 and a 7-max score of 100? I tend to think of a max as scoring-system independent. It wouldn't be a max under some other systems, whereas under winners only scoring (on Apterous), you'd get maxes all over the place that aren't what I'd call maxes.Michael Wallace wrote:Bold aside, getting 7 points on a round when the maximum you can score is 7 is clearly a 'max'. Your objective is to score as many points as possible, not get as close to the target as you can.
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
I suppose another question is whether it would be called a max if the opponent had beaten it, which is a lot less clear cut to me.Gavin Chipper wrote:I suppose, but since the objective is to score as many points as possible, why do we distinguish between a 10-max score of 100 and a 7-max score of 100? I tend to think of a max as scoring-system independent. It wouldn't be a max under some other systems, whereas under winners only scoring (on Apterous), you'd get maxes all over the place that aren't what I'd call maxes.Michael Wallace wrote:Bold aside, getting 7 points on a round when the maximum you can score is 7 is clearly a 'max'. Your objective is to score as many points as possible, not get as close to the target as you can.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
I was going to mention that because apart from the conundrum where you are in direct competition with your opponent, a max should be independent of what they do.Michael Wallace wrote:I suppose another question is whether it would be called a max if the opponent had beaten it, which is a lot less clear cut to me.Gavin Chipper wrote:I suppose, but since the objective is to score as many points as possible, why do we distinguish between a 10-max score of 100 and a 7-max score of 100? I tend to think of a max as scoring-system independent. It wouldn't be a max under some other systems, whereas under winners only scoring (on Apterous), you'd get maxes all over the place that aren't what I'd call maxes.Michael Wallace wrote:Bold aside, getting 7 points on a round when the maximum you can score is 7 is clearly a 'max'. Your objective is to score as many points as possible, not get as close to the target as you can.
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 557
- Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:53 pm
- Location: South Yorkshire
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Naah! Mine are better than this. You just don't understand them.Gavin Chipper wrote:This is like a Ralph Gillions post.
- Charlie Reams
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9494
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
- Location: Cambridge
- Contact:
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
I know this has been discussed before but I'm now pretty much of the opinion that "max" ought to mean maximal points rather than unbeatable. That way you don't have to grant an exception for the conundrum; it seems ridiculous to need an exception when you only have three things to generalize about. True enough it wouldn't be a max in other scoring systems, but max is already relative to scoring system (e.g. we might have a Scrabble scoring system at some point). I think it's inconsistent in apterous (the in-game table uses bold in some places where the website table doesn't, or vice versa) so I'd like to fix that.Gavin Chipper wrote: I was going to mention that because apart from the conundrum where you are in direct competition with your opponent, a max should be independent of what they do.
-
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3661
- Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:18 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Guys, guys you're taking the shine off my recap.
Best post EVER.Michael Wallace wrote:Bold aside, getting 7 points on a round when the maximum you can score is 7 is clearly a 'max'. Your objective is to score as many points as possible, not get as close to the target as you can.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
We're drawing attention to it. Everyone will be like "Hey, this recap has got a lot of replies. It must be the best ever!"Ryan Taylor wrote:Guys, guys you're taking the shine off my recap.
-
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3661
- Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:18 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Good point. My Monday one didn't get this much attention and it had a long 'witty' anagram of Ian FItzpatrick in it which took like a good 2 minutes to think of.Gavin Chipper wrote:We're drawing attention to it. Everyone will be like "Hey, this recap has got a lot of replies. It must be the best ever!"Ryan Taylor wrote:Guys, guys you're taking the shine off my recap.
- Mike Brown
- Legend
- Posts: 1413
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:16 pm
- Location: King's Lynn
- Contact:
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Think this might have come up before, but where is VERENDAH listed in the dictionary? Is it one of those strange plurals listed under a word that begins with a different letter or something similar?? Also - nice conundrum scramble!!
- Jon O'Neill
- Ginger Ninja
- Posts: 4546
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:45 am
- Location: London, UK
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
But you're trading the purity of the numbers maxes for a little extra consistency. Just because there's no satisfactory way to deal with conundrums doesn't mean we have to compromise on everybody's favourite round, the numbers.Charlie Reams wrote:I know this has been discussed before but I'm now pretty much of the opinion that "max" ought to mean maximal points rather than unbeatable. That way you don't have to grant an exception for the conundrum; it seems ridiculous to need an exception when you only have three things to generalize about. True enough it wouldn't be a max in other scoring systems, but max is already relative to scoring system (e.g. we might have a Scrabble scoring system at some point). I think it's inconsistent in apterous (the in-game table uses bold in some places where the website table doesn't, or vice versa) so I'd like to fix that.Gavin Chipper wrote: I was going to mention that because apart from the conundrum where you are in direct competition with your opponent, a max should be independent of what they do.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Exactly. Anyway, we can bring back the consistency by instead of saying "unbeatable" you just say "optimal solution". That way it includes the conundrums and the proper numbers maxes.Jon O'Neill wrote:But you're trading the purity of the numbers maxes for a little extra consistency. Just because there's no satisfactory way to deal with conundrums doesn't mean we have to compromise on everybody's favourite round, the numbers.Charlie Reams wrote:I know this has been discussed before but I'm now pretty much of the opinion that "max" ought to mean maximal points rather than unbeatable. That way you don't have to grant an exception for the conundrum; it seems ridiculous to need an exception when you only have three things to generalize about. True enough it wouldn't be a max in other scoring systems, but max is already relative to scoring system (e.g. we might have a Scrabble scoring system at some point). I think it's inconsistent in apterous (the in-game table uses bold in some places where the website table doesn't, or vice versa) so I'd like to fix that.Gavin Chipper wrote: I was going to mention that because apart from the conundrum where you are in direct competition with your opponent, a max should be independent of what they do.
- Adam Gillard
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1762
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:42 pm
- Location: About 45 minutes south-east of Thibodaux, Louisiana
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
"Optimal solution" in numbers rounds would have to get as close as possible to the target in as few steps as possible. E.g. 100 1 2 3 4 5 - > 105; 100+5 is optimal; 100+3+2 and 100+4+1 are not.Gavin Chipper wrote:instead of saying "unbeatable" you just say "optimal solution". That way it includes the conundrums and the proper numbers maxes.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Not really. That's just an aesthetic thing. Solutions aren't judged on that.Adam Gillard wrote:"Optimal solution" in numbers rounds would have to get as close as possible to the target in as few steps as possible. E.g. 100 1 2 3 4 5 - > 105; 100+5 is optimal; 100+3+2 and 100+4+1 are not.Gavin Chipper wrote:instead of saying "unbeatable" you just say "optimal solution". That way it includes the conundrums and the proper numbers maxes.
- Jon O'Neill
- Ginger Ninja
- Posts: 4546
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:45 am
- Location: London, UK
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Not really, as the optimal solution for the conundrum would be to buzz in after 0.0000etc.1 seconds, so you'd never get a max for that. Perhaps max % stats should just exclude conundrums..Gavin Chipper wrote:Jon O'Neill wrote:Exactly. Anyway, we can bring back the consistency by instead of saying "unbeatable" you just say "optimal solution". That way it includes the conundrums and the proper numbers maxes.Charlie Reams wrote: But you're trading the purity of the numbers maxes for a little extra consistency. Just because there's no satisfactory way to deal with conundrums doesn't mean we have to compromise on everybody's favourite round, the numbers.
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
We should ask Damian to just drop the conundrum from the show. Problem solved.Jon O'Neill wrote:Not really, as the optimal solution for the conundrum would be to buzz in after 0.0000etc.1 seconds, so you'd never get a max for that. Perhaps max % stats should just exclude conundrums..
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
You're meant to be on my side! But no, the solution is the same whenever you get the conundrum. The time isn't part of the solution.Jon O'Neill wrote:Not really, as the optimal solution for the conundrum would be to buzz in after 0.0000etc.1 seconds, so you'd never get a max for that. Perhaps max % stats should just exclude conundrums..
- Jon O'Neill
- Ginger Ninja
- Posts: 4546
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:45 am
- Location: London, UK
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
I guess I define a max as an unbeatable performance in a round.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
So there's no max games when there's a conundrum?Jon O'Neill wrote:I guess I define a max as an unbeatable performance in a round.
But anyway, I think we agree that the state of the conundrum shouldn't be relevant in determining what counts as a max numbers game. Playing with semantics to make it so that a conundrum solve is or isn't optimal is irrelevant to numbers games.
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
I think there should be a new bot, who will always get a 'traditional' max game, but you only get the max if your word, numbers solution method, or conundrum solve time match his. He could be called Max, and always pick the least spotted of the max words.
- Rhys Benjamin
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3102
- Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
It's called Rex.Michael Wallace wrote:I think there should be a new bot, who will always get a 'traditional' max game, but you only get the max if your word, numbers solution method, or conundrum solve time match his. He could be called Max, and always pick the least spotted of the max words.
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
No, Max would be better.Rhys Benjamin wrote:It's called Rex.Michael Wallace wrote:I think there should be a new bot, who will always get a 'traditional' max game, but you only get the max if your word, numbers solution method, or conundrum solve time match his. He could be called Max, and always pick the least spotted of the max words.
- Mike Brown
- Legend
- Posts: 1413
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:16 pm
- Location: King's Lynn
- Contact:
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Pretty much agree with that. Maybe we need to discriminate between a 'max' game and a 'perfect' game. Although, hang on a minute, we're back to the conundrum problem...Charlie Reams wrote:I know this has been discussed before but I'm now pretty much of the opinion that "max" ought to mean maximal points rather than unbeatable.Gavin Chipper wrote: I was going to mention that because apart from the conundrum where you are in direct competition with your opponent, a max should be independent of what they do.
- Mike Brown
- Legend
- Posts: 1413
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:16 pm
- Location: King's Lynn
- Contact:
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Incredible number of views for this recap. Obviously the key is to make your comments as short as possible.
-
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3661
- Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:18 pm
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Or put something a little bit controversial to get whiney bitches to grumble over. I'm going to do it more often!Mike Brown wrote:Incredible number of views for this recap. Obviously the key is to make your comments as short as possible.
-
- Acolyte
- Posts: 212
- Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 11:37 am
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
The first letter in round 12 was actually an O not a D, meaning BOOGIED renders BIGOTED slightly less Standout.Ryan Taylor wrote:
Round 12: D I E T G D O B I
C1: BIGOTED (7)
C2: BIGOTED (7)
Score: 82–13 (max 97)
Standout.
- James Robinson
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 10580
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:38 pm
- Location: Mirfield, West Yorkshire
Re: Tuesday 1st February 2011 (Series 64, Prelim 17)
Taken me 24 days to double-check it, but MAULERS wasn't said. Susie said MULLERS twice.Ryan Taylor wrote:Round 9: S R A E M L U C L
C1: CALLERS (7)
C2: MUSCLE (6)
DC: CELLARS (7) MULLERS (7) MAULERS (7)
OT: ALLURES (7) LAURELS (7) RECALLS (7) SCLERAL (7) CULLERS (7) SCULLER (7) MACULES (7) MALLEUS (7) MARCELS (7) RECUSAL (7) SECULAR (7) SMALLER (7)
Score: 62–0 (max 74)