The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

All discussion relevant to Countdown that is not too spoilerific. New members: come here first to introduce yourself. We don't bite, or at least rarely.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Enthusiast
Posts: 333
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

The next Championship of Champions - now back on topic

Post by Callum Todd » Tue Dec 24, 2013 5:52 pm

I've seen lots of little discussions about the possibility of another CoC pop up all around the forum so thought it'd be a good idea to make a thread for these discussions to be collated in one place.

So, do you think there will be another CoC tournament? If so, when, and who would you like to see in it?
Last edited by Callum Todd on Thu Jan 02, 2014 12:38 am, edited 2 times in total.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.

User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 1526
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Graeme Cole » Tue Dec 24, 2013 7:52 pm

Callum Todd wrote:I've seen lots of little discussions about the possibility of another CoC pop up all around the forum so thought it'd be a good idea to make a thread for these discussions to be collated in one place.

So, do you think there will be another CoC tournament? If so, when, and who would you like to see in it?
A few years ago, the idea of another CoC had been thoroughly ruled out by the team. Then the mother of all CoCs happened, the 30th birthday championship, taking everyone by surprise. By all accounts that tournament was hugely well received by the viewers too. I'm hopeful that there will be another CoC, but I doubt it will be so soon after the 30th birthday thing.

User avatar
Andy Platt
Kiloposter
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 3:00 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Andy Platt » Tue Dec 24, 2013 8:12 pm

^ This. Next winter might be an idea, or Summer 2015. Wouldn't be too soon after the 30BC, I reckon.

User avatar
Callum Todd
Enthusiast
Posts: 333
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Callum Todd » Tue Dec 24, 2013 9:07 pm

I was thinking that, if there ever is another CoC, it won't be for a long while. The 30BC was so epic that another one so soon may just be in its shadow.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.

Zubair Patel
Rookie
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:52 pm

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Zubair Patel » Tue Dec 24, 2013 10:19 pm

What about a match between the two champions of 2013 ? Didn't it happen regularly in the past ?

Fred Mumford
Enthusiast
Posts: 266
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 2:32 pm

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Fred Mumford » Tue Dec 24, 2013 10:51 pm

Zubair Patel wrote:What about a match between the two champions of 2013 ? Didn't it happen regularly in the past ?
No, I don't think Callum and Giles have ever played each other on the show before.

(Tiresome sarcasm or genuine stupidity? You decide)

Zubair Patel
Rookie
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:52 pm

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Zubair Patel » Wed Dec 25, 2013 2:03 am

Fred Mumford wrote:
Zubair Patel wrote:What about a match between the two champions of 2013 ? Didn't it happen regularly in the past ?
No, I don't think Callum and Giles have ever played each other on the show before.

(Tiresome sarcasm or genuine stupidity? You decide)
Er, genuine stupidity to think that could even come across as saracasm ? :)

User avatar
Thomas Carey
Devotee
Posts: 974
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 4:17 pm
Location: North-West of Bradford
Contact:

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Thomas Carey » Wed Dec 25, 2013 8:17 pm

COCs are all well and good, but what the world NEEDS is a special between Zarte Siempre and Phyl Styles, because both of them were very good contestants who ended up as number 9 seeds.
signature

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8359
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Gavin Chipper » Wed Dec 25, 2013 8:24 pm

Andy Platt wrote:^ This. Next winter might be an idea, or Summer 2015. Wouldn't be too soon after the 30BC, I reckon.
There was always at least a two year gap so at least 2015 I'd say.

User avatar
Andy Platt
Kiloposter
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 3:00 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Andy Platt » Sat Dec 28, 2013 4:55 pm

Thomas Carey wrote:COCs are all well and good, but what the world NEEDS is a special between Zarte Siempre and Phyl Styles, because both of them were very good contestants who ended up as number 9 seeds.
I kind of like the idea of this. You could even have a special week or two knockout for the best players to never have made a finals / lost their first game.

Dave Preece
Devotee
Posts: 616
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:50 pm
Location: Crewe, Cheshire

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Dave Preece » Sat Dec 28, 2013 6:30 pm

Surely these come under SPECIALS don't they?

Dave Preece
Devotee
Posts: 616
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:50 pm
Location: Crewe, Cheshire

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Dave Preece » Sat Dec 28, 2013 6:37 pm

CoC XIV would be effing awesome!!!

My 16 would be:

Adam Gillard
Andrew Hulme
Andy Platt
Callum Todd
Chris Davies
Dylan Taylor
Edward McCullagh
Eoin Monaghan
Giles Hutchings
Graeme Cole
Jack Hurst
Jack Worsley
Jonathon Rawlinson
Kirk Bevins
Oliver Garner
Paul James

Dave Preece
Devotee
Posts: 616
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:50 pm
Location: Crewe, Cheshire

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Dave Preece » Sat Dec 28, 2013 6:37 pm

Maybe swop Deeks for James???

User avatar
James Robinson
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 9345
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: Mirfield, West Yorkshire

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by James Robinson » Sat Dec 28, 2013 6:53 pm

Dave Preece wrote:Maybe swop Deeks for James???
Well, Paul James did win his series, so he should be there, in terms of having the 10 champions and the next 6 best, that's pretty decent billing, I'd say :!:
WE ARE PREMIER LEAGUE!!!
UP THE MIGHTY TERRIERS!!! ;) :) :D :mrgreen: 8-)

User avatar
Andy Platt
Kiloposter
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 3:00 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Andy Platt » Sat Dec 28, 2013 7:25 pm

I don't think that's a very realistic list.

The 30th Birthday Championships fulfilled essentially the same role as a Champions of Champions tournament, so it would be a little strange to include those players included in that, especially those who had a good run. You've also missed out women, for whatever reason. I think Jen and Heather would be definites and the likes of Gemma, Eileen, Rose, Jayne, etc would probably also be shortlisted. I don't think having a whole tournament of 18-30 year old males would make for particularly interesting viewing for a lot of viewers.

User avatar
Jennifer Steadman
Kiloposter
Posts: 1055
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:34 pm
Location: Kent
Contact:

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Jennifer Steadman » Sat Dec 28, 2013 8:33 pm

I agree with Andy that 30th BC was basically just an extended CoC, so series 60-66ers wouldn't (/shouldn't) be involved in a future CoC. Innis's idea in the spoiler thread about having contestants who couldn't make the CoC but would have otherwise been invited (Eoin, Oli Garner et al) invited back was nice, although it would might make it a bit confusing to explain to viewers ("We're having the best contestants from the last _ series! ...and also randomly one from series 63 and one from series 62").

Obviously all series winners and runners-up should be shoo-ins. I'd definitely include Eileen Taylor as well, as a demographic breaker x2, good player and fan favourite.

Oh and +1 to Tom Carey's idea about a Zarte v Phyl special too. Especially as they're both awesome people generally.
🍆

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8359
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Gavin Chipper » Sat Dec 28, 2013 9:41 pm

I don't think it would be that confusing to have players like Eoin, Oliver etc. It's happened before (e.g. Jon Corby), and I'm not sure that the issue even needs to be addressed. Just have them on. I doubt there will be too many people pulling their hair out about it.

I would say that obviously series winners would make it automatically and the rest depending on how good they were and number of spaces. So you'd definitely invite Oliver Garner, Paul James, Giles Hutchings and Callum Todd, but then you'd likely have players like Eoin Monaghan, Andy Platt, Dylan Taylor and Jen Steadman as well. You'd really want it to be 16 players especially if it's not going to be for over a year and it would be a tight fit for 8 even now.

I know Eileen Taylor was a "demographic breaker" but I'm generally against inclusion on these grounds. It's a bit, you know, racist.

Specials are good, but I'm not sure the Zarte v Phyl one would really work that well. It's likely to be fairly one-sided if I'm being totally honest.

Zarte Siempre
Kiloposter
Posts: 1248
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:56 pm
Location: Dadford, Buckinghamshire

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Zarte Siempre » Sat Dec 28, 2013 9:53 pm

Gavin Chipper wrote:I don't think it would be that confusing to have players like Eoin, Oliver etc. It's happened before (e.g. Jon Corby), and I'm not sure that the issue even needs to be addressed. Just have them on. I doubt there will be too many people pulling their hair out about it.

I would say that obviously series winners would make it automatically and the rest depending on how good they were and number of spaces. So you'd definitely invite Oliver Garner, Paul James, Giles Hutchings and Callum Todd, but then you'd likely have players like Eoin Monaghan, Andy Platt, Dylan Taylor and Jen Steadman as well. You'd really want it to be 16 players especially if it's not going to be for over a year and it would be a tight fit for 8 even now.

I know Eileen Taylor was a "demographic breaker" but I'm generally against inclusion on these grounds. It's a bit, you know, racist.

Specials are good, but I'm not sure the Zarte v Phyl one would really work that well. It's likely to be fairly one-sided if I'm being totally honest.
I agree. Phyl's always kicking my arse.
Possibly the first contestant to accelerate with a mic clipped...

Dave Preece
Devotee
Posts: 616
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:50 pm
Location: Crewe, Cheshire

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Dave Preece » Sat Dec 28, 2013 11:28 pm

Why not get Abdi on as the token black guy; a couple of girls... and players from Ireland, Scotland and Wales... Whilst you're there... Invite a wheelchair player and an autistic/aspergers type?

FFS... Can't we just have the BEST, without worrying about ticking boxes?

Or shall we have a gay/lesbian special too!?
Last edited by Dave Preece on Sun Dec 29, 2013 12:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Callum Todd
Enthusiast
Posts: 333
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Callum Todd » Sat Dec 28, 2013 11:59 pm

Dave, this is a thread just for light chatter about who you'd like to see, not furious debate over who definitely should or shouldn't be on. We're not actually drawing up the invite list here.

Personally I think it would be nice to have some representative people, while still maintaining a good level of competition. This is a entertainment television show, not an elitist battle for the title of #1. I would like to see Eileen back in the chair.

Any more thoughts on if/when the next CoC would occur?
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.

User avatar
Johnny Canuck
Kiloposter
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
Location: Atlantic Canada
Contact:

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Johnny Canuck » Sun Dec 29, 2013 12:24 am

They're not going to get rid of CoCs permanently. If, God forbid, Countdown is ever cancelled, they're definitely going to go out with a bang, not a whimper. But I'm sure that that day will be far in the future. I believe there will be time for many more CoCs during Countdown's history.

Specials are nice, but they are just single games, not tournaments. A tournament offers fifteen* games, and thus fifteen times more opportunities for Countdowny action, drama and suspense. And the recent success of the 30th Birthday Championship proves that people do, indeed, enjoy matches of a high standard.
*Assuming that the CoC is of the same format as those in the past.

In my opinion, it's still much too soon to have a full CoC, however, given that the 30BC was only nine months ago. I could see one coming around Series 73. I realize that this is two years from now and that such a long wait may be disheartening to some, but I personally doubt that they are going to include people from Series 60-66 in the next CoC given that they made up the bulk of the 30BC's contestants. Having Kirk, Chris, Jack, et al., play in a smaller-scale event after their Supreme Championship successes would just feel... incongruous to me. Assuming there isn't another hiatus, I think CoC XIV will be composed of players from Series 67 onward.
* Despite everything, it's still you.

Dave Preece
Devotee
Posts: 616
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:50 pm
Location: Crewe, Cheshire

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Dave Preece » Sun Dec 29, 2013 12:31 am

Maybe a token ginger, fat guy and sex changer whillst we're at it???

PS. I cover 2/3 of those.

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8359
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Gavin Chipper » Sun Dec 29, 2013 12:32 am

I'd say January 2015 is the earliest reasonable time, but January 2016 might be slightly more realistic (whatever series number they happen to be).

User avatar
James Robinson
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 9345
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: Mirfield, West Yorkshire

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by James Robinson » Sun Dec 29, 2013 12:34 am

Johnny Canuck wrote:Assuming there isn't another hiatus, I think CoC XIV will be composed of players from Series 67 onward.
Yeah, my guess is that if they did do it again, they'd wait until at least the end of 2014, after 2 more series are done, so they have 5 series worth of players (67-71).

Let's hope and pray. ;) :) :D :mrgreen: 8-)
WE ARE PREMIER LEAGUE!!!
UP THE MIGHTY TERRIERS!!! ;) :) :D :mrgreen: 8-)

User avatar
Andy Platt
Kiloposter
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 3:00 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Andy Platt » Sun Dec 29, 2013 12:34 am

Dave Preece wrote:Maybe a token ginger, fat guy and sex changer whillst we're at it???

PS. I cover 2/3 of those.
Which two?

Dave Preece
Devotee
Posts: 616
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:50 pm
Location: Crewe, Cheshire

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Dave Preece » Sun Dec 29, 2013 12:40 am

Callum Todd wrote:Dave, this is a thread just for light chatter about who you'd like to see, not furious debate over who definitely should or shouldn't be on. We're not actually drawing up the invite list here.

Personally I think it would be nice to have some representative people, while still maintaining a good level of competition. This is a entertainment television show, not an elitist battle for the title of #1. I would like to see Eileen back in the chair.

Any more thoughts on if/when the next CoC would occur?
I'm fully aware of all that, young Callum.

Are you suggesting I'm not allowed my true thoughts in this thread?

Maybe we should also have some sort of SPECIAL involving people who aren't allowed to express their opinions in a public forum?

Can I put my name forward for this edition please?

User avatar
Callum Todd
Enthusiast
Posts: 333
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Callum Todd » Sun Dec 29, 2013 12:43 am

Dave Preece wrote:
Callum Todd wrote:Dave, this is a thread just for light chatter about who you'd like to see, not furious debate over who definitely should or shouldn't be on. We're not actually drawing up the invite list here.

Personally I think it would be nice to have some representative people, while still maintaining a good level of competition. This is a entertainment television show, not an elitist battle for the title of #1. I would like to see Eileen back in the chair.

Any more thoughts on if/when the next CoC would occur?
I'm fully aware of all that, young Callum.

Are you suggesting I'm not allowed my true thoughts in this thread?

Maybe we should also have some sort of SPECIAL involving people who aren't allowed to express their opinions in a public forum?

Can I put my name forward for this edition please?
I never said you couldn't express your true thoughts. I just suggested you could try expressing them a little less aggressively, condescendingly, and smugly. And I repeat that suggestion now. Please can we get back on topic, and onto a more friendly tone?
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.

Zarte Siempre
Kiloposter
Posts: 1248
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:56 pm
Location: Dadford, Buckinghamshire

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Zarte Siempre » Sun Dec 29, 2013 10:23 am

Dave Preece wrote:Maybe a token ginger, fat guy and sex changer whillst we're at it???

PS. I cover 2/3 of those.
If you're that desperate to get on, I'll let you have my "token disabled" place because you're being a fucking retard.

Your list not only contained several people who had already been on for the 30th BC, but failed to include ANY women. Now I totally disagree with Callum about someone like Eileen being around as a demographic breaker. But Jen having the highest female octototal? And only losing to a series champion? I'm pretty sure that even if as the only woman, she'd be in the top 16 of players eligible for it.

If you're going to shout your exasperated UKIP-esque ramblings on here without regard for how you may be coming across, then we're going to feel free to shout our exasperated exclamations of how much of a fucking twat you're being when you get like this.
Possibly the first contestant to accelerate with a mic clipped...

User avatar
Adam Gillard
Kiloposter
Posts: 1618
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:42 pm
Location: About 45 minutes south-east of Thibodaux, Louisiana

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Adam Gillard » Sun Dec 29, 2013 11:31 am

I see c4c is alive and kicking again!
Mike Brown: "Round 12: T N R S A E I G U

C1: SIGNATURE (18) ["9; not written down"]
C2: SEATING (7)
Score: 108–16 (max 113)

Another niner for Adam and yet another century. Well done, that man."

Dave Preece
Devotee
Posts: 616
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:50 pm
Location: Crewe, Cheshire

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Dave Preece » Sun Dec 29, 2013 1:43 pm

Rather more aggressive and unpleasant than ANY of my posts that Zarté...

I'm almost half-offended!

Dave Preece
Devotee
Posts: 616
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:50 pm
Location: Crewe, Cheshire

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Dave Preece » Sun Dec 29, 2013 1:44 pm

Andy Platt wrote:
Dave Preece wrote:Maybe a token ginger, fat guy and sex changer whillst we're at it???

PS. I cover 2/3 of those.
Which two?
I'm slightly ginger and fat... and never say never about the other one!

Zarte Siempre
Kiloposter
Posts: 1248
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:56 pm
Location: Dadford, Buckinghamshire

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Zarte Siempre » Sun Dec 29, 2013 2:12 pm

Dave Preece wrote:Rather more aggressive and unpleasant than ANY of my posts that Zarté...

I'm almost half-offended!
Aggressive, perhaps. But after tolerating you raising the imbecility levels of the forum much better than most have, I feel perfectly comfortable with releasing my torrent of STFU in one go.

As for unpleasant, I'd be inclined to say that your seemingly latent sexism would be viewed as more consistently unpleasant than myself just doing what I'm known for. Calling spades, spades. Or in this instance, calling a wanker, a wanker.
Possibly the first contestant to accelerate with a mic clipped...

User avatar
Innis Carson
Devotee
Posts: 880
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 3:24 pm

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Innis Carson » Sun Dec 29, 2013 3:00 pm

Definitely agree with those who've said that there's no need to include 30BC contestants in the next CoC, we had our moment in the sun, and considering how rare these tournaments are it wouldn't be right to deprive other people of the same opportunity just so we can have a second one. Besides, with people like Craig Beevers not having taken part in a CoC, it's not as though the CoCs represent a solid history of all the best contestants anyway.

If it's done in this way, as things stand, there shouldn't be much of a shortage of female contestants in the next CoC anyway. Jen and Heather are obvious picks, and Eileen and Rose would be entirely justifiable choices on merit too.

Dave Preece
Devotee
Posts: 616
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:50 pm
Location: Crewe, Cheshire

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Dave Preece » Mon Dec 30, 2013 3:19 pm

Why is it so important to some to have female contestants? Surely going out of your way to even mention it never mind ensure they get invited is sexism itself? Surely everyone should be treated equally, if you're good enough to be invited then it should matter not whether you are female or whatever?

Dave Preece
Devotee
Posts: 616
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:50 pm
Location: Crewe, Cheshire

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Dave Preece » Mon Dec 30, 2013 3:24 pm

Zarte Siempre wrote:
Dave Preece wrote:Rather more aggressive and unpleasant than ANY of my posts that Zarté...

I'm almost half-offended!
Aggressive, perhaps. But after tolerating you raising the imbecility levels of the forum much better than most have, I feel perfectly comfortable with releasing my torrent of STFU in one go.

As for unpleasant, I'd be inclined to say that your seemingly latent sexism would be viewed as more consistently unpleasant than myself just doing what I'm known for. Calling spades, spades. Or in this instance, calling a wanker, a wanker.
Wouldn't you agree that your levels of imbecility were extremely high in the above post by suggesting someone - you don't know and have never even met - is a wanker?

You're acting like a little school boy, sunny!

Zarte Siempre
Kiloposter
Posts: 1248
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:56 pm
Location: Dadford, Buckinghamshire

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Zarte Siempre » Mon Dec 30, 2013 3:47 pm

Dave Preece wrote:
Zarte Siempre wrote:
Dave Preece wrote:Rather more aggressive and unpleasant than ANY of my posts that Zarté...

I'm almost half-offended!
Aggressive, perhaps. But after tolerating you raising the imbecility levels of the forum much better than most have, I feel perfectly comfortable with releasing my torrent of STFU in one go.

As for unpleasant, I'd be inclined to say that your seemingly latent sexism would be viewed as more consistently unpleasant than myself just doing what I'm known for. Calling spades, spades. Or in this instance, calling a wanker, a wanker.
Wouldn't you agree that your levels of imbecility were extremely high in the above post by suggesting someone - you don't know and have never even met - is a wanker?

You're acting like a little school boy, sunny!
No, I wouldn't. You've managed to fuck off a fair percentage of the people on this website. I'd suggest that qualifies you nicely for the category of wanker.

If you wish to resort to being patronising rather than face up to the fact that your input on this site is about as useful or valued as that of a South African interpreter for the deaf then that's your prerogative - it certainly doesn't bother me being called a "school boy" - however personally, if I was seeming to fuck off long-standing members of a community I'd not long been part of, I'd be considering discovering why such opinions were being formed, and attempting to purport accordingly, instead. I have no doubt however, that you'll continue as you were and so whilst you do, I'll sit here feeling perfectly justified in my aforementioned opinion.
Possibly the first contestant to accelerate with a mic clipped...

User avatar
James S Roper
Acolyte
Posts: 115
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2013 9:02 pm

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by James S Roper » Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:56 pm

It'd probably be worth contacting a moderator to lock this now.

User avatar
Jennifer Steadman
Kiloposter
Posts: 1055
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:34 pm
Location: Kent
Contact:

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Jennifer Steadman » Mon Dec 30, 2013 5:18 pm

I think we'd all like to see Dave's amended list if he takes into account that a CoC would most likely be drawn from series 67 onwards. It would be interesting to see how his argument (that the female players suggested thus far would be arbitrary box-ticking inclusions) stands up to the fact that a third of finalists from these 3 series have been female! Or were we all there on the box-ticking whim of the producers? :)
🍆

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8359
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Gavin Chipper » Mon Dec 30, 2013 5:49 pm

There's nothing wrong with this thread (other than the thread title now and maybe that's an argument for not allowing thread name changes without a moderator).

But so what, some of you disagree with Dave Preece. I can't help but think there's been some massive overreacting on here. Get over it. Get on with it.

User avatar
Mark Deeks
Kiloposter
Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Mark Deeks » Mon Dec 30, 2013 6:07 pm

I don't agree that series 60-67 were covered by the Supreme Championship, to be honest.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark

User avatar
Callum Todd
Enthusiast
Posts: 333
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Callum Todd » Mon Dec 30, 2013 7:01 pm

Gavin Chipper wrote:There's nothing wrong with this thread (other than the thread title now and maybe that's an argument for not allowing thread name changes without a moderator).

But so what, some of you disagree with Dave Preece. I can't help but think there's been some massive overreacting on here. Get over it. Get on with it.
There was nothing wrong with this thread. The difference of opinion is not the problem, it's the argument that has resulted from that difference of opinion that is the problem. Dave posted his list, and a few people replied, some agreeing with him, and some disagreeing (calmly and politely) and suggesting alternatives for his list.

Then this happened:
Dave Preece wrote:Why not get Abdi on as the token black guy; a couple of girls... and players from Ireland, Scotland and Wales... Whilst you're there... Invite a wheelchair player and an autistic/aspergers type?

FFS... Can't we just have the BEST, without worrying about ticking boxes?

Or shall we have a gay/lesbian special too!?
That was the death blow to this thread and most of the posts since have just been further stabs at its corpse. I see people mentioning the possibility of a moderator locking this thread, and I think that would be a good idea. Or even deleting it, or at least the posts from that first inflammatory one quoted above all the way down to the most recent, excluding Innis's and Mark's. And maybe Jen's.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8359
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Gavin Chipper » Mon Dec 30, 2013 8:31 pm

Callum Todd wrote:
Dave Preece wrote:Why not get Abdi on as the token black guy; a couple of girls... and players from Ireland, Scotland and Wales... Whilst you're there... Invite a wheelchair player and an autistic/aspergers type?

FFS... Can't we just have the BEST, without worrying about ticking boxes?

Or shall we have a gay/lesbian special too!?
That was the death blow to this thread and most of the posts since have just been further stabs at its corpse.
He was being a bit of a dickhead certainly, but let it slide. There's no point in getting worked up over it. There is a point he's making in that as well.
Last edited by Gavin Chipper on Mon Dec 30, 2013 9:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Kiloposter
Posts: 1927
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight
Contact:

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Mon Dec 30, 2013 9:22 pm

Hmmm... my post seems to have mysteriously not sent.

Anyhow...

For COC14 I really want to see Channel 4 make an effort. I don't care how long it is, even if it's crammed into one week like COC10 was at the end of 1999. I agree with Mark; Series 60-67 were not covered by the Supreme Championship fully, but the problem is that I felt the Supreme Championship was too heavily biased towards players from the Apterous era, but that's another story (yes, I am still bitter about no Scott Mearns!).

They should broadcast COC14 aroundabout the time of year I'm posting, 30 December, at 5pm or thereabouts. I'm sure people would think 'Ooh, Countdown's back on', as shows before 4pm tend to get swallowed up in TV guides etc - in the Radio Times, for example, they're written in a very small font on the previous page or crammed into a box.

My pick for COC14 would be more formulaic. Let's look at each scenario.

One week, five episodes, six players, with byes for the top 2 seeds:

Oliver Garner (S62) - BYE TO SEMI FINALS
Paul James (S67) - BYE TO SEMI FINALS
Eoin Monaghan (S63)
Giles Hutchings (S68)
Dylan Taylor (S69)
Callum Todd (S69)

One and a half weeks, seven episodes, eight players, no seeds, no byes:

Oliver Garner (S62)
Eoin Monaghan (S63)
Adam Gillard (S64)
Paul James (S67)
Heather Styles (S67)
Giles Hutchings (S68)
Dylan Taylor (S69)
Callum Todd (S69)

Three weeks, fifteen episodes, sixteen players, no seeds, no byes:

Kirk Bevins (S60)
Chris Davies (S61)
Innis Carson (S61)
Oliver Garner (S62)
Jack Hurst (S63)
Eoin Monaghan (S63)
Edward McCullagh (S64)
Adam Gillard (S64)
Graeme Cole (S65)
Jack Worsley (S66)
Jonathan Rawlinson (S66)
Paul James (S67)
Giles Hutchings (S68)
Andy Platt (S68)
Dylan Taylor (S69)
Callum Todd (S69)

EDIT: Forgot Series 68 & 69!!
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

User avatar
Andy Platt
Kiloposter
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 3:00 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Andy Platt » Mon Dec 30, 2013 10:26 pm

Think you should delete Rhys's post as well while you're at it.

User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Kiloposter
Posts: 1927
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight
Contact:

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Mon Dec 30, 2013 10:51 pm

Andy Platt wrote:Think you should delete Rhys's post as well while you're at it.
Nice try.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

User avatar
Johnny Canuck
Kiloposter
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
Location: Atlantic Canada
Contact:

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Johnny Canuck » Mon Dec 30, 2013 11:22 pm

Rhys Benjamin wrote:Hmmm... my post seems to have mysteriously not sent.

Anyhow...

For COC14 I really want to see Channel 4 make an effort. I don't care how long it is, even if it's crammed into one week like COC10 was at the end of 1999. I agree with Mark; Series 60-67 were not covered by the Supreme Championship fully, but the problem is that I felt the Supreme Championship was too heavily biased towards players from the Apterous era, but that's another story (yes, I am still bitter about no Scott Mearns!).

They should broadcast COC14 aroundabout the time of year I'm posting, 30 December, at 5pm or thereabouts. I'm sure people would think 'Ooh, Countdown's back on', as shows before 4pm tend to get swallowed up in TV guides etc - in the Radio Times, for example, they're written in a very small font on the previous page or crammed into a box.

My pick for COC14 would be more formulaic. Let's look at each scenario.

One week, five episodes, six players, with byes for the top 2 seeds:

Oliver Garner (S62) - BYE TO SEMI FINALS
Paul James (S67) - BYE TO SEMI FINALS
Eoin Monaghan (S63)
Giles Hutchings (S68)
Dylan Taylor (S69)
Callum Todd (S69)

One and a half weeks, seven episodes, eight players, no seeds, no byes:

Oliver Garner (S62)
Eoin Monaghan (S63)
Adam Gillard (S64)
Paul James (S67)
Heather Styles (S67)
Giles Hutchings (S68)
Dylan Taylor (S69)
Callum Todd (S69)

Three weeks, fifteen episodes, sixteen players, no seeds, no byes:

Kirk Bevins (S60)
Chris Davies (S61)
Innis Carson (S61)
Oliver Garner (S62)
Jack Hurst (S63)
Eoin Monaghan (S63)
Edward McCullagh (S64)
Adam Gillard (S64)
Graeme Cole (S65)
Jack Worsley (S66)
Jonathan Rawlinson (S66)
Paul James (S67)
Giles Hutchings (S68)
Andy Platt (S68)
Dylan Taylor (S69)
Callum Todd (S69)

EDIT: Forgot Series 68 & 69!!
And what about Series 70+?
* Despite everything, it's still you.

User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Kiloposter
Posts: 1927
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight
Contact:

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Tue Dec 31, 2013 12:04 am

Johnny Canuck wrote:
I wrote:some stuff
And what about Series 70+?
I don't know, but I'm not sure where they'd go. Looking back on the one week, six players, I feel Dylan and Eoin may lose their places for the champions of S70 & 71, the seven episodes/eight players, I feel any two to four of Eoin, Adam, Heather, and Dylan would go. For the full monty three weeks, any two to four of Innis, Eoin, Adam, Andy, and Dylan would go.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7378
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: The next Champion of Champions

Post by Matt Morrison » Tue Dec 31, 2013 9:08 am

Gavin Chipper wrote:There's nothing wrong with this thread (other than the thread title now and maybe that's an argument for not allowing thread name changes without a moderator).
Gev nails it again.

Tom
Acolyte
Posts: 135
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 3:59 pm

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Tom » Tue Dec 31, 2013 11:30 am

Apologies if this goes over any old ground as I don't come on here regularly, but I personally would love to see another C of C as these have very much formed part of the Countdown landscape. Whilst I can see the reason for not wanting to hold one, I don't think 2-3 weeks of devoting time to such an event is going to do more harm than good especially as viewers seemingly praised the 30th BC.

I must admit, I do feel slightly sorry for those 2009-present contestants who took part in the 30th and didn't have a C of C under their belts as to me, for gifted Countdown players, your record as a contestant is a bit like a CV and can only enhance your profile. This isn't a criticism at all of the 30th BC but I must admit I was incredibly surprised that after a reluctance to hold a C of C they then came in with the 30th.

I still think though that for exceptional players from 2009 should be allowed to take part in a C of C and that includes players who took part in the 30th but with nearly 5 years since the last one, if they are going to do one I think at the latest they should do one at the end of 2014. If they were reluctant to do this and/or having as much as a 16 player tournament, they could do an 8 player tourney from 2013-15 which I don't think would be too bad at all or at a minimum, have the 2 series winners play each other in a yearly battle and if that was done on a separate recording day, fill it with specials. (An idea off the cuff would be the two number 9 seeds of the year battle it out) Shortly after I did my C of C they filmed a load of specials such as replayed finals, people in the same profession and mother and son etc and I don't think that's a shabby idea.

Just food for thought
Probably the second tallest ever series finalist.

User avatar
Jennifer Steadman
Kiloposter
Posts: 1055
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:34 pm
Location: Kent
Contact:

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Jennifer Steadman » Tue Dec 31, 2013 12:58 pm

1. Gev - I don't disagree that Dave has a point in as much as people shouldn't be picked solely for the purpose of fulfilling a quota, even if he's undermined his point with unnecessary embellishments. What I DO disagree with is the suggestion that no 'quota-fulfilling' contestants would qualify on the basis of merit. This is what I was getting at in my last comment.

2. Perhaps it's unfortunate that 60-66 didn't get their own CoC when the series before that did. But post-30th BC, there's no point trying to amend that retroactively. While those who lost to contestants from before that era might have cause to feel aggrieved, they've still had another tournament in which to get some more airtime and enjoy being back in the studio. Is it fair to deprive other notable contestants from series 67 onwards of this just because the 60-66ers want a Conor-free tournament? No offence, but it seems like a vain complaint. No-one can doubt that these contestants are fantastic players, but it's kind of overkill to have the same people recycled for tournaments again and again when there are more recent contestants who are just as good.
The only argument I can really see for it is for those contestants who would have probably been included in a 60-66 CoC but, due to number of spaces, weren't invited to the 30th BC (Daniel Pati, perhaps). But I don't think anyone's list thus far has included anyone who wasn't in the 30th BC (Eoin and Oli aside*), so that's clearly not the argument those in favour of it are championing.
I just can't see Countdown Team going for it to be honest.

*They only weren't invited because of exam issues, I believe, so I'd be all for them being included now these are over.

3. Rhys - your lists don't make sense. Surely byes would be randomly decided (how did you calculate the top 2 seeds for the first list anyway?). Also not sure why you'd have Adam in there over Ed in your second list (surely series winner trumps runner-up?), or invite Heather to a seven-episode CoC but not a 15-ep one.
🍆

User avatar
Mark Deeks
Kiloposter
Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Mark Deeks » Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:01 pm

The 30th BC wasn't equal to a CoC. A CoC is supposed to feature the best of the best. The 30th BC didn't - it featured some of the best of the best, but some who definitely weren't, some who had had CoC's of their own, and some who never would have done. It was an anomaly, a one off, and should be treated as such. Whether or not 60-66 ought get a separate CoC is a different question, but it's a valid one, and it's silly to call it vain.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark

User avatar
Jon O'Neill
Ginger Ninja
Posts: 4153
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:45 am
Location: London, UK

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Jon O'Neill » Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:08 pm

Mark Deeks wrote:The 30th BC wasn't equal to a CoC. A CoC is supposed to feature the best of the best. The 30th BC didn't - it featured some of the best of the best, but some who definitely weren't, some who had had CoC's of their own, and some who never would have done. It was an anomaly, a one off, and should be treated as such. Whether or not 60-66 ought get a separate CoC is a different question, but it's a valid one, and it's silly to call it vain.
I think the spirit of a CoC was embodied in the 30th BC. CoCs haven't always featured the best of the best - people have always been invited because they were an interesting character, were popular with viewers, etc., same as the 30th BC.

User avatar
Mark Deeks
Kiloposter
Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Mark Deeks » Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:11 pm

If that's the case, why therefore would those not invited to the 30th BC now be considered candidates for a future CoC? Can't have it both ways. It either sufficed, or it didn't.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark

User avatar
Jon O'Neill
Ginger Ninja
Posts: 4153
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:45 am
Location: London, UK

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Jon O'Neill » Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:17 pm

Mark Deeks wrote:If that's the case, why therefore would those not invited to the 30th BC now be considered candidates for a future CoC? Can't have it both ways. It either sufficed, or it didn't.
Well there is a band of people who didn't make the cut of 41 from the show's 30-year history but would make the cut of 16 since the last CoC.

User avatar
Mark Deeks
Kiloposter
Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Mark Deeks » Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:31 pm

Then surely the 30th BC didn't suffice as a CoC. I get that it had elements of it, but it wasn't one, and nor was its guest list.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark

User avatar
Jennifer Steadman
Kiloposter
Posts: 1055
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:34 pm
Location: Kent
Contact:

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Jennifer Steadman » Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:57 pm

Mark Deeks wrote:If that's the case, why therefore would those not invited to the 30th BC now be considered candidates for a future CoC?
I think due to changes in filming procedure by the time of 30th BC, Eoin wasn't allowed to film unless he'd taken his GCSEs? I've heard it was something convoluted like that, anyway. I don't doubt he would've been invited if not for rules like that.
🍆

User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7378
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Matt Morrison » Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:05 pm

All these posts are invalid. This is a spam thread.

Tom
Acolyte
Posts: 135
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 3:59 pm

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Tom » Tue Dec 31, 2013 3:26 pm

I think I'm safe to say that I don't believe that for those exceptional players who appeared from 2009-30th BC that I don't think a C of C will happen which to me is a shame. I would personally have done a C of C first then a 30th. With the praise that came in from the 30th, I think the responsible people should take the hint that a C of C (with players in the last few years now stronger than ever before would by and large produce mouth watering classics)

Thinking about it, a few of the prelims/1st round matches of the 30th included people that no doubt would have been in a C of C such as Mark vs Jack and Ed v Jonathan which were brilliant games. I fully agree with Mark and Jon in that the spirit of a C of C was embodied and that it didn't have all the best players in. With a tournament like the 30th, they no doubt wanted a good spread of people down the ages; out of the apparent 214 people who applied, I'm confident that 40+ who applied would have been post 2008 and I got the impression that if you did well further back than that you'd be looked upon slightly more favourably) Put it this way, if there was a good spread of exceptional players down the years and assuming they were all available, I doubt I would have had a look in. There were some notable casualties but I guess you'd expect that plus there would have been no way of reaching out to all former players.
Probably the second tallest ever series finalist.

User avatar
Innis Carson
Devotee
Posts: 880
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 3:24 pm

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Innis Carson » Tue Dec 31, 2013 4:08 pm

Mark Deeks wrote:Then surely the 30th BC didn't suffice as a CoC. I get that it had elements of it, but it wasn't one, and nor was its guest list.
It didn't suffice in the sense that not all the likely CoC candidates since the last CoC could have taken part, which is why it's being suggested that those people should get the opportunity to play in the next one. But I'd be amazed if there was anyone who took part in the 30BC and felt that it didn't suffice for them in terms of feeling like a CoC. And even if there is, I really don't see why this feeling should be given priority over those who haven't had any chance to take part in any champions tournament. It would feel wrong to deprive people of this opportunity just to fulfil some tenuous idea of completeness, and besides, I doubt the viewing audience will be particularly won over by "Remember that huge tournament of past champions you just watched, which was referred to on-screen as a 'champion of champion of champions'? Well, that's not the same thing as a champion of champions. So here's all the same people all over again".

User avatar
Mark Deeks
Kiloposter
Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am

Re: - now a spam thread -

Post by Mark Deeks » Tue Dec 31, 2013 4:13 pm

should be given priority
Didn't say this.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests