Thanks, Joseph - exactly what I meant!Charlie Reams wrote:Nope.Joseph Bolas wrote:If two people or more are tied, is there any logic to the order the names appear in the list?
And thanks for the answer, Charlie.
Thanks, Joseph - exactly what I meant!Charlie Reams wrote:Nope.Joseph Bolas wrote:If two people or more are tied, is there any logic to the order the names appear in the list?
*Smacks himself on the forehead after taking nearly a minute to figure out HACIENDA + S*Kirk Bevins wrote:Yes well done - a hard one. I had HACIENDA for a nice 8 but didn't know the nine. Turns out only S and L can be added to HACIENDA to make nines so easy to learn!Joseph Bolas wrote:Going by yesterday's duel, very well done to Dan Vanniasingham and James Hurrell for getting the conundrum ENCHILADA.
Cheers Joseph. That has to be one of the least deserved Duel victories, given that I maxed none of the letters rounds, but my conundrum practice the previous day paid off. Letters practice next methinks...Joseph Bolas wrote:Going by yesterday's duel, very well done to Dan Vanniasingham and James Hurrell for getting the conundrum ENCHILADA.
You may not have maxed in all the rounds, but actually you were the only person who got points in every round of the duel, so that's still something to be victorious ofDan Vanniasingham wrote:Cheers Joseph. That has to be one of the least deserved Duel victories, given that I maxed none of the letters rounds, but my conundrum practice the previous day paid off. Letters practice next methinks...Joseph Bolas wrote:Going by yesterday's duel, very well done to Dan Vanniasingham and James Hurrell for getting the conundrum ENCHILADA.
Now, this isn't sour grapes, since I'm usually close to the bottom in the duel points table anyway.Charlie Reams wrote:
Congrats to Steven Briers for a sweet performance on today's Blind Duel btw, dropping only 4 points in 16 rounds.
That's pretty much what I do. You have to be quite fast at forming words or pseudowords as the letters come up, and duplicate letters are particularly problematic (I noticed I wasn't the only person who went for EXEUNTS in Round 1), but it's the best technique I know of.Damian E wrote:Can i give you my take on it Julie. This is only my take, not sure what everyone else does.
I look at the letters as they come out and write them on an imaginary piece of paper in my head and as you get more advanced at Countdown, STRNAEI turns into RETAINS with no effort and so it's quite easy to get longish words from the selection.Charlie Reams wrote:That's pretty much what I do. You have to be quite fast at forming words or pseudowords as the letters come up, and duplicate letters are particularly problematic (I noticed I wasn't the only person who went for EXEUNTS in Round 1), but it's the best technique I know of.Damian E wrote:Can i give you my take on it Julie. This is only my take, not sure what everyone else does.
I see now - three bonus points for the maximum.Charlie Reams wrote:Good question. I guess the scoring system needs some work.Gavin Chipper wrote:Also in the winner onlt scores duel where a million people tied for top, how come they got 28 points when there were 25 entrants? Normally they would get 25 wouldn't they? I still think you should use my scoring system.
I still don't like the scoring system in the daily duels so I thought I'd bump this.Gavin Chipper wrote:Going back to this, I think going up from one point in ones doesn't work that well. Finishing 1st out of 20 is obviously better than 8th out of 27. Using the logic from the "Heights" thread in the off-topic forum, 1st out of 20 makes you a "1 in 21" player, whereas 8th out of 27 makes you a "8 in 28" player. The scores could reflect this.
My pseudo-logical rambling method would be to add one to the number of players and your score would be that number over your finishing position. 9th out of 26 would mean 27/9=3 points. There would be weird fractions but a computer can keep track of them easily enough.
As for draws, instead of simply giving everyone the higher score, I would split the points between them. 1st and 2nd out of 19 would normally (under my system) get 20 and 10 points so we could give them 15 each. Or we could say they finished 1.5th and give them 13.333.
Also could only count 20 or so scores in a month as people are likely to miss some, and it would reward good play rather than consistency.