Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

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
James Roper
Rookie
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:46 pm

Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by James Roper » Mon Mar 25, 2013 9:55 pm

This may not be worded the best, but here goes:

These days, a lot of the startlingly good contestants that appear on countdown are from apterous. However, every now and again we would get these kind of people in the era before apterous had begun (e.g, Craig Beevers, Paul Gallen etc.). These days, because people tend to find apterous, we don't get this standard from non-apterites nowadays.

So this got me thinking. Since apterous was created, who have been the greatest contestants to participate that aren't members of apterous?

(Excluding some of the contestants from the 30th BC)

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8335
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Gavin Chipper » Mon Mar 25, 2013 10:15 pm

Did Carl Williams use Apterous? If not, you'd probably have to put him top, given how close he came to winning the series. But he might have gone on under a different name. Cate Henderson's octorun was pretty good, although she lost in the quarters, and Nicki Sellars made the final. I don't think Nicki Sellars was on Apterous, and Cate Henderson apparently hated the concept.

User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 1511
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Graeme Cole » Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:28 am

Gavin Chipper wrote:Did Carl Williams use Apterous?
Not that I'm aware, although it was suspected that he might have done. I asked him whether he did and he said he'd heard of apterous but didn't play on it.

There is an apterous profile with his name, but I think that was Ed messing about. :-)

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

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Innis Carson » Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:36 am

Peter Godwin and Brian Selway both showed glimpses of very strong form, but were plagued by inconsistency which ultimately prevented them from posing any serious threat to the apterites in their series. Carl seems pretty much the clear winner in terms of finals success. It was striking that after Brian in Series 61, there were no non-apterite octochamps at all until Dave Taylor in S65.

User avatar
Mark Deeks
Kiloposter
Posts: 1777
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Mark Deeks » Tue Mar 26, 2013 1:48 am

No reason to assume Carl was an Apterite. He knew it about it, sure, but since he admitted to Googling at least me, and no doubt all of us in the QF lineup, that's no great mystery. So yeah. Him.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark

Jordan F
Kiloposter
Posts: 1063
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 11:01 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Jordan F » Tue Mar 26, 2013 3:39 am

I think as much as people don't like his practices and the way he did things, I think Jeffrey Hansford, just based on pure ability, is up there. Some stumbling blocks and obviously some buzzing controversy, but as I understand it (and those of you in the know can interject where I can't), there was still quite a bit of skill just in his noggin. Michael Macdonald-Cooper and Tim Reypert I think are underrated too. Probably can't consider them perhaps all time greats because of their QF losses, but they both had some skill (I consider Michael stronger than Tim because Tim appeared relatively weak at the numbers).

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

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Innis Carson » Tue Mar 26, 2013 2:23 pm

On the list of octochamps by number of maxes in the Ask Graeme thread, the winner amongst non-apterite octochamps in the 'apterous era' (which I would define as Series 60 onwards) is actually Shane Roberts, though he's only very narrowly ahead of some others. Obviously there are plenty of people higher up in the list who were at least as 'natural' as him, but it's hard to quantify that.

Jojo Apollo
Devotee
Posts: 751
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:29 am

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Jojo Apollo » Tue Mar 26, 2013 5:05 pm

The great Julian Fell said he used to practise on the handheld computer game of Countdown.

James Roper
Rookie
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:46 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by James Roper » Tue Mar 26, 2013 5:16 pm

Jordan F wrote:I think as much as people don't like his practices and the way he did things, I think Jeffrey Hansford, just based on pure ability, is up there. Some stumbling blocks and obviously some buzzing controversy, but as I understand it (and those of you in the know can interject where I can't), there was still quite a bit of skill just in his noggin. Michael Macdonald-Cooper and Tim Reypert I think are underrated too. Probably can't consider them perhaps all time greats because of their QF losses, but they both had some skill (I consider Michael stronger than Tim because Tim appeared relatively weak at the numbers).
After apterous was created.

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: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Adam Gillard » Wed Mar 27, 2013 7:59 pm

Mary Adie did very well.
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."

User avatar
LaurenHamer
Newbie
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun May 01, 2011 7:31 pm
Location: Cardiff

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by LaurenHamer » Thu Mar 28, 2013 9:53 am

As did the lovely Dave 'I wish you were my uncle' Taylor. Aww, lovely Dave. I think he did sign up briefly after his games but never stuck around.

User avatar
L'oisleatch McGraw
Acolyte
Posts: 134
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 am
Location: Waterford
Contact:

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by L'oisleatch McGraw » Wed Jul 19, 2017 10:22 pm

MOOOOSE! :mrgreen:
:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: S:778-ochamp

Tom S
Devotee
Posts: 509
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Tom S » Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:28 pm

Essentially all the non-apterites of S77.

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8335
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Gavin Chipper » Mon Jan 22, 2018 5:32 pm

Bradley Cates?

Tom S
Devotee
Posts: 509
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Tom S » Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:01 pm

Gavin Chipper wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 5:32 pm
Bradley Cates?
Definitely.

User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3306
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Ian Volante » Tue Jan 23, 2018 1:33 pm

Tom S wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:01 pm
Gavin Chipper wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 5:32 pm
Bradley Cates?
Definitely.
Meh, I beat him, can't be that good.
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles

Tom S
Devotee
Posts: 509
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Tom S » Tue Jan 23, 2018 5:35 pm

Ian Volante wrote:
Tue Jan 23, 2018 1:33 pm
Tom S wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:01 pm
Gavin Chipper wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 5:32 pm
Bradley Cates?
Definitely.
Meh, I beat him, can't be that good.
Hah, albeit about 10 years ago- a rematch would be interesting :) ;)

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8335
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Gavin Chipper » Tue Jan 23, 2018 7:59 pm

Amey Deshpande?

User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3306
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Ian Volante » Wed Jan 24, 2018 1:31 pm

Tom S wrote:
Tue Jan 23, 2018 5:35 pm
Ian Volante wrote:
Tue Jan 23, 2018 1:33 pm
Tom S wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:01 pm


Definitely.
Meh, I beat him, can't be that good.
Hah, albeit about 10 years ago- a rematch would be interesting :) ;)
Aye, might be a little different now...
Gavin Chipper wrote:
Tue Jan 23, 2018 7:59 pm
Amey Deshpande?
Now he was stunningly good... :cry:
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles

sean d
Acolyte
Posts: 171
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2013 3:42 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by sean d » Mon Jan 29, 2018 9:08 am

Bradley did exceptionally well second time round. He went to the semis in the notorious series 69 and was within striking distance of Dylan on the final numbers round, despite never using Apterous

Tom S
Devotee
Posts: 509
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Tom S » Mon Feb 19, 2018 10:22 pm

Chris Thorn.

Elliott Mellor
Devotee
Posts: 504
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2016 12:42 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Elliott Mellor » Tue Feb 20, 2018 6:55 am

Tom S wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 10:22 pm
Chris Thorn.
Not sure I fully agree with this, or at least he isn't of the standard of a lot of the people mentioned in this thread.

Tom S
Devotee
Posts: 509
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Tom S » Tue Feb 20, 2018 7:26 am

Elliott Mellor wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 6:55 am
Tom S wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 10:22 pm
Chris Thorn.
Not sure I fully agree with this, or at least he isn't of the standard of a lot of the people mentioned in this thread.
Suppose I am thinking of him in terms of this series, and whilst I agree with the statement aforesaid, I still think he is worthy of a spot on here....

Zarte Siempre
Kiloposter
Posts: 1232
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:56 pm
Location: Dadford, Buckinghamshire

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Zarte Siempre » Tue Feb 20, 2018 11:06 am

Tom S wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 7:26 am
Elliott Mellor wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 6:55 am
Tom S wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 10:22 pm
Chris Thorn.
Not sure I fully agree with this, or at least he isn't of the standard of a lot of the people mentioned in this thread.
Suppose I am thinking of him in terms of this series, and whilst I agree with the statement aforesaid, I still think he is worthy of a spot on here....
Yeah.. no.

If you included him you basically bring hundreds of other people in. It's not to say he's not good, just that... he's not THAT good. I count 15 non-Apterites who've had around or over his score just in the last 10 series.

The one I'm amazed looking back that no-one has mentioned in this thread was Stephen Briggs. He seems to have become a forgotten man. Or he was using Apterous and I've forgotten, one or the other.
Possibly the first contestant to accelerate with a mic clipped...

User avatar
Johnny Canuck
Kiloposter
Posts: 1134
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
Location: Atlantic Canada
Contact:

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Johnny Canuck » Tue Feb 20, 2018 1:05 pm

Zarte Siempre wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 11:06 am
The one I'm amazed looking back that no-one has mentioned in this thread was Stephen Briggs. He seems to have become a forgotten man. Or he was using Apterous and I've forgotten, one or the other.
Totally second this -- in fact, I believe that if you convert Briggs' octototal to a 9-round equivalent, he's on par with Harvey Freeman, and during his own preparation, he may not have used forms of technology much beyond those that Freeman had access to. His series finals performances in particular were superb among those of non-Apterites.
* Despite everything, it's still you.

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 8335
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Gavin Chipper » Tue Feb 20, 2018 2:00 pm

Zarte Siempre wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 11:06 am
The one I'm amazed looking back that no-one has mentioned in this thread was Stephen Briggs. He seems to have become a forgotten man. Or he was using Apterous and I've forgotten, one or the other.
I don't think he was on Apterous. But also, this thread hasn't been the only discussion of these things, and his name has come up previously in other threads.

Elliott Mellor
Devotee
Posts: 504
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2016 12:42 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Elliott Mellor » Tue Feb 20, 2018 7:46 pm

Zarte Siempre wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 11:06 am
Tom S wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 7:26 am
Elliott Mellor wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 6:55 am


Not sure I fully agree with this, or at least he isn't of the standard of a lot of the people mentioned in this thread.
Suppose I am thinking of him in terms of this series, and whilst I agree with the statement aforesaid, I still think he is worthy of a spot on here....
Yeah.. no.

If you included him you basically bring hundreds of other people in. It's not to say he's not good, just that... he's not THAT good. I count 15 non-Apterites who've had around or over his score just in the last 10 series.

The one I'm amazed looking back that no-one has mentioned in this thread was Stephen Briggs. He seems to have become a forgotten man. Or he was using Apterous and I've forgotten, one or the other.
Yeah exactly my thoughts. Just because someone octoed and is temporarily number 1 seed, albeit in a weak series so far that's no reason for inclusion on this thread. So yeah, scrub that.

Surprised Stephen Briggs hasn't been mentioned too, his octo score was 883 !

Tom S
Devotee
Posts: 509
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Tom S » Wed Feb 21, 2018 1:28 pm

John Cowen- yes, he was largely inconsistent at times, but had Brad lost his QF, I am sure John would have stormed through to the final and would have produced a very close game against Tom. Who knows what the outcome would have been like?...

Zarte Siempre
Kiloposter
Posts: 1232
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:56 pm
Location: Dadford, Buckinghamshire

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Zarte Siempre » Wed Feb 21, 2018 3:53 pm

Tom S wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 1:28 pm
John Cowen- yes, he was largely inconsistent at times, but had Brad lost his QF, I am sure John would have stormed through to the final and would have produced a very close game against Tom. Who knows what the outcome would have been like?...
John's best was as good as anyone. John's worst was... pretty bad tbh. I dunno, I don't totally object to this, but I'm not totally in agreement either.

He is however, a thoroughly lovely bloke. If that was a factor for assessment, it would help him.
Possibly the first contestant to accelerate with a mic clipped...

Tom S
Devotee
Posts: 509
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Tom S » Wed Feb 21, 2018 4:13 pm

Zarte Siempre wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 3:53 pm
Tom S wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 1:28 pm
John Cowen- yes, he was largely inconsistent at times, but had Brad lost his QF, I am sure John would have stormed through to the final and would have produced a very close game against Tom. Who knows what the outcome would have been like?...
John's best was as good as anyone. John's worst was... pretty bad tbh. I dunno, I don't totally object to this, but I'm not totally in agreement either.

He is however, a thoroughly lovely bloke. If that was a factor for assessment, it would help him.

Do agree with you that he was not as good on some occasions, but his play in the semi was cracking, and he is more worthy than some mentioned above...

Elliott Mellor
Devotee
Posts: 504
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2016 12:42 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Elliott Mellor » Wed Feb 21, 2018 7:23 pm

Zarte Siempre wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 3:53 pm
Tom S wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 1:28 pm
John Cowen- yes, he was largely inconsistent at times, but had Brad lost his QF, I am sure John would have stormed through to the final and would have produced a very close game against Tom. Who knows what the outcome would have been like?...
John's best was as good as anyone. John's worst was... pretty bad tbh. I dunno, I don't totally object to this, but I'm not totally in agreement either.

He is however, a thoroughly lovely bloke. If that was a factor for assessment, it would help him.
He certainly showed glimpses of very strong form, but his trouble was he was plagued by inconsistency. Thinking about it though, had he chosen 1l he could have had maybe an 850 octototal, so I think perhaps he's worthy of a mention.

Was a lovely bloke it seemed, too.

Ian Birdman
Newbie
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 10:36 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Ian Birdman » Tue Mar 06, 2018 1:01 pm

I don't think Stephen Briggs used apterous at all so he'd have to get my vote. Incredibly consistent.

Interestingly Stephen plays in the Birmingham chess league that i play in and is good...very darn good!

I think with John C there's a distinction between TALENT and overall game performance. He came out with some lovely spots and some great number solves. Things that most non apterites (and some apterites like me!) simply would not be able to do.

Obviously he was wildly inconsistent so I don't think you could label him the best overall non apterous player. But talent alone? Worth a mention.

Tom S
Devotee
Posts: 509
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Tom S » Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:29 pm

The guy who Zarte played yesterday came up with some lovely, nice letters spots yesterday.

Owen Carroll
Enthusiast
Posts: 356
Joined: Sat May 26, 2018 1:10 am

Re: Talented Non-Apterous Contestants

Post by Owen Carroll » Sat May 26, 2018 11:36 am

John Cowen wasn't an apterite until after the finals. He wasn't exactly bad to get third place in the whole series.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests