Tactics

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.
Post Reply
User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9494
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Tactics

Post by Charlie Reams »

If you were right proper good, wouldn't it be sensible to conceal it in the audition so as to increase your chance of playing someone else good in the heats, thus knocking them out before the finals?
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13258
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Tactics

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Charlie Reams wrote:If you were right proper good, wouldn't it be sensible to conceal it in the audition so as to increase your chance of playing someone else good in the heats, thus knocking them out before the finals?
No. Because if you're scared of facing them in the finals, you'd be scared of facing them in the heats. Surely?
User avatar
Kirk Bevins
God
Posts: 4923
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
Location: York, UK

Re: Tactics

Post by Kirk Bevins »

Charlie Reams wrote:If you were right proper good, wouldn't it be sensible to conceal it in the audition so as to increase your chance of playing someone else good in the heats, thus knocking them out before the finals?
No. Ross Mackenzie, for example, got knocked out in the heats (although whether he is "right proper good" is arguable). Surely you'd want to make sure you get to the finals to at least pick up the glassware and a potential £1000.
User avatar
Steve Durney
Acolyte
Posts: 181
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:53 pm
Location: Swindon

Re: Tactics

Post by Steve Durney »

Charlie Reams wrote:If you were right proper good, wouldn't it be sensible to conceal it in the audition so as to increase your chance of playing someone else good in the heats, thus knocking them out before the finals?
What would you rather: lose to Junaid in your first match, or in the final and had achieved octochamp status, series runner-up status, plus a cheque for a grand? (Not that i'm saying you'd have lost to Junaid!)
User avatar
Michael Wallace
Racoonteur
Posts: 5458
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
Location: London

Re: Tactics

Post by Michael Wallace »

Steve Durney wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:If you were right proper good, wouldn't it be sensible to conceal it in the audition so as to increase your chance of playing someone else good in the heats, thus knocking them out before the finals?
What would you rather: lose to Junaid in your first match, or in the final and had achieved octochamp status, series runner-up status, plus a cheque for a grand? (Not that i'm saying you'd have lost to Junaid!)
Except it's fairly well known that Junaid took the time between becoming an octochamp and playing in the finals to practise like mad.
Marc Meakin
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 6289
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Re: Tactics

Post by Marc Meakin »

With the eye of Apterous watching you, it would be difficult to conceal how good you are.
Unless you use a fake name. ;)
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
Marc Meakin
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 6289
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Re: Tactics

Post by Marc Meakin »

Charlie Reams wrote:If you were right proper good, wouldn't it be sensible to conceal it in the audition so as to increase your chance of playing someone else good in the heats, thus knocking them out before the finals?
Is there a hidden agenda?
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
User avatar
Matthew Green
Devotee
Posts: 716
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Tactics

Post by Matthew Green »

Marc Meakin wrote:With the eye of Apterous watching you, it would be difficult to conceal how good you are.
Unless you use a fake name. ;)
So it's easy to conceal then?
If I suddenly have a squirming baby on my lap it probably means that I should start paying it some attention and stop wasting my time messing around on a Countdown forum
User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9494
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Tactics

Post by Charlie Reams »

Michael Wallace wrote:Except it's fairly well known that Junaid took the time between becoming an octochamp and playing in the finals to practise like mad.
Right, exactly. Same with Craig Beevers, who was no slouch in the heats but totally unstoppable by the finals. Likewise Stewart Holden etc etc.

I'd say almost everyone is most beatable in their first appearance; you've got the nerves, the unfamiliarity, and nothing much to play for yet.

Obviously once you get sufficiently good then it hardly matters who you play, but there is some point at which maybe this would be a good strategy. Would be hard to test, obviously, but just putting it out there.
User avatar
Karen Pearson
Devotee
Posts: 742
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:28 am
Location: Bromsgrove

Re: Tactics

Post by Karen Pearson »

Would you rather be Karen Pearson or Ross Allatt - both of whom lost to Richard Heald. Not that I'm saying I'd have beaten as many people as Ross did (because I'm sure I wouldn't) but I'm sure he's glad he didn't come up against Richard in the heats.
User avatar
Jon Corby
Moral Hero
Posts: 8021
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Tactics

Post by Jon Corby »

Nah, I'd say the opposite of the OP.
Charlie Reams wrote:I'd say almost everyone is most beatable in their first appearance; you've got the nerves, the unfamiliarity, and nothing much to play for yet.
Equally likely of course that "your" first game is gonna be against "them", "them" having already won 5 on the bounce with century scores. You'd have to be one mega-mega confident motherfucker to try it.
User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9494
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Tactics

Post by Charlie Reams »

Karen Pearson wrote:Would you rather be Karen Pearson or Ross Allatt - both of whom lost to Richard Heald. Not that I'm saying I'd have beaten as many people as Ross did (because I'm sure I wouldn't) but I'm sure he's glad he didn't come up against Richard in the heats.
I was thinking more like Kirk-standard players who are applying with the intention of winning the series. Most players are not going to be good enough in the audition to earn "separation" anyway.
Jon Corby wrote:Nah, I'd say the opposite of the OP.
Charlie Reams wrote:I'd say almost everyone is most beatable in their first appearance; you've got the nerves, the unfamiliarity, and nothing much to play for yet.
Equally likely of course that "your" first game is gonna be against "them", "them" having already won 5 on the bounce with century scores. You'd have to be one mega-mega confident motherfucker to try it.
Yep, true. I just wonder if there's some particular range in the scale of "goodness" (whatever that means) where it does become a viable tactic, but maybe there isn't.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13258
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Tactics

Post by Gavin Chipper »

I see your point now but added to all that is the difficulty of doing worse than you can in the audition but making sure you pass (though I suppose you can just keep retrying with the audition until you get it right).

And then of course there's all the other people who are right proper good in your series that have just read this thread...
David O'Donnell
Series 58 Champion
Posts: 2010
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: Cardiff

Re: Tactics

Post by David O'Donnell »

Seems like a ridiculously cocky strategy to me, is it Kirk's?
User avatar
Kirk Bevins
God
Posts: 4923
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
Location: York, UK

Re: Tactics

Post by Kirk Bevins »

David O'Donnell wrote:Seems like a ridiculously cocky strategy to me, is it Kirk's?
Piss off.
David O'Donnell
Series 58 Champion
Posts: 2010
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: Cardiff

Re: Tactics

Post by David O'Donnell »

Kirk Bevins wrote:
David O'Donnell wrote:Seems like a ridiculously cocky strategy to me, is it Kirk's?
Piss off.
Tetchy! I just mean you are one of the few who could actually pull if off so-to-speak.
User avatar
Kirk Bevins
God
Posts: 4923
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
Location: York, UK

Re: Tactics

Post by Kirk Bevins »

David O'Donnell wrote:
Tetchy! I just mean you are one of the few who could actually pull if off so-to-speak.
I think you're just trying to call me cocky. I will not participate in such tactics and will try to beat the man (or woman) put before me.
Oliver Garner
Series 62 Champion
Posts: 775
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 2:13 pm

Re: Tactics

Post by Oliver Garner »

When I figured that Mark Goodliffe was a good player coupled with the fact I would probably make it to the finals with 7 wins, I thought that I could knock a potential finalist out which would (will?) be advantageous come the series finals.
User avatar
Craig Beevers
Series 57 Champion
Posts: 653
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 am
Contact:

Re: Tactics

Post by Craig Beevers »

This would surely be more of a gambling tactic rather than one a favourite would employ. it would make more sense for example if you were a solid 800 type octochamp and you knew there was going to be an uber-player coming on. If you got 'lucky' you could draw the uber-player on your nth game (where n = 2 or greater) and play them on their first appearance. If n was large enough you could have two shots at knocking them out.
David Williams
Kiloposter
Posts: 1263
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:57 pm

Re: Tactics

Post by David Williams »

Oliver Garner wrote:When I figured that Mark Goodliffe was a good player coupled with the fact I would probably make it to the finals with 7 wins, I thought that I could knock a potential finalist out which would (will?) be advantageous come the series finals.
Alternatively, if you knew someone who you thought was better than you (or even just very good) was coming on in the following week, you could deliberately lose. You're almost certainly in the finals anyway, and only one of them can join you. I don't think anyone would think this desirable or advisable, but it could marginally increase your chances, unlike every other suggestion in this thread.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13258
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Tactics

Post by Gavin Chipper »

David Williams wrote:
Oliver Garner wrote:When I figured that Mark Goodliffe was a good player coupled with the fact I would probably make it to the finals with 7 wins, I thought that I could knock a potential finalist out which would (will?) be advantageous come the series finals.
Alternatively, if you knew someone who you thought was better than you (or even just very good) was coming on in the following week, you could deliberately lose. You're almost certainly in the finals anyway, and only one of them can join you. I don't think anyone would think this desirable or advisable, but it could marginally increase your chances, unlike every other suggestion in this thread.
But this involves a situation where you've won seven, know the eighth player is good as well as another player coming up after your eighth. It's an unlikely scenario!

A good time to lose is when your run is at the end of a series with a below average standard and you've already qualified for the quarters but would go into the following series if you went all the way. (This of course is extremely likely. ;))
Post Reply