c4countdown

So, it's time to return to a full week of Countdown, and by the end of it, we'll know who is the champion of Series 68.

We're down to the top 6 players, and I think it's fair to say that this quarter-final is the match that everyone has been waiting to see.

The match is a rematch between the No.3 seed, (and Peoples' Champion) Eileen Taylor, and the No.6 seed, Jill Hayward. (Quite ironically, the first song to be in my car on my way to the station to the finals was "Come On Eileen"!! )

Here are the stats:

Firstly, No.3 Seed Eileen "The Sydenham Superwoman" Taylor - 8 Wins, 754 Points. (Average: 94.25)
Highest Score: 111 vs. Katie Burge (5th Game)
Lowest Score: 67 vs. Sam Lake (7th Game)
9's Achieved: 1/4
Total Points/Max/%: 754/1024 (74%)
Letters Points/Max/%: 494/624 (79%)
Numbers Points/Max/%: 210/320 (66%)
Conundrum Points/Max/%: 50/80 (63%)

Secondly, No.6 Seed Jill "The Christchurch Cohort" Hayward - 3 Wins, 374 Points. (Average: 93.5)
Highest Score: 104 vs. Pat Gardner (3rd Game)
Lowest Score: 85 vs. John Gardner (1st Game)
9's Achieved: 0/0
Total Points/Max/%: 374/484 (77%)
Letters Points/Max/%: 220/284 (77%)
Numbers Points/Max/%: 124/160 (78%)
Conundrum Points/Max/%: 30/40 (75%)

Myleene Klass will be carrying on in DC all week, adding to her single appearance last week.

Graeme will be recapping later on.

Odd that despite Eileen having a higher average score, Jill achieved a higher percentage of the max points. I'm betting this one will either go to a crucial or a last-minute escape from Eileen.

Factoid: this is the first heat-final rematch in nearly three years.

1st numbers: (25+2)x10x3+9-7 = 812

first numbers ((25x(3+2)-9)x7

Alt 7 in R1 of TRIVIUM.

Also there is an alternative 9 in R2, but I went for the invalid "craniated"!

Very very easy to do, as CRANIATES is a noun plural and CARINATED is an adjective - thus CRANIATED^ and CARINATES^ are not in.

Easier to take ERADICANT / ASCERTAIN

DUKEDOMS in round 11?

Yeah, Dan & Giles had that one, nice effort

Well played Eileen well done to Jill in getting to the quarters also.

Andy Platt wrote:Yeah, Dan & Giles had that one, nice effort

Ah nice, cheers Andy.

They were both better than me - I got couverts but missed all four easy eights in the padrones round for instance.

I thought DC got EARSHOT in round 5 originally. Either I'm mistaken or it was edited out. PAYEES and IDEOGRAM for a couple of other beaters.

Go Eileen!

Alt. REASONED in round 12.

Very close-run thing - if Jill hadn't misdeclared in the first round she'd have won.

No-one's pointed out in this or the previous game that Myleene Klass seems to think she can get away with wearing comedy glasses without anyone noticing.

Interesting that all the things about tomorrow's game has been revealed by the papers, but according to the Wiki, it was Rachel's 1,000th game TODAY!! http://wiki.apterous.org/Rachel_Riley

Would I have been allowed 'overcuts' in the round that had 'cutovers'? Would have been more appropriate for a Tailor [Sorry ]

Philip Wilson wrote:Would I have been allowed 'overcuts' in the round that had 'cutovers'? Would have been more appropriate for a Tailor [Sorry ]

Afraid not, Philip. Just CUTOVERS and COUVERTS in that round.

There was IDEOGRAM in round 10 though.

James Robinson wrote:

Philip Wilson wrote:Would I have been allowed 'overcuts' in the round that had 'cutovers'? Would have been more appropriate for a Tailor [Sorry ]

Afraid not, Philip. Just CUTOVERS and COUVERTS in that round.

There was IDEOGRAM in round 10 though.

That's shocking!! It should be a noun And a verb!! Oh well!

James Robinson wrote:Interesting that all the things about tomorrow's game has been revealed by the papers, but according to the Wiki, it was Rachel's 1,000th game TODAY!! http://wiki.apterous.org/Rachel_Riley

Was it? It says "Appearances: 999" to me, so tomorrow is the 1000th.

Graeme Cole wrote:

James Robinson wrote:Interesting that all the things about tomorrow's game has been revealed by the papers, but according to the Wiki, it was Rachel's 1,000th game TODAY!! http://wiki.apterous.org/Rachel_Riley

Was it? It says "Appearances: 999" to me, so tomorrow is the 1000th.

Why does mine say "Appearances: 1,000" then

I even double-checked it on returning from the recording

James Robinson wrote:

Graeme Cole wrote:

James Robinson wrote:Interesting that all the things about tomorrow's game has been revealed by the papers, but according to the Wiki, it was Rachel's 1,000th game TODAY!! http://wiki.apterous.org/Rachel_Riley

Was it? It says "Appearances: 999" to me, so tomorrow is the 1000th.

Why does mine say "Appearances: 1,000" then

I even double-checked it on returning from the recording

Rachel's first episode was episode 4733, with today's being 5717. That makes it 985 numbered episodes. She's also done eleven specials and four 8 out of 10 Cats specials, which makes today her 1,000th.

James Robinson wrote:

Graeme Cole wrote:

James Robinson wrote:Interesting that all the things about tomorrow's game has been revealed by the papers, but according to the Wiki, it was Rachel's 1,000th game TODAY!! http://wiki.apterous.org/Rachel_Riley

Was it? It says "Appearances: 999" to me, so tomorrow is the 1000th.

Why does mine say "Appearances: 1,000" then

I even double-checked it on returning from the recording

Now, that's odd. If I log in, it says 1,000. If I log out again, it says 999. Curious. Maybe she was in a secret episode that only wiki account holders are allowed to know about.

Well, maybe they're not counting the 8 Out Of 10 Cats episodes (4 of them). But that would mean today was the 996th. Okay then, maybe they're also counting specials that have been recorded but not broadcast. There were, I think, four specials recorded on one day in 2011 of which Channel 4 decided in their infinite wisdom only to show one, so that's three, plus Matt Croy's special against Craig Lingard and the Rychelle matchup, that's five. So that means today was her 1001st. Okay, that's even further out, so forget that.

I have another theory. Maybe someone at Countdown looked at Rachel's page on our wiki, which inexplicably gives a number of shows one lower than it should to non-logged-in viewers, and used that?

Jack Worsley wrote:

James Robinson wrote: Why does mine say "Appearances: 1,000" then

I even double-checked it on returning from the recording

Rachel's first episode was episode 4733, with today's being 5717. That makes it 985 numbered episodes. She's also done eleven specials and four 8 out of 10 Cats specials, which makes today her 1,000th.

Well, she's actually done a few more specials, so she's actually already passed 1,000, but it was 1,000 broadcast ones today.

Gavin Chipper wrote:No-one's pointed out in this or the previous game that Myleene Klass seems to think she can get away with wearing comedy glasses without anyone noticing.

Like

Johnny Canuck wrote:
Factoid: this is the first heat-final rematch in nearly three years.

I wonder when the last time was that 2 women have faced off in the heats then met again in the finals? If it's ever happened that is.Can't think it has ATM.

Richard Priest wrote:

Johnny Canuck wrote:
Factoid: this is the first heat-final rematch in nearly three years.

I wonder when the last time was that 2 women have faced off in the heats then met again in the finals? If it's ever happened that is.Can't think it has ATM.

In series 6, Helen Grayson beat Olivia Lloyd-Potts in a heat game and then lost to her in the semi-final. So that's at least once.

[Moved to correct day - 25th June]

Gavin Chipper wrote:Susie allowed BAIZES, which I thought was interesting. BAIZE is a mass noun but they can be pluralised if there's more than one type. But her reason for deciding that there's more than one type was that it's listed as "typically green". That goes too far for me. Presumably all mass nouns are typically something, whether listed so or not. I know it's often a bit vague, but to allow something because it's "typically..." is a stretch.

It's listed as allowed in this episode from 2011 but disallowed here in 2009. It's not on Apterous as it happens.

It was redone, it was originally disallowed, then 5 minutes later was allowed. I remeber the incident in 2009, so thought it wouldn't be allowed this time.........

Shows what I know.

Did I post that in the wrong day?

That was a very nice quarter-final. Jill was a bit unfortunate in my eyes to be too far behind even with that 20-point swing at the end, as she didn't seem that far behind Eileen in general play. PADRONES from Eileen and the final numbers solve from Jill were both decent. Eileen and Myleene make for good entertainment!