Ask Graeme?
Re: Ask Graeme?
PREFUCK isn't in my ODE2r electronic file that I made, so I'm 99.99% certain that it won't be in the book, but I'll check when I get home.
- Innis Carson
- Devotee
- Posts: 898
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 3:24 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
It's not, it was added to that wikicap as a joke. See the recap.
- Mark Deeks
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2446
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am
Re: Ask Graeme?
![Sad :(](./images/smilies/icon_e_sad.gif)
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark
- Ian Volante
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3967
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
- Location: Edinburgh
- Contact:
Re: Ask Graeme?
What's the largest regular-series defeat for an n-time winner? Similarly, what's the ranking when those losing margins are divided by the total score of the victor?
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles
- Graeme Cole
- Series 65 Champion
- Posts: 2041
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
I'm not sure if by "regular-series defeat" you mean a defeat in the prelims or a defeat in the prelims or series finals.Ian Volante wrote:What's the largest regular-series defeat for an n-time winner?
The highest margin over a zero-time winner was the highest winning margin ever.
Jim Page won 1 game then lost to Wendy Roe by 81 points.
Lee Bailey won 2 games then lost to Jonathan Coles by 85 points.
Chris Ball won 3 games and qualified for the quarter-finals, where she lost to Andy Platt by 86 points. If we discount finals games, the three-time winner with the highest losing margin is Alan Galt in this game (68).
Ben Nicholson won 4 games then lost to Jonathan Rawlinson by 67 points.
Mary Adie won 5 games and reached the semi-finals, where she lost to Edward McCullagh by 79 points. If we discount finals games, the five-time winner with the highest losing margin is Philip Whitnall in this game (48).
Daniel Peake won 6 games and reached the quarter-finals, where he lost to Conor Travers by 69 points. Discounting finals games, the six-time winner with the highest losing margin is Phyl Styles in this game (64).
David Butcher won 7 games and reached the quarter-finals, where he was beaten by Mark Deeks by 95 points. Discounting finals games, the seven-time winner with the highest losing margin is David Franks in this game (48). He was beaten by Lee Hartley, who qualified for the finals as one of the eight octochamps that series, which meant David Franks didn't.
Danny Hamilton won all 8 of his prelims, reached the semi-final, and was beaten by Julian Fell by 69 points. Five people have beaten octochamps in prelims (Edit: actually 11 people, I did something silly), and, as you'd expect, these are all cases where an octochamp had previously appeared in a separate run and lost. The largest such margin was when John Snedden beat future octochamp Amey Deshpande by 42 points. (Your 15-point victory over Bradley Cates is joint fourth.)
Not sure what's being asked for here. Do you mean divide these losing margins by the score of the victor in that game, or the eventual total for all the victor's games in that run?Ian Volante wrote:Similarly, what's the ranking when those losing margins are divided by the total score of the victor?
- Ian Volante
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3967
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
- Location: Edinburgh
- Contact:
Re: Ask Graeme?
I was thinking just in prelims, but you've covered both eventualities, so that's great.Graeme Cole wrote:I'm not sure if by "regular-series defeat" you mean a defeat in the prelims or a defeat in the prelims or series finals.Ian Volante wrote:What's the largest regular-series defeat for an n-time winner?
The highest margin over a zero-time winner was the highest winning margin ever.
Jim Page won 1 game then lost to Wendy Roe by 81 points.
Lee Bailey won 2 games then lost to Jonathan Coles by 85 points.
Chris Ball won 3 games and qualified for the quarter-finals, where she lost to Andy Platt by 86 points. If we discount finals games, the three-time winner with the highest losing margin is Alan Galt in this game (68).
Ben Nicholson won 4 games then lost to Jonathan Rawlinson by 67 points.
Mary Adie won 5 games and reached the semi-finals, where she lost to Edward McCullagh by 79 points. If we discount finals games, the five-time winner with the highest losing margin is Philip Whitnall in this game (48).
Daniel Peake won 6 games and reached the quarter-finals, where he lost to Conor Travers by 69 points. Discounting finals games, the six-time winner with the highest losing margin is Phyl Styles in this game (64).
David Butcher won 7 games and reached the quarter-finals, where he was beaten by Mark Deeks by 95 points. Discounting finals games, the seven-time winner with the highest losing margin is David Franks in this game (48). He was beaten by Lee Hartley, who qualified for the finals as one of the eight octochamps that series, which meant David Franks didn't.
Danny Hamilton won all 8 of his prelims, reached the semi-final, and was beaten by Julian Fell by 69 points. Five people have beaten octochamps in prelims (Edit: actually 11 people, I did something silly), and, as you'd expect, these are all cases where an octochamp had previously appeared in a separate run and lost. The largest such margin was when John Snedden beat future octochamp Amey Deshpande by 42 points. (Your 15-point victory over Bradley Cates is joint fourth.)
Not sure what's being asked for here. Do you mean divide these losing margins by the score of the victor in that game, or the eventual total for all the victor's games in that run?Ian Volante wrote:Similarly, what's the ranking when those losing margins are divided by the total score of the victor?
My second thought was of a way to tease out the biggest shocks from such results, e.g. someone having a nightmare game during a long run rather than, say, Phyl running into another excellent player at the wrong moment, so yes, total points for the victor's run as the denominator.
Also, it's nice to find out that I'm the joint fourth-best countdowner ever, even if it is by a particularly spurious ranking method
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
Last edited by Ian Volante on Mon Jun 16, 2014 9:27 am, edited 2 times in total.
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13309
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
What are the lowest and highest eight-game totals of seven-time winners?
- Graeme Cole
- Series 65 Champion
- Posts: 2041
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
The losing margin divided by the victor's total score is in brackets.Ian Volante wrote:My second thought was of a way to tease out the biggest shocks from such results, e.g. someone having a nightmare game during a long run rather than, say, Phyl running into another excellent player at the wrong moment, so yes, total points for the victor's run as the denominator.
9 rounders:
1-time winner Jane Atkins lost by 40 points to Eugene McGoldrick who scored a total of 102 over two games (0.392).
2-time winner Andrea Parker lost by 41 points to George Head who scored a total of 86 over two games (0.477).
3-time winner Andrew Newens lost by 40 points to Mary Jones who scored a total of 104 over two games (0.385).
4-time winner Verity Joubert lost by 36 points to Chris Williams who scored a total of 104 over two games (0.346). Chris Williams was invited back to play again the following series, as he'd had a couple of words disallowed in his original run which were brought in with the next dictionary change. This counted as a new run. Meanwhile, Verity Joubert, despite the heavy defeat in her fifth game, went on to win her series.
5-time winner Una Szewc received a shock 28 point defeat by John Shock, who scored 97 over two games (0.289).
6-time winner Kate Ritchie lost by 36 points to Daniel Burton who scored 103 over two games (0.350).
7-time winner Joan Orchard lost by 16 points to Peg Smith who scored 78 over two games (0.205).
15 rounders (either flavour):
1-time winner Phil Matthams lost by 72 points to Bernie Corrigan who scored 190 over two games (0.379).
2-time winner Tony Owen lost by 45 points to Nick Billington who scored 162 over two games (0.278).
3-time winner Martin Gilbert lost by 40 points to Paul Best who scored 146 over two games (0.274).
4-time winner Matthew Green lost by 32 points to Michael Howe who scored 157 over two games (0.204).
5-time winner Judith Armstrong lost by 42 points to Tim Charlton who scored 193 over two games (0.218).
6-time winner Victoria James lost by 18 points to Chris Rose who scored 135 over two games (0.133).
7-time winner Nikki Roberts lost by 38 points to Anne Haley who scored 185 over two games (0.205).
Last edited by Graeme Cole on Mon Jun 16, 2014 11:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Graeme Cole
- Series 65 Champion
- Posts: 2041
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
9 rounders (counting losing scores as well as winning scores, which wasn't always how it was done):Gavin Chipper wrote:What are the lowest and highest eight-game totals of seven-time winners?
Lowest: Joan Orchard with 329.
Highest: Rodney Marrison with 455.
15 rounders:
Lowest: Peter Zyss with 617.
Highest: Steve Baines with 758.
- Ian Volante
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3967
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
- Location: Edinburgh
- Contact:
Re: Ask Graeme?
Thanks. An interesting way to highlight some forgotten games, if not that enlightening!Graeme Cole wrote:The losing margin divided by the victor's total score is in brackets.Ian Volante wrote:My second thought was of a way to tease out the biggest shocks from such results, e.g. someone having a nightmare game during a long run rather than, say, Phyl running into another excellent player at the wrong moment, so yes, total points for the victor's run as the denominator.
9 rounders:
1-time winner Jane Atkins lost by 40 points to Eugene McGoldrick who scored a total of 102 over two games (0.392).
2-time winner Andrea Parker lost by 41 points to George Head who scored a total of 86 over two games (0.477).
3-time winner Andrew Newens lost by 40 points to Mary Jones who scored a total of 104 over two games (0.385).
4-time winner Verity Joubert lost by 36 points to Chris Williams who scored a total of 104 over two games (0.346). Chris Williams was invited back to play again the following series, as he'd had a couple of words disallowed in his original run which were brought in with the next dictionary change. This didn't count as a new run, though. Meanwhile, Verity Joubert, despite the heavy defeat in her fifth game, went on to win her series.
5-time winner Una Szewc received a shock 28 point defeat by John Shock, who scored 97 over two games (0.289).
6-time winner Kate Ritchie lost by 36 points to Daniel Burton who scored 103 over two games (0.350).
7-time winner Joan Orchard lost by 16 points to Peg Smith who scored 78 over two games (0.205).
15 rounders (either flavour):
1-time winner Phil Matthams lost by 72 points to Bernie Corrigan who scored 190 over two games (0.379).
2-time winner Tony Owen lost by 45 points to Nick Billington who scored 162 over two games (0.278).
3-time winner Martin Gilbert lost by 40 points to Paul Best who scored 146 over two games (0.274).
4-time winner Matthew Green lost by 32 points to Michael Howe who scored 157 over two games (0.204).
5-time winner Judith Armstrong lost by 42 points to Tim Charlton who scored 193 over two games (0.218).
6-time winner Victoria James lost by 18 points to Chris Rose who scored 135 over two games (0.133).
7-time winner Nikki Roberts lost by 38 points to Anne Haley who scored 185 over two games (0.205).
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles
- Graeme Cole
- Series 65 Champion
- Posts: 2041
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
You've done that thing where you say the exact opposite of what you mean. You'd better edit it quick before anyone notices.Graeme Cole wrote:Chris Williams was invited back to play again the following series, as he'd had a couple of words disallowed in his original run which were brought in with the next dictionary change. This didn't count as a new run, though.
-
- Rookie
- Posts: 76
- Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 10:44 am
- Location: Kempston, Bedford
- Contact:
Re: Ask Graeme?
I just wondering is it rarely for the contestant lose a century in preliminary round?
- Graeme Cole
- Series 65 Champion
- Posts: 2041
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
Very rare indeed. It's happened only six times in over 2,500 15-round prelims.Ciaran McCarthy wrote:I just wondering is it rarely for the contestant lose a century in preliminary round?
- Chris Wills 120 - 107 Terry Rattle
- Micheal Harris 101 - 133 Andrew Hulme
- Ryan Taylor 106 - 104 Lesley Hines
- Abdirizak Hirsi 107 - 119 Mark Hartnett
- Mark Hartnett 101 - 111 Bradley Cates
- And one other which you're already familiar with.
Losing a prelim with a score of 100 or more is so rare that Terry Rattle, Micheal Harris and Lesley Hines were all subsequently invited back for special episodes for high-scoring losing contestants. So who knows, you might yet get to win the teapot.
- Charlie Reams
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9494
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
- Location: Cambridge
- Contact:
Re: Ask Graeme?
This game seems particularly worth highlighting. You might expect that the biggest defeat of a 7-time winner would come about from a few high-volatility rounds and some nines, but this game actually has a very modest max of 122 with no nines available, and the large margin was accumulated gradually over the course of seven winning spots. Top game.Graeme Cole wrote:Discounting finals games, the seven-time winner with the highest losing margin is David Franks in this game (48).
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13309
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
Interestingly it was pointed out once ages ago that on the basis of his first six wins, David Franks would have been a viscount and the number 1 seed in the previous series but instead didn't even make the quarter finals.Charlie Reams wrote:This game seems particularly worth highlighting. You might expect that the biggest defeat of a 7-time winner would come about from a few high-volatility rounds and some nines, but this game actually has a very modest max of 122 with no nines available, and the large margin was accumulated gradually over the course of seven winning spots. Top game.Graeme Cole wrote:Discounting finals games, the seven-time winner with the highest losing margin is David Franks in this game (48).
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 424
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:45 pm
- Location: West Bridgford
Re: Ask Graeme?
Spoilers for Series 70 included so I'll put it in a different colour
If Samir had beaten Andy in today's semi-final, would the final have been the first between two non UK born contestants? Seeing as Samir is from Bosnia and Mark from Dublin
If Samir had beaten Andy in today's semi-final, would the final have been the first between two non UK born contestants? Seeing as Samir is from Bosnia and Mark from Dublin
Definitely not Jamie McNeill or Schrodinger's Cat....
-
- Series 66 Champion
- Posts: 979
- Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:32 pm
- Location: Blackpool
Re: Ask Graeme?
James, I don't think your question will be answerable as the database doesn't store information on where contestants were born.
- Graeme Cole
- Series 65 Champion
- Posts: 2041
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
Correct, I'm afraid. Although today's final was the first between two players who had appeared in a previous series.Jack Worsley wrote:James, I don't think your question will be answerable as the database doesn't store information on where contestants were born.
- Callum Todd
- Series 69 Champion
- Posts: 1127
- Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
- Location: Leeds
Re: Ask Graeme?
Very minor spoilers for today's Countdown episode so I don't think it's necessary to do a colour change but let me know if you think otherwise and I'll edit this post:
In a round today, there was an amazing total of 17 seven-letter words available. Is that the flattest round in Countdown history?
In a round today, there was an amazing total of 17 seven-letter words available. Is that the flattest round in Countdown history?
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
- James Robinson
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 10580
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:38 pm
- Location: Mirfield, West Yorkshire
Re: Ask Graeme?
Nowhere close, I remember one there was about 30, if not moreCallum Todd wrote:Very minor spoilers for today's Countdown episode so I don't think it's necessary to do a colour change but let me know if you think otherwise and I'll edit this post:
In a round today, there was an amazing total of 17 seven-letter words available. Is that the flattest round in Countdown history?
![Exclamation :!:](./images/smilies/icon_exclaim.gif)
- Callum Todd
- Series 69 Champion
- Posts: 1127
- Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
- Location: Leeds
Re: Ask Graeme?
Wow that's incredible. Perhaps I should rephrase my question then to maximise the interestingness(es) of the answer: what is the flattest round in Countdown history?James Robinson wrote:Nowhere close, I remember one there was about 30, if not moreCallum Todd wrote:Very minor spoilers for today's Countdown episode so I don't think it's necessary to do a colour change but let me know if you think otherwise and I'll edit this post:
In a round today, there was an amazing total of 17 seven-letter words available. Is that the flattest round in Countdown history?
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13309
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
I'm surprised it isn't a better-known thing. It must come from a set of nine fairly common letters, and must have come up a few times. So what's the flattest round possible?James Robinson wrote:Nowhere close, I remember one there was about 30, if not moreCallum Todd wrote:Very minor spoilers for today's Countdown episode so I don't think it's necessary to do a colour change but let me know if you think otherwise and I'll edit this post:
In a round today, there was an amazing total of 17 seven-letter words available. Is that the flattest round in Countdown history?
- Johnny Canuck
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1650
- Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
- Location: Montréal 😃, Québec 😕, Canada 😃
Re: Ask Graeme?
The Series 2 final had a round with the letters (in some order) ACDEIRRST and it had over 30 valid words. This was before ERRATICS was valid.James Robinson wrote:Nowhere close, I remember one there was about 30, if not moreCallum Todd wrote:Very minor spoilers for today's Countdown episode so I don't think it's necessary to do a colour change but let me know if you think otherwise and I'll edit this post:
In a round today, there was an amazing total of 17 seven-letter words available. Is that the flattest round in Countdown history?
I'm not dead yet. In a rut right now because of stress from work. I'll be back later in S89. I also plan to bring back the Mastergram - if I can find a way to run a timer or clock through pure MediaWiki without having to upload to Vimeo every time.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13309
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
According to Apterous, RYWDOENLA has 30 6s available. It came up in this game. It's quite a fragile record for a selection to have though. A single word coming into the dictionary with one more letter turns it into a darrenic selection and joint worst by this criterion.Gavin Chipper wrote:I'm surprised it isn't a better-known thing. It must come from a set of nine fairly common letters, and must have come up a few times. So what's the flattest round possible?James Robinson wrote:Nowhere close, I remember one there was about 30, if not moreCallum Todd wrote:Very minor spoilers for today's Countdown episode so I don't think it's necessary to do a colour change but let me know if you think otherwise and I'll edit this post:
In a round today, there was an amazing total of 17 seven-letter words available. Is that the flattest round in Countdown history?
- Johnny Canuck
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1650
- Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
- Location: Montréal 😃, Québec 😕, Canada 😃
Re: Ask Graeme?
Has there ever been a (televised) round whose selection began with the letters "CEI"? I found a Countdown blooper in which those three letters are chosen and then somebody backstage sticks their hand through the letters board, terrifying Carol. Presumably this was not left in the final version, but would there be any way to tell what episode it was from?
I'm not dead yet. In a rut right now because of stress from work. I'll be back later in S89. I also plan to bring back the Mastergram - if I can find a way to run a timer or clock through pure MediaWiki without having to upload to Vimeo every time.
- Graeme Cole
- Series 65 Champion
- Posts: 2041
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
There have been six: round 7 of episode 1411, round 6 of episode 1701, round 6 of episode 2253, round 2 of episode 2710, round 3 of episode 3406, and round 8 of episode S31.Johnny Canuck wrote:Has there ever been a (televised) round whose selection began with the letters "CEI"? I found a Countdown blooper in which those three letters are chosen and then somebody backstage sticks their hand through the letters board, terrifying Carol. Presumably this was not left in the final version, but would there be any way to tell what episode it was from?
Here's the clip. I'm pretty sure it's from the 1990s, which would rule out episodes 2710, 3406, and S31. S31 didn't feature Carol anyway.
I don't recognise the contestant in the challenger's chair picking the letters, but maybe someone else knows if it's John Howell, John Molloy or Alan Reynolds?
Of course, they could have scrapped the CEI and started the round again, in which case it might not be any of the above.
- Graeme Cole
- Series 65 Champion
- Posts: 2041
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
Regarding the flattest-round-ever question, Gevin is right - I haven't done that because it's so dependent on having the right dictionary, something we know we don't have for series prior to the adoption of the ODE2r.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13309
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
Would you be able to find the flattest rounds that have occurred according to the database even if it isn't entirely accurate? If you give a top 5 or 10, some of them at least should survive a dictionary change.Graeme Cole wrote:Regarding the flattest-round-ever question, Gevin is right - I haven't done that because it's so dependent on having the right dictionary, something we know we don't have for series prior to the adoption of the ODE2r.
-
- Series 66 Champion
- Posts: 979
- Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:32 pm
- Location: Blackpool
Re: Ask Graeme?
This may have been asked before but I'll do it anyway.
I remember coming across this video a while ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEpQ05577TE Have there been any other occasions where a contestant's added up all six numbers to reach the target or where it's been possible to achieve it in this way?
I remember coming across this video a while ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEpQ05577TE Have there been any other occasions where a contestant's added up all six numbers to reach the target or where it's been possible to achieve it in this way?
- Graeme Cole
- Series 65 Champion
- Posts: 2041
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
Contrary to Carol's claim, that wasn't the first time the target had been the sum of all the numbers - it had happened three times prior to then. It's also happened three times since.Jack Worsley wrote:This may have been asked before but I'll do it anyway.
I remember coming across this video a while ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEpQ05577TE Have there been any other occasions where a contestant's added up all six numbers to reach the target or where it's been possible to achieve it in this way?
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_163 (round 4)
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_1351 (round 4)
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_1424 (round 4)
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_3605 (round 14)
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_4618 (round 14)
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_5001 (round 14)
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_5883 (round 14)
Theresa McKeown in episode 1424 was the first contestant to actually solve it this way. Then Steve Graston did it in that video, then Paul Archard did it in episode 5001.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13309
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
Always in round 4 in 9-rounders or round 14 in 15-rounders.Graeme Cole wrote:Contrary to Carol's claim, that wasn't the first time the target had been the sum of all the numbers - it had happened three times prior to then. It's also happened three times since.Jack Worsley wrote:This may have been asked before but I'll do it anyway.
I remember coming across this video a while ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEpQ05577TE Have there been any other occasions where a contestant's added up all six numbers to reach the target or where it's been possible to achieve it in this way?
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_163 (round 4)
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_1351 (round 4)
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_1424 (round 4)
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_3605 (round 14)
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_4618 (round 14)
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_5001 (round 14)
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_5883 (round 14)
Theresa McKeown in episode 1424 was the first contestant to actually solve it this way. Then Steve Graston did it in that video, then Paul Archard did it in episode 5001.
- JimBentley
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2820
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:39 pm
- Contact:
Re: Ask Graeme?
It's a conspiracy!Gavin Chipper wrote:Always in round 4 in 9-rounders or round 14 in 15-rounders.
-
- Rookie
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:26 am
Re: Ask Graeme?
Having met Lisa Hermann at the quizzing Grand Prix she mentioned that the person who beat her won her next game with a very low score so I looked the game up
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_2729
COLOR is no longer valid due to countdown rules so the winner should have actually lost this game, how many other games would have had a different result if US spellings had never been allowed on Countdown?
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_2729
COLOR is no longer valid due to countdown rules so the winner should have actually lost this game, how many other games would have had a different result if US spellings had never been allowed on Countdown?
- Johnny Canuck
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1650
- Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
- Location: Montréal 😃, Québec 😕, Canada 😃
Re: Ask Graeme?
In round 5 of this game, the contestants' two offerings had no letters in common. Has this happened in any other instances (excluding those where a contestant offers nothing)?
I'm not dead yet. In a rut right now because of stress from work. I'll be back later in S89. I also plan to bring back the Mastergram - if I can find a way to run a timer or clock through pure MediaWiki without having to upload to Vimeo every time.
- James Robinson
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 10580
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:38 pm
- Location: Mirfield, West Yorkshire
Re: Ask Graeme?
Round 7 here, and they were only 3's in this one, so a bit easier.Johnny Canuck wrote:In round 5 of this game, the contestants' two offerings had no letters in common. Has this happened in any other instances (excluding those where a contestant offers nothing)?
![Razz :P](./images/smilies/icon_razz.gif)
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13309
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
You'd need to know what word they would have offered with the different rules in place.Jon Stitcher wrote:Having met Lisa Hermann at the quizzing Grand Prix she mentioned that the person who beat her won her next game with a very low score so I looked the game up
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_2729
COLOR is no longer valid due to countdown rules so the winner should have actually lost this game, how many other games would have had a different result if US spellings had never been allowed on Countdown?
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 424
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:45 pm
- Location: West Bridgford
Re: Ask Graeme?
This may well have be asked before, but how different would the seedings of recent series be if games were scored in Stepdown scoring?
Definitely not Jamie McNeill or Schrodinger's Cat....
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 424
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:45 pm
- Location: West Bridgford
Re: Ask Graeme?
This may well have be asked before, but how different would the seedings of recent series be if games were scored in Stepdown scoring?
Definitely not Jamie McNeill or Schrodinger's Cat....
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13309
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
James Laverty wrote:This may well have be asked before, but how different would the seedings of recent series be if games were scored in Stepdown scoring?
It has. By you.James Laverty wrote:This may well have be asked before, but how different would the seedings of recent series be if games were scored in Stepdown scoring?
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13309
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
What's the average number of vowels and consonants per selection?
- Ben Wilson
- Legend
- Posts: 4547
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:05 pm
- Location: North Hykeham
- JimBentley
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2820
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:39 pm
- Contact:
Re: Ask Graeme?
I just need to say Fred (that in the absence of "Likes" - you may not remember those), I have been enjoying your work here over the past few months and I'm pretty much part of your fan club.Fred Mumford wrote:Nine.
- Graeme Cole
- Series 65 Champion
- Posts: 2041
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
This. Also I don't have any programmatic way of telling if something's a US spelling or not.Gavin Chipper wrote:You'd need to know what word they would have offered with the different rules in place.Jon Stitcher wrote:Having met Lisa Hermann at the quizzing Grand Prix she mentioned that the person who beat her won her next game with a very low score so I looked the game up
http://wiki.apterous.org/Episode_2729
COLOR is no longer valid due to countdown rules so the winner should have actually lost this game, how many other games would have had a different result if US spellings had never been allowed on Countdown?
- Graeme Cole
- Series 65 Champion
- Posts: 2041
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
3.54 vowels per selection is the average for all letters rounds since the show started.Gavin Chipper wrote:What's the average number of vowels and consonants per selection?
3.43 for the 1980s.
3.39 for the 1990s.
3.56 for the 2000s.
3.70 for all games so far in the 2010s.
3.76 for the 30th Birthday Championship.
4.03 for rounds picked by Jack Hurst.
4.60 for rounds picked by Jonathan Rawlinson.
- Johnny Canuck
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1650
- Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
- Location: Montréal 😃, Québec 😕, Canada 😃
Re: Ask Graeme?
Almost precisely right.Fred Mumford wrote:Nine.
I'm not dead yet. In a rut right now because of stress from work. I'll be back later in S89. I also plan to bring back the Mastergram - if I can find a way to run a timer or clock through pure MediaWiki without having to upload to Vimeo every time.
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 425
- Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 2:32 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
Wow, thank you. The great thing about my fan club is its exclusivity. Loneliness may become an issue though.JimBentley wrote:I just need to say Fred (that in the absence of "Likes" - you may not remember those), I have been enjoying your work here over the past few months and I'm pretty much part of your fan club.Fred Mumford wrote:Nine.
Re: Ask Graeme?
Who is this Fred Mumford though? It's a (Rentaghost) pseudonym, right? So I want to know all about the man behind this "Fred Mumford" (by which I don't mean Jim, as in being behind Fred bumming him going "ooh you're so great").JimBentley wrote:I just need to say Fred (that in the absence of "Likes" - you may not remember those), I have been enjoying your work here over the past few months and I'm pretty much part of your fan club.Fred Mumford wrote:Nine.
- JimBentley
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2820
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:39 pm
- Contact:
Re: Ask Graeme?
I stand behind my standing behind Fred Mumford, bumming him or not. It's a stance I'm proud of.Jon Corby wrote:Who is this Fred Mumford though? It's a (Rentaghost) pseudonym, right? So I want to know all about the man behind this "Fred Mumford" (by which I don't mean Jim, as in being behind Fred bumming him going "ooh you're so great").JimBentley wrote:I just need to say Fred (that in the absence of "Likes" - you may not remember those), I have been enjoying your work here over the past few months and I'm pretty much part of your fan club.Fred Mumford wrote:Nine.
You're just jealous because your time has passed and new, quicker and funnier people are marginalising you. They're doing the jokes you used to do, before you got old and slow, and bald.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13309
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
But how many people can they bully off the forum? That's the true measure. And Fred's "nine" comment hasn't got rid of me.JimBentley wrote:I stand behind my standing behind Fred Mumford, bumming him or not. It's a stance I'm proud of.Jon Corby wrote:Who is this Fred Mumford though? It's a (Rentaghost) pseudonym, right? So I want to know all about the man behind this "Fred Mumford" (by which I don't mean Jim, as in being behind Fred bumming him going "ooh you're so great").JimBentley wrote: I just need to say Fred (that in the absence of "Likes" - you may not remember those), I have been enjoying your work here over the past few months and I'm pretty much part of your fan club.
You're just jealous because your time has passed and new, quicker and funnier people are marginalising you. They're doing the jokes you used to do, before you got old and slow, and bald.
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 425
- Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 2:32 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
Graeme, what is the correct response to the social dilemma of not really wanting to be bummed by an octochamp, but not wanting to appear ungrateful either?
(I'm really referring to just the 15 round era, but if you have it for the 9 round era too then great).
(I'm really referring to just the 15 round era, but if you have it for the 9 round era too then great).
- Ben Wilson
- Legend
- Posts: 4547
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:05 pm
- Location: North Hykeham
Re: Ask Graeme?
Because I need an ego boost: How many people have lost two or more games with a score of 90+?
- Graeme Cole
- Series 65 Champion
- Posts: 2041
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
Five. You, Jon O'Neill, David O'Donnell, Innis Carson and Adam Gillard.Ben Wilson wrote:Because I need an ego boost: How many people have lost two or more games with a score of 90+?
- Johnny Canuck
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1650
- Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
- Location: Montréal 😃, Québec 😕, Canada 😃
Re: Ask Graeme?
I've no clue how I managed to notice, but round 5 on Wednesday and round 11 yesterday shared seven of the same letters in the same positions (N__AOELXO). Is this a first? Have any two selections ever matched eight letters in the same positions?
I'm not dead yet. In a rut right now because of stress from work. I'll be back later in S89. I also plan to bring back the Mastergram - if I can find a way to run a timer or clock through pure MediaWiki without having to upload to Vimeo every time.
-
- Acolyte
- Posts: 184
- Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 10:55 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
Who has the best winning margin of numbers rounds over their octochamp heat games?Graeme Cole wrote:Five. You, Jon O'Neill, David O'Donnell, Innis Carson and Adam Gillard.Ben Wilson wrote:Because I need an ego boost: How many people have lost two or more games with a score of 90+?
- Graeme Cole
- Series 65 Champion
- Posts: 2041
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
Up to the end of series 70, 1,989 letters rounds (out of about 50,000) shared exactly seven letters in the same positions with another round, so it's not that rare. It is rare for it to happen in such quick succession, though. The record is in this game, when rounds 9 and 13 had seven of the same letters in the same places.
60 rounds have shared eight letters in the same positions with another round, none of them particularly close together - the closest were round 4 of this game and round 4 of this game, 55 days later, and round 2 of this game and round 1 of this game, 56 days (but fewer episodes) later.
In over 50,000 letters rounds, the same selection in the same order has never come up twice.
- Matt Morrison
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 7822
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: London
- Contact:
Re: Ask Graeme?
Some top shelf Cole there.
- Graeme Cole
- Series 65 Champion
- Posts: 2041
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
Old 15 round formatGeorge Pryn wrote:Who has the best winning margin of numbers rounds over their octochamp heat games?Graeme Cole wrote:Five. You, Jon O'Neill, David O'Donnell, Innis Carson and Adam Gillard.Ben Wilson wrote:Because I need an ego boost: How many people have lost two or more games with a score of 90+?
The person at the top of this table isn't any of the usual names that might spring to mind. Mike Pullin did well on the numbers with 216/237, but his eight opponents only managed 47 numbers points between them, giving him a numbers margin of 169.
Top 10:
Code: Select all
+ - MARGIN
Mike Pullin 216 47 169
Mark Deeks 228 84 144
Jon O'Neill 224 84 140
Jack Worsley 237 100 137
Eoin Monaghan 229 92 137
Junaid Mubeen 218 87 131
Michael Bowden 208 77 131
Edward McCullagh 234 114 120
John Hunt 213 97 116
Ned Pendleton 188 74 114
All 12:
Code: Select all
+ - MARGIN
Jonathan Liew 256 81 175
Jen Steadman 295 150 145
Dylan Taylor 311 180 131
Giles Hutchings 286 171 115
Andy Naylor 249 141 108
Joe McGonigle 239 131 108
Glen Webb 292 187 105
Mark Murray 292 194 98
Bradley Cates 279 195 84
Eileen Taylor 220 148 72
Samir Pilica 215 162 53
Alex Fish 264 228 36
Andy Platt fits into neither format (or both, if you prefer) - he scored 239 and his opponents got 94, making his margin 145.
9 round format
Top 10 plus ties:
Code: Select all
+ - MARGIN
Graham Nash 141 54 87
John Hadfield 125 40 85
James Martin 145 77 68
David Williams 142 77 65
Melvin Hetherington 144 80 64
Peter Hutchings 108 44 64
Satbir Gupta 124 61 63
Dag Griffiths 102 40 62
Allan Saldanha 138 77 61
Scott Mearns 129 69 60
David Trace 87 27 60
- Johnny Canuck
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1650
- Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
- Location: Montréal 😃, Québec 😕, Canada 😃
Re: Ask Graeme?
This genuinely surprised me! I was expecting that 7 matching letters might never have come up before, let alone 8. Anyways, thanks for crunching the numbers; I know your database might not have been suited to answering it.Graeme Cole wrote:60 rounds have shared eight letters in the same positions with another round, none of them particularly close together - the closest were round 4 of this game and round 4 of this game, 55 days later, and round 2 of this game and round 1 of this game, 56 days (but fewer episodes) later.
I'm not dead yet. In a rut right now because of stress from work. I'll be back later in S89. I also plan to bring back the Mastergram - if I can find a way to run a timer or clock through pure MediaWiki without having to upload to Vimeo every time.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13309
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Ask Graeme?
If this hasn't already been asked, which 9-letter combination (so any order) has come out the most? Might as well have a top 10 or 20 with the maxes alongside!