B'day Championship Spoilers For Wednesday February 27th 2013

James Robinson · Post by **James Robinson** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:44 am

WOWEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's unbelievable to think that we have now reached the semi-final stage of this competition, BUT WE HAVE!!!!!

Even more amazing is that if you include David O'Donnell from yesterday, our final 5 contestants represent each of the 5 hosts of the show's 30 year history, a true testament to the rich past that the show has produced.

And even more amazing than that is the brilliance of our final 4 contestants. In their quarter-finals, all 4 between them dropped just EIGHT points

And it's actually the two that dropped those points who face off today, the Series 66 runner-up, Jonathan Rawlinson and the still unbeaten Series 63 champion, Jack Hurst.

Here are the stats:

Firstly, Series 66 Runner-Up Jonathan Rawlinson - 15 Games, 14 Wins, 1,533 Points (Average: 102.2 - Not Including Tie-Break Conundrum)
Highest Score: 120 vs. Stewart Calver (3rd Game)
Lowest Score: 70 vs. Jack Worsley (Grand Final)
9's Achieved: 4/7
Total Points/Max/%: 1533/1828 (84%)
Letters Points/Max/%: 1049/1240 (85%)
Numbers Points/Max/%: 364/438 (83%)
Conundrum Points/Max/%: 120/150 (80%)

Secondly, Series 63 Champion Jack Hurst - 15 Games, 15 Wins, 1,757 Points. (Average: 117.13)
Highest Score: 143 vs. Wayne Kelly (30BC Round 1)
Lowest Score: 108 vs. Peter Godwin (Quarter-Final) & vs. Mark Deeks (30BC Prelim)
9's Achieved: 9/10
Total Points/Max/%: 1757/1890 (93%)
Letters Points/Max/%: 1208/1302 (93%)
Numbers Points/Max/%: 429/438 (98%)
Conundrum Points/Max/%: 120/150 (80%)

I'll be around with the recap later.

P.S. Savour every moment if you can, there's only 3 more games to go.

Dave Preece · Post by **Dave Preece** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 2:31 pm

Can't wait for this!

Zarte Siempre · Post by **Zarte Siempre** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 2:58 pm

(10+4)*(50+3)-9-8 for first numbers

Zarte Siempre · Post by **Zarte Siempre** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:01 pm

...after seeing Rachel's way of eventually doing it, am I going mad?!?!

Adam Gillard · Post by **Adam Gillard** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:01 pm

I had Zarte's method; Rachel's was silly.

Zarte Siempre · Post by **Zarte Siempre** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:15 pm

alt r10 - (75-10-2)*7

Adam Gillard · Post by **Adam Gillard** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:15 pm

Same as Zarte again!

Jack Worsley · Post by **Jack Worsley** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:18 pm

Love Jonathan's Dave Taylor impression in round 4; "Probably the same eight" and then offering something completely different.

Great stuff so far!

Zarte Siempre · Post by **Zarte Siempre** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:24 pm

payouts as an alt to autopsy

Adam Gillard · Post by **Adam Gillard** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:29 pm

A great contest; very good conundrum solve Jack and congratulations on reaching the final. Well played both!

Zarte Siempre · Post by **Zarte Siempre** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:30 pm

Jeeze, conundrum was a bit slow, wasn't it?

Seriously though, another great game, and well played both.

Jack Worsley · Post by **Jack Worsley** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:36 pm

Yet another fantastic game! Sorry to see Rawlo go but well done to Jack for a great conundrum solve under pressure.

Jordan F · Post by **Jordan F** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:39 pm

As I just finished watching due to a delayed stream, very well done Jack on reaching the final, no way I would have ever gotten that conundrum. Very unlucky Jonathan, you played strong throughout that entire game, and scoring 105 against Jack is no mean feat. Should be a very tough challenge for either Jono or Conor on Friday.

Grant Waters · Post by **Grant Waters** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:50 pm

Superb game again.

Round 4 was just silly. I mean how often does Susie have to look up both words!

Unlucky with hammies Jack - that was a brave attempt but I think this game was destined to go to a crucial no matter what happened.

Well done to Jonathan for an impressive run up to and including this game, but Jack was always going to be tough to beat.

I didn't get the conundrum but it was one I should have got since I holidayed on the Ardnamurchan peninsula and used to go through a village called Strontian which I always (as a boy) called Strontium.

Eoin Monaghan · Post by **Eoin Monaghan** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:57 pm

Was sitting beside Paul Keane in the studio for this and we both got the first numbers using Zarte's method really quickly and there was a lot of confusion...

David Barnard · Post by **David Barnard** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:57 pm

What I marvel at is the consistency in which Jack scores 110 plus, very well played Jack I wish I could be that good

John Garcia · Post by **John Garcia** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 4:17 pm

Great game both, played in the best of spirits!

Did anyone else notice that in Jonathan's last letters pick, Nick said to him "This will be your last letters pick of the tournament .." then hastily added "in this game". Hmmmmmmm!

Matt Coates · Post by **Matt Coates** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 4:26 pm

1st Numbers alt: ((9-3)X6)+10=58, 58X50=2900/4

Got it after the time tho but before I saw Rachels method.

Well played guys by the way

Grant Waters · Post by **Grant Waters** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 4:36 pm

David Barnard wrote:What I marvel at is the consistency in which Jack scores 110 plus, very well played Jack I wish I could be that good

I know! An AVERAGE of 117 is just mental!

Andy Platt · Post by **Andy Platt** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 4:55 pm

How much of Jack's emotion at the end did the cameras show? Cos that was nice

David Barnard · Post by **David Barnard** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 5:42 pm

Andy Platt wrote:How much of Jack's emotion at the end did the cameras show? Cos that was nice

They showed a little bit of it, although he was quite obviously crying when the credits were rolling

Jojo Apollo · Post by **Jojo Apollo** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 6:04 pm

Great double ton game, I thought Jonathan was going to get another superfast conundrum solve there and win it. Well done Jack on reaching the final, also well done to Jonathan on making the final four.

Andy Platt · Post by **Andy Platt** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 6:11 pm

David Barnard wrote:
Andy Platt wrote:How much of Jack's emotion at the end did the cameras show? Cos that was nice
They showed a little bit of it, although he was quite obviously crying when the credits were rolling

Cool, well, that's great to see. Clearly such an involving and intense experience that even the most cool are starting to fray their nerves a little. Love it.
And well done again to both for another great game. At the time of the crucial I thought Rawlo was the favourite but good nerve by that Hurst guy and, all things considered, a deserved place in the final.

James Robinson · Post by **James Robinson** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 7:33 pm

THIS RECAP IS GONNA BLOW YOUR HEAD OFF, IF NOT MINE FIRST!!!

Super staggering level of brilliance, and with the added pressure of a semi-final too, it just made it even more memorable

Very well done Jack for getting to the final, and maintaining your 100% record too.

Commiserations, Jonathan, but you did a valiant effort to stay with Jack all game.

KAMEEZ in round 3, MIMEOS/MIMOSA in round 11.

Roll on the 2nd semi

Eoin Monaghan · Post by **Eoin Monaghan** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 8:31 pm

It was incredible being in the studio for this semi-final (thanks again to the Team for this chance) and to meet so many familiar faces. Was ridiculously nervous going into the conundrum for this one, not really sure who I wanted to win. It clearly meant so much to Jack to get to the final (I know the feeling!) and it was great that it paid.

Jonathan was also fantastic, and has been fantastic throughout (even if he did beat Ed

) and thoroughly deserves this accolade. A great advocate for the game and your personality off-screen and on-screen was great. You seemed so cheery prior to this game!

Jon Corby · Post by **Jon Corby** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 8:55 pm

Jordan F wrote:no way I would have ever gotten that conundrum

Ditto, I paused it so that I could get a chance to solve before one of the contestants buzzes (which has become a bit of a necessity during this tournament!) and gave up after a couple of minutes. Good natured (and high quality, I didn't know either of those 8s in round 4 either!) game again today. Congratulations to Jack on reaching the final, it seemed that both players were content with the phenomenal achievement of reaching the semi whatever the result. Great stuff.

Peter Mabey · Post by **Peter Mabey** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 10:47 pm

Yet another amazing game

- they just get better & better

Found Matt's method for first numbers, Zante's for second, both in time (I habitually look for factors of target, so wasted several seconds trying 7x17 for third one

)
When I saw AURIFIED^, i thought I was on a winner, but it's Scrabble only

Zarte Siempre · Post by **Zarte Siempre** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:37 pm

How do I keep ending up as a Greek island?!?!

Jon O'Neill · Post by **Jon O'Neill** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:38 pm

Zarte Siempre wrote:How do I keep ending up as a Greek island?!?!

I'm guessing AutoCorrect. I become Hobo.

Zarte Siempre · Post by **Zarte Siempre** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 12:30 am

At least that's APT...

Matt Morrison · Post by **Matt Morrison** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 12:35 am

keep dreaming guys. I doubt AURIFIED is going to get through without getting autocorrected up, though perhaps the ^ prevented it. But the killer is likely to be "i" - no phone sees a solitary i and doesn't capitalise it. So yeah, he just hates you both and thinks you have shit names.

Adam Dexter · Post by **Adam Dexter** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 1:01 am

Thanks. I did the first numbers the same way as you Zarte, and was beginning to question my sanity when I saw Rachel's bizarre method. Thanks for clarifying that I hadn't succumbed to the lunacy a full moon can bring on!

David O'Donnell · Post by **David O'Donnell** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 7:08 am

Great game. I'm glad I didn't have to play in the semis as I would have been destroyed!

Tony Atkins · Post by **Tony Atkins** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 2:32 pm

Eoin Monaghan wrote:Was sitting beside Paul Keane in the studio for this and we both got the first numbers using Zarte's method really quickly and there was a lot of confusion...

There was a huddle of Apterites on the other side who also got it the same as Zarte and wondered what the fuss was about.

Actually after Rachel said she hadn't got it Jack butted in saying that he had it now and started to shout out the
multiply up then divide method. Rachel told him off saying you can't have another go and got quite annoyed at him.
She then sat down and scribbled to get then answer she did.

Arthur Bennett · Post by **Arthur Bennett** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 3:09 pm

Not-so-belated congratulations this time, Jack.

Hitting back immediately after that invalid spot, and then solving a second crucial conundrum in as many days, isn't bad going at all.

And hard luck, Jonathan. You were brilliant throughout this tournament, and there's no shame whatsoever in going out in the semis.

Jennifer Steadman · Post by **Jennifer Steadman** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 7:49 pm

Jack and Jonathan having a conversation mid-round in round 1 made me literally choke on my dinner with laughter. I think it was funny because it was so surreal - I guess there's nothing in the rules that says you can't talk to the other contestant during a round! (Either that or I just have a really shit sense of humour. Probably both.)

Jon Corby · Post by **Jon Corby** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 8:04 pm

Jennifer Steadman wrote:Jack and Jonathan having a conversation mid-round in round 1 made me literally choke on my dinner with laughter. I think it was funny because it was so surreal - I guess there's nothing in the rules that says you can't talk to the other contestant during a round! (Either that or I just have a really shit sense of humour. Probably both.)

Nah, I enjoyed that too, was really nice

Gavin Chipper · Post by **Gavin Chipper** » Sat Mar 02, 2013 12:27 am

I think it was Jack's game before that had a target of 725 which Corby pointed out you could get doing 75*58/6. This time you could do 50*58/4. So there you go.

But yes, very good game. I did kind of want Jack to win this, because I thought he'd make a better all-time great candidate than Jonathan based on his entire Countdown run. Obviously Jonathan was brilliant all tournament though and deserved to get where he did.

Gavin Chipper · Post by **Gavin Chipper** » Wed Jun 24, 2020 4:11 pm

Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2013 12:27 am I think it was Jack's game before that had a target of 725 which Corby pointed out you could get doing 75*58/6. This time you could do 50*58/4. So there you go.

Yes, today I did 50 x (8x9-10-3)/4 = 725. I'm surprised no-one got it given that it was basically the same round that Jack had to play against Chris Wills. And yes, I think this method was easier than 14x53-17. It seems as though I missed this last time though given my wording above. "You could do". Probably got it late.

Zarte Siempre wrote: ↑Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:15 pm alt r10 - (75-10-2)*7

And this was my method for this round too. Far less clunky than what the contestants did.

I also did 100 + 25 instead of 75 + 50 for the final numbers. I refuse to lower myself to this showboating.

Oh and given that I remembered the conundrum and that I got the 10 from 725, I won this game today. Wasn't expecting that. Still counts.

Good game though. Looking forward to the others!

Gavin Chipper · Post by **Gavin Chipper** » Wed Jun 24, 2020 4:13 pm

Andy Platt wrote: ↑Wed Feb 27, 2013 6:11 pm At the time of the crucial I thought Rawlo was the favourite but good nerve by that Hurst guy and, all things considered, a deserved place in the final.

I remember thinking this at the time given Jonathan's conundrums. But Tom Rowell did also take a conundrum off him.

Thomas Cappleman · Post by **Thomas Cappleman** » Wed Jun 24, 2020 6:46 pm

Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 4:11 pm
Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2013 12:27 am I think it was Jack's game before that had a target of 725 which Corby pointed out you could get doing 75*58/6. This time you could do 50*58/4. So there you go.
Yes, today I did 50 x (8x9-10-3)/4 = 725.

Except that equals 737.5

Gavin Chipper · Post by **Gavin Chipper** » Wed Jun 24, 2020 7:04 pm

Thomas Cappleman wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 6:46 pm
Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 4:11 pm
Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Sat Mar 02, 2013 12:27 am I think it was Jack's game before that had a target of 725 which Corby pointed out you could get doing 75*58/6. This time you could do 50*58/4. So there you go.
Yes, today I did 50 x (8x9-10-3)/4 = 725.
Except that equals 737.5

So it does. I would have been better off doing 8 x (9-3) + 10 for the 58. Which is probably what Matt Coates did if he'd typed it in correctly.

Matt Coates wrote: ↑Wed Feb 27, 2013 4:26 pm 1st Numbers alt: ((9-3)X6)+10=58, 58X50=2900/4

Got it after the time tho but before I saw Rachels method.

Well played guys by the way

James Robinson · Post by **James Robinson** » Sun Jun 28, 2020 3:42 pm

Semi-Final 1 2020 Word Update

The max would have increased by three points (from 126 to 129) if played today, as there was a 7 available in Round 13 and 8's available in Rounds 7 & 12 that weren't around in 2013.

New Words Now Allowed:

R2: RHAGONS, ROHUNAS
R6: DIVIER
R7: UNREMOTE (increases MAX from 7 to 8)
R11: MAHEMS, MEISHI, MISAIM, MISMAE, MOMIES, OMIAIS
R12: PIOUSITY (increases MAX from 7 to 8)
R13: LOWEITE (increases MAXx from 6 to 7)