c4countdown

Countdown recap for Monday 7 December 2009.

C1: Champion Jan Parker (1 win, 94 points.)
C2: Challenger Adrian Lumb.
DC: Susie Dent and Dr Phil Hammond.
RR: Rachel Riley.
OT: Other words or solutions.

Jan surprised a few people on Friday last week by beating four times winner Tom Allerton, thereby confirming Jackie Baker's place in the finals later this week. Jan now has the opportunity to follow in Jackie's footsteps and have a run spanning two series. Only three people stand in her way.

The first of these three is Adrian, a CAB advisor from Hoylake, on the tip of the Wirral, and who doesn't appear to be quite sure whether watching Everton or getting married was his greatest thrill. Maybe today's experience will beat both of those.

Back in Dictionary Corner for another week is Dr Phil Hammond, the Dr having been resurrected in the show's credits.

R01: T Y L E A E K N R
R02: P W R E O A D L N
R03: T W N I A F B E S
R04: R G H E U I C S E
R05: 50, 9, 8, 2, 2, 3. Target: 172.
TTT: OPENLATE - "Gnu's just in. Dec's friend might run away with a woman."
R06: N T G I O O T A S
R07: W D O E G N I M D
R08: B X D A O E R S Y
R09: R S T A E A N P D
R10: 100, 5, 3, 7, 6, 7, . Target: 883.
TTT: REBELHOD - "How he sees the insect in his hand."
R11: P R I O E S C S N
R12: L N T U E I S D E
R13: Z T S A I E T R M
R14: 50, 7, 2, 5, 2, 1. Target: 749.
R15: T I T E S C A R F (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

Enjoy the show.

Round 1: T Y L E A E K N R

C1: TALKER (6)
C2: RELENT (6)
DC: ETERNAL (7) ENTERAL (7)
OT: RETAKEN (7)
Score: 6–6 (max 7)

Round 2: P W R E O A D L N

C1: WEAPON (6)
C2: PONDER (6)
DC: PADRONE (7) PROWLED (7) LARDON (6) LEOPARD (7)
OT: POLEWARD (8)
Score: 12–12 (max 15)

Nobody gets the Darren, which means nothing other than towards a pole (as in north or south pole).

Round 3: T W (actually an upside down M) N I A F B E S

C1: TWINES (6)
C2: FIESTA (6)
DC: INFEST (6)
OT: BASINET (7)
Score: 18–18 (max 22)

Once more, the Darren is missed by all.

Round 4: R G H E U I C S E

C1: CRUISE (6)
C2: RICHES (6)
DC: GUSHIER (7) CUSHIER (7)
OT: EUCHRES (7) HEURIGE (7)
Score: 24–24 (max 29)

Heurige is an Austrian wine.

Round 5: 50, 9, 8, 2, 2, 3. Target: 172.

C1: 172. (50 + 8) x 3 - 2 (10)
C2: 172. (50 + 8) x 3 - 2 (10)
Score: 34–34 (max 39)

And so we go into the first break with nothing between the contestants, all rounds so far being level.

Teatime teaser: OPENLATE -> ANTELOPE
I have to admit that it wasn't until I had the solution that I was able to work out what the clue really did say.

In the first of Dr Phil's spots this week, he talked about the pros and cons of Scrabble before marriage, and managed to finish with a plug for his new book, which I'll repeat here.

Round 6: N T G I O O T A S

C1: TOASTING (8)
C2: tootings
OT: OSTINATO (8)
Score: 42–34 (max 47)

Tooting isn't listed as a noun, so Jan takes the first lead today.
Ostinato is a repeated musical phrase.

Round 7: W D O E G N I M D

C1: DOWNED (6)
C2: DEMON (5)
DC: DEMIGOD (7) WIDGEON (7)
OT: DEMOING (7) MEOWING (7) WEDDING (7) WENDIGO (7)
Score: 48–34 (max 54)

And immediately, Jan moves further ahead.
Surprisingly, well to me at any rate, MODDING isn't permitted. I first started modding computer programmes some 47 years ago, and, although MOD in that sense is in the dictionary as a noun, it's yet to make an appearance as a verb. Yet the much more obsure WENDIGO is permitted. And for those completely in the dark, WENDIGO is a variant spelling of WINDIGO; I'm sure that explains all.

Round 8: B X D A O E R S Y

C1: BROADS (6)
C2: BOXERS (6)
OT: BYROADS (7) ROSEBAY (7)
Score: 54–40 (max 61)

"Broads and Boxers" sounds like a good title for a late night film on Channel 5.

Round 9: R S T A E A N P D

C1: PARENTS (7)
C2: PARENTS (7)
DC: TREPANS (7) PANDERS (7)
OT: ADAPTERS (8) READAPTS (8)
Score: 61–47 (max 69)

Susie's telling us this week about the derivation of some place names in Britain. Star name today has to be Nottingham, first named Snottingham, after the chieftan Snot. Regretably the S has since disappeared, but I see a report of Susie's talk today has already found its way onto at least one football website, and so opponents of Nottingham Forest may well be coming up with some new chants soon.

Round 10: 100, 5, 3, 7, 6, 7. Target: 883.

C1: -
C2: 880. 6 + 3 = 9 ... oh bugger, or words to that effect.
RR: 883. (100 - 6 - 5) x (3 + 7) - 7 (10)
Score: 61–47 (max 79)

Rachel only managed 882 during the 30 seconds; the 883 result came after the interval.

Teatime teaser: REBELHOD -> BEHOLDER

Round 11: P R I O E S C S N

C1: PRINCESS (8)
C2: PRINCESS (8)
DC: CONSPIRES (18)
Score: 69–55 (max 97)

Nice nine from DC.

Round 12: L N T U E I S D E

C1: DILUTES (7)
C2: DILUTES (7)
DC: LISTENED (8) INSULTED (8) DILUENTS (8)
OT: UNLISTED (8) ENLISTED (8)
Score: 76–62 (max 105)

Round 13: Z T S A I E T R M

C1: nattier
C2: MAZIEST (7)
DC: MISTREAT (8)
Score: 76–69 (max 113)

Perhaps Jan heard N instead of M. And this lets Adrian back in with just two rounds to go.

Round 14: 50, 7, 2, 5, 2, 1. Target: 749.

C1: 749. (2 x 50 + 7) x (5 + 2) (10)
C2: 749. (2 x 50 + 7) x (5 + 2) (10)
Score: 86–79 (max 123)

And so all depends on the crucial conundrum ...

Round 15: T I T E S C A R F

... which niether contentant gets.
A lady in green, who strangely seemed to be nursing a Countdown mug box, gives the correct answer, CRAFTIEST.
Score: 86–79 (max 133)

So after a very close game (only two different in their raw scores, and with only one max between them in the letters rounds), Adrian's free to go back to his wife, or to watch Everton, while Jan returns tomorrow in the hope that she can finish the year undefeated.

Statistics Corner

Jan:
Total score - 86
Raw score - 86
Total % of max - 65
Raw % of max - 65
Total average score per round - 5.7
Raw average score per round - 5.7
Number of maxes - 3 (two numbers, one letters)

Adrian:
Total score - 79
Raw score - 84
Total % of max - 59
Raw % of max - 63
Total average score per round - 5.3
Raw average score per round - 5.6
Number of maxes - 2 (both numbers)

Further summaries are at:
http://www.apterous.org/cdb/series.php?series=61

I suppose they would have had to accept trifectas as an alternative for the conundrum?

This discussion probably took place in the spoiler thread but I am avoiding spoilers since am so behind on the show.

David O'Donnell wrote:I am avoiding spoilers since am so behind on the show.

Says the man who tried to extort the result of the finals from me! No the alternate solution wasn't mentioned in the spoilers thread but I think I heard someone mentioning it on the recording day.

David O'Donnell wrote:I suppose they would have had to accept trifectas as an alternative for the conundrum?

It's a valid word, but the solution to the conundrum is never a plural.

Marc Enyedy wrote:

David O'Donnell wrote:I suppose they would have had to accept trifectas as an alternative for the conundrum?

It's a valid word, but the solution to the conundrum is never a plural.

I suspect David knows that... However the no-plural thing is an unwritten rule, which it would be a bit unfair to expect contestants to know and obey in the heat of the moment.

Charlie Reams wrote:

Marc Enyedy wrote:

David O'Donnell wrote:I suppose they would have had to accept trifectas as an alternative for the conundrum?

It's a valid word, but the solution to the conundrum is never a plural.

I suspect David knows that... However the no-plural thing is an unwritten rule, which it would be a bit unfair to expect contestants to know and obey in the heat of the moment.

GERANIUMS!

Charlie Reams wrote:However the no-plural thing is an unwritten rule

Not any more!

Kai Laddiman wrote:

Charlie Reams wrote:However the no-plural thing is an unwritten rule

Not any more!

Cool, hadn't seen that. If that's really verbatim from the guidelines then it's incorrect, or at least incomplete. For example, VITALISES can't be a conundrum even though it isn't a plural. The rule is some slightly ad hoc thing about words which you can add an S to in a regular way, or something.

Charlie Reams wrote: For example, VITALISES can't be a conundrum even though it isn't a plural. The rule is some slightly ad hoc thing about words which you can add an S to in a regular way, or something.

Where did you get this info from?

D Eadie wrote:

Charlie Reams wrote: For example, VITALISES can't be a conundrum even though it isn't a plural. The rule is some slightly ad hoc thing about words which you can add an S to in a regular way, or something.

Where did you get this info from?

You've never set a conundrum like that. Am I wrong in saying that VITALISES couldn't be a conundrum?

Charlie Reams wrote: Am I wrong in saying that VITALISES couldn't be a conundrum?

Am not closing any more doors re conundrums except for the plural rule. We need to keep all options open because once all possible conundrums are available to play on Apterous, we have the chance that a player might win a final because of luck in having the very same conundrum in a game against Prune the night before the show, even down to the very same shuffle, which would be a great shame. The goalposts will shift whenever its needed, but we'll always let players know in advance. As you know, i went to great lengths to make sure the conundrums in the finals of this series were not used on Apterous, and it took me half my life, which i don't fancy doing every series. If a slight change of rule works in our favour, then it's to be explored.

Apterous may not be killing Countdown, but it almost killed me for a few weeks in October.

D Eadie wrote: We need to keep all options open because once all possible conundrums are available to play on Apterous, we have the chance that a player might win a final because of luck in having the very same conundrum in a game against Prune the night before the show, even down to the very same shuffle, which would be a great shame.

All conundrums are available....to anyone who wants to spend the time trawling the ODE for them and to read them or practising spotting them using their own program, or even using something like Excel. I think if you've put the hours in practising on Apterous then you should be rewarded. If they've even spent their own time committing scrambles to memory (e.g. I must remember AMITOSISL is ALTISSIMO or WATERGOLF is AFTERGLOW) then I think if WATERGOLF appears they will be rewarded for spending several hours committing scrambles to memory. I learnt STUNSAIL the week before I went on the show as I missed it on apterous and then it came up. There's no qualms about that as it's in a letters round so I don't see why words like ALTISSIMO can't be used as finals conundrums. They may have seen them in apterous and may or may not have spotted it but if they can recognise the pattern of letters when it matters on TV, then to me that's a good thing.

Obviously you can try to change the shuffle from one on apterous (maybe) to stop people memorising the shuffles (which there are so many of it's ridiculous to use this method) but I'll still stand by the statement: "those that practise hard should be rewarded".

Kirk Bevins wrote: "those that practise hard should be rewarded".

Agreed. Not only that, it seems particularly odd to punish particularly those who practise in public under their real names. If I were thinking of appearing in the future, I'd definitely be signing up for multiple fake accounts right now, to stop myself being singled out for a deliberate handicap.

In saying this, I can see Damian's frustrations: Imagine forseeing an A vs B final. Damian thinks about using the conundrum HYDROFOIL as it's quite hard and would be fitting for a final. Upon looking at apterous he sees that both A and B have solved it, both within a second. He's then thinking "If I put HYDROFOIL as a conundrum it's going to be a reaction test to the buzzer".

Whether this is a good thing or not (may look impressive to the audience as they've solved it in 0.8 seconds) is another matter but if you *know* they've both solved this conundrum instantly recently then it's a bit pointless setting it. Perhaps set apterous conundrums that have been unsolved by both players?

Kirk Bevins wrote:Perhaps set apterous conundrums that have been unsolved by both players?

Anything which narrows the set of possible conundrums only makes it easier. Every time you/Chris/Innis etc nail a conundrum in 1 second on apterous you can now think "cool, another one I don't need to remember for CoC". It gets a bit silly and disadvantages apterites versus people who practise in other ways, or not at all. I'm very tempted to just anonymise the recaps, which would solve the problem immediately, but I'd rather not have to do things like that.

Those who practice hard should be rewarded, well that's fair enough in relation to letters and numbers, but not for conundrums. I've played people on apterous who have been pretty inferior to me in terms of gameplay, but then Rd 15 comes along and within 1.5 seconds they've unscrambled something pretty ridiculous. I'm thinking WTF?, then you realise they saw the word a few games earlier, and the test of skill between us both has been rendered null and void. In a final or a semi, you won't get games where the skill gap is so wide, so the crucial conundrum should always be a test of skill, not a memory challenge from sitting at the PC all night.

Listen guys, i don't give a flying shit who wins or loses, i get my salary and go home, but if i put a majorly important conundrum into a game, knowing that one particular player has seen it on apterous, or even that its been used on apterous a lot, even if the players are anonymous or called Veronica Pissflaps, i'd still feel a bit guilty and somewhat gutted for the person coming out second best.

Practice yes, sure it pays dividends, but not in this case. I did PETDRAGON for GODPARENT on the show a few weeks ago, and it was used exactly the same way on apterous, not long before. There's only so many permutations available before it gets to the stage where someone can win Countdown purely because they have the time to sit at home all day playing online, playing Conundrum attacks.

Nobody is being punished at all, its the same for everyone.

D Eadie wrote:gets to the stage where someone can win Countdown purely because they have the time to sit at home all day playing online, playing Conundrum attacks.

Welcome to Series 61.

Kirk Bevins wrote:

D Eadie wrote:gets to the stage where someone can win Countdown purely because they have the time to sit at home all day playing online, playing Conundrum attacks.

Welcome to Series 61.

I don't get you.

All I meant was in this series in particular a lot of winners (octochamps etc) were caused by people who practised on apterous a lot. Nothing sinister.

Oh sure, goes without saying.
It's all Reams' fault.

Has Apterous killed the countdown conundrum?

Marc Meakin wrote:Has Apterous killed the countdown conundrum?

Nope, just made it harder to beat.