Calculating one's own score

[Guy Barry]

What's the best method of calculating one's own score when watching a game? There seem to be several possible methods:

(1) Raw score, ignoring the contestants;
(2) Playing against one contestant or the other;
(3) Playing against both contestants simultaneously, so you only claim the points if neither contestant does better;
(4) Playing against the best word/solution in the studio, including Dictionary Corner and Rachel (I don't think I'd risk this!).

I've noticed that some people here use method (2) but you can run into problems with the conundrum if you're playing against one contestant and the other buzzes in first.

[Ryan Taylor]

You've missed out probably the most common one:

(5) Playing against both contestants simultaneously, keeping two separate scores

[Adam Gillard]

(6) Playing against James Robinson (retrospectively)

[Jon Corby]

You've missed out probably the most common one:

(5) Playing against both contestants simultaneously, keeping two separate scores

Yip, that's what I always do (did) if keeping score.

[Andy Platt]

Same here. Although coincidentally my score against both contestants yesterday was exactly the same for the whole game - probably the first time this has happened.

[Gavin Chipper]

You've missed out probably the most common one:

(5) Playing against both contestants simultaneously, keeping two separate scores

Yip, that's what I always do (did) if keeping score.

Yeah that seems to be the way a lot of the geeks on here do it. But I think the simplest system (known as "the standard method") is just to have one score where you obviously have to equal or beat the top scoring contestant in that round. You also obviously take points off their score when you beat them. The way people do it on here doesn't really work for numbers or conundrums. I can sort of understand it if you specifically want to compare yourself against someone in particular but in general it's just more hassle. Don't do it.

[Ryan Taylor]

How does it not work for numbers? Conundrums as you say are problematic but you'll always get a true result against at least one of the contestants.

[Gavin Chipper]

How does it not work for numbers? Conundrums as you say are problematic but you'll always get a true result against at least one of the contestants.

If one is closer than the other you won't know if the further away declaration is valid. If you beat them it doesn't matter though obviously.

[James Roper]

What I tend to do is create a wiki/apto style grid and play one contestant. I try to play against as many people as possible in a series. Out of 27 prelims, I've only missed 3 people to play against.

[Eoin Monaghan]

When I played along, I played against both contestants simultaneously.

[James Robinson]

When I played along, I played against both contestants simultaneously.

Yup, always do that.

[Jack Worsley]

Both contestants simultaneously for me too, although I do sometimes make different declarations against each contestant, normally when I'm unsure of a word and it depends on whether I would have to declare first or second.

[Tom]

Before I went on, I used to play against the champion first and if I beat them I'd then play only against the challenger as if I was the actual reigning champion at the time and hope that I would get 8 wins and then just repeat the process. That way I knew if I could do it consistently I'd know I was capable of becoming an Octochamp.I would also keep a note of my scores to see how I was progressing over time and compare myself score wise to other Octochamps who'd been and done it before me as I felt it would give me a good indication as to how well I could potentially do.

[Zarte Siempre]

I always play the champ. If it's 2 newbies I get someone to pick the one they think looks smarter.

[Jon O'Neill]

I play DC/RR.

/brag

[James Roper]

I always play the champ. If it's 2 newbies I get someone to pick the one they think looks smarter.

I used to do that, but when you get series like S67 where there were 7 octochamps, playing the same people for 56 episodes does become slightly more boring than it used to. I like variety.

[Jennifer Steadman]

I don't specifically play anyone or keep track of my own score. /brag?

[Mark James]

I don't specifically play anyone or keep track of my own score. /brag?

I was just gonna say, does anyone else just watch it?

[Zarte Siempre]

I always play the champ. If it's 2 newbies I get someone to pick the one they think looks smarter.

I used to do that, but when you get series like S67 where there were 7 octochamps, playing the same people for 56 episodes does become slightly more boring than it used to. I like variety.

I disagree - why would I want to play some duffer they've brought in at short notice over someone with genuine skill. I realise most players are competitive at least, but some really are just awful.

[sean d]

I play against each contestant, though if its obvious I'm going to win comfortably against one or the other I'll stop counting. Hard to resist the temptation to give myself the benefit of the doubt when playing the likes of Giles! (Ah yeh, I would have declared that dodgy 8 that turns out to be legit)

As I always watch on Sky Plus it's not unknown for me to use the pause button as a buzzer when it's a crucial conundrum. Usually only do that if I'm watching alone, the wife thinks I'm sad enough as it is.