Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Moderator: James Robinson
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st S
This game was indeed brilliant. I managed to come up in AUSPICES, POLITEST and ANORECTAL, which i was ecstatic about. I find it interesting that the idea of the seeding system is that the number one seed earns the right to the supposedly easiest route to the final, but i think the winner out of tomorrows game would have had a much easier route than kirk has had. Maybe this shows that some contestants can improve lots between their heats and the finals.
Its a shame for Neil that he had to play kirk in the semi's, because judging form his form in his two games, I'd probably say he's been the best finalist behind kirk for this series.
Its a shame for Neil that he had to play kirk in the semi's, because judging form his form in his two games, I'd probably say he's been the best finalist behind kirk for this series.
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Wait what?Liam Tiernan wrote:My money's on Hamish to pull another rabbit (or raccoon) out of his hat.
-
- Rookie
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 11:14 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Well played to Neil and Kirk.
Can anybody tell me where doctor Phil lives so I can go watch round his house. I nearly had a heart attack today. That was so awesome a game.
Both players slaughtered me today, my one bit of glory was first numbers:-
100-(8*2)=84
84*(7+4)=924
Can anybody tell me where doctor Phil lives so I can go watch round his house. I nearly had a heart attack today. That was so awesome a game.
Both players slaughtered me today, my one bit of glory was first numbers:-
100-(8*2)=84
84*(7+4)=924
-
- Acolyte
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 7:13 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Terrific game - well done to both players, especially Neil who many (probably including himself) felt might be the underdog. Pity this wasn't the final, really. Can it get any better?
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13330
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Great game! It's a shame that Rachel broke her arm between the last quarter final and this game, but I'm sure she'll be better tomorrow!
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 876
- Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 4:08 pm
- Location: Eastbourne
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
lol watGavin Chipper wrote:Great game! It's a shame that Rachel broke her arm between the last quarter final and this game, but I'm sure she'll be better tomorrow!
- Neil Zussman
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 328
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:41 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
I'm glad it was good to watch, but to be honest that was really devastating. I expected to get beaten comfortably, as I said on yesterday's show. But to come so close makes it more difficult to take. I suppose I shouldn't really have any regrets- I did far better than I thought I would do in January when it all started. But all I had to do was push a button and say the word 'Eclampsia' and I'd be in the final, I mean how easy is that?!
In a way, it's very annoying- he had a massive advantage in that he'd seen the scramble before, which is a bit of an unfair advantage. It means he 'learnt' the answer rather than solving it, which is not really what the game is about. But I'm probably a bit biased. Why couldn't Damian have picked a word I knew but Kirk didn't?!
Obviously Kirk is the better player, but he wasn't used to that kind of pressure, which played into my hands a bit. When I pointed out before the final numbers that the conundrum would be crucial whatever happened, he was not happy! But unfortunately for me, my mind games (which were totally unintentional, by the way, I wasn't trying to make Kirk nervous!) didn't quite work.
I know most of you wanted Kirk to win today. You got your wish. But it would've been so nice to be remembered as the person who beat the Kirkulator.
And they also cut out my joke about not solving the conundrum even in 30 minutes, let alone 30 seconds.
Nobody ever remembers the losing semi-finalists...
In a way, it's very annoying- he had a massive advantage in that he'd seen the scramble before, which is a bit of an unfair advantage. It means he 'learnt' the answer rather than solving it, which is not really what the game is about. But I'm probably a bit biased. Why couldn't Damian have picked a word I knew but Kirk didn't?!
Obviously Kirk is the better player, but he wasn't used to that kind of pressure, which played into my hands a bit. When I pointed out before the final numbers that the conundrum would be crucial whatever happened, he was not happy! But unfortunately for me, my mind games (which were totally unintentional, by the way, I wasn't trying to make Kirk nervous!) didn't quite work.
I know most of you wanted Kirk to win today. You got your wish. But it would've been so nice to be remembered as the person who beat the Kirkulator.
And they also cut out my joke about not solving the conundrum even in 30 minutes, let alone 30 seconds.
I'd definitely prefer this to the alternative. If the conundrum had been Speakeasy, say, Kirk would've buzzed straight away and I'd had so many regrets about losing out just because my reactions were a bit slower. At least this way there was nothing I could do, so I can't really regret it. The only think I'm kicking myself on is the first numbers. It was really a bad miss by us both, and if I'd solved that, and Kirk went behind for the first time, who knows what might've happened...Matt Morrison wrote: I'm not sure what I'd have preferred really - a total nonsense conundrum like ECLAMPSIA that suits the contestant's abilities, or something a bit more reasonable that might have produced more of a crucial buzz-off. I wouldn't have got it in 30 days.
Nobody ever remembers the losing semi-finalists...
- Derek Hazell
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1535
- Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:52 am
- Location: Swindon
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Those that have met Kirk did, but for others of us on here you are on a more equal ground, as you are both people who we know a bit on here, and both seem like good guys in your own individual ways. I for one would have been just as happy for you to have won after playing such a magnificent game.Neil Zussman wrote:I know most of you wanted Kirk to win today. You got your wish. But it would've been so nice to be remembered as the person who beat the Kirkulator.
Hopefully you'll get another go in the future, because coming so close and just being beaten on that one small thing makes you a very special case.
Keep posting on here, and make sure we never forget you!Neil Zussman wrote:Nobody ever remembers the losing semi-finalists...
Edited to add - Another thing is you probably had a LOT of support among general viewers, as it is in the British psyche to always support the perceived underdog.
Last edited by Derek Hazell on Wed Jun 17, 2009 8:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Living life in a gyratory circus kind of way.
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 876
- Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 4:08 pm
- Location: Eastbourne
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Interesting post Neil. I was, for obvious reasons, cheering you on in the green room!
- Kai Laddiman
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2314
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:37 pm
- Location: My bedroom
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
They don't? Idiots.Neil Zussman wrote:Nobody ever remembers the losing semi-finalists...
Hello, I'm Kai Laddiman, and I went on Countdown once.
16/10/2007 - Episode 4460
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.
- Kai Laddiman
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2314
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:37 pm
- Location: My bedroom
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
But seriously, Neil, you did amazing mate. The conundrum was slightly harsh on you (I hadn't even heard of it before), but you did brilliantly. If I didn't already know I would've tippped you to go all the way.
16/10/2007 - Episode 4460
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.
- Matt Morrison
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 7822
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: London
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Talk about fishing for compliments! Nah i'm only joking Neil, I feel for you - that post of yours had genuine emotion. I see what you mean about the conundrum now - better to have had no chance at all, than to have to always rue your reaction times rather than your pure Countdown ability.
The whole thing was a fantastic effort, I'm damn sure everyone here appreciates how close you came and it was far from being a simple case of "yet another win for Kirk".
You don't need to be remembered for beating Kirk, and you don't need to be remembered for being a losing semi-finalist, you'll be remembered here because you're a quality contestant and a quality guy. Besides, you've got Phil here to constantly swoon over you, so at least you've got that for recognition. And who remembers Richard Pay anyway?
As far as who I wanted to win - I literally had no preference. Kirk's so good that if I didn't know him I'd want him to get beaten every time I see him play (mentality ingrained from being a Liverpool fan watching Man Utd win everything), but I know Kirk would be distraught if he didn't win this series (it didn't take a psychologist to see that in his face as you pushed him today). Of course, you're clearly distraught too. Cheesy as it is, I just watched it as a total neutral, hoping for a good game. And if you want cheesier, how's this: there were no losers, only winners.
The whole thing was a fantastic effort, I'm damn sure everyone here appreciates how close you came and it was far from being a simple case of "yet another win for Kirk".
You don't need to be remembered for beating Kirk, and you don't need to be remembered for being a losing semi-finalist, you'll be remembered here because you're a quality contestant and a quality guy. Besides, you've got Phil here to constantly swoon over you, so at least you've got that for recognition. And who remembers Richard Pay anyway?
As far as who I wanted to win - I literally had no preference. Kirk's so good that if I didn't know him I'd want him to get beaten every time I see him play (mentality ingrained from being a Liverpool fan watching Man Utd win everything), but I know Kirk would be distraught if he didn't win this series (it didn't take a psychologist to see that in his face as you pushed him today). Of course, you're clearly distraught too. Cheesy as it is, I just watched it as a total neutral, hoping for a good game. And if you want cheesier, how's this: there were no losers, only winners.
- Ben Wilson
- Legend
- Posts: 4549
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:05 pm
- Location: North Hykeham
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Neil Zussman wrote:Nobody ever remembers the losing semi-finalists...
It's odd that you should mention that, as Kirk doesn't usually have that good a record against #5 seeds who lose in semi-finals.Neil Zussman wrote:But it would've been so nice to be remembered as the person who beat the Kirkulator.
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 593
- Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 8:54 pm
- Location: Farnborough, Hampshire
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Kirk Bevins wrote: I'm not quite sure how I managed to see ECLAMPSIA instantly but boy was I happy. I was speechless after and felt tears in my eyes (you can see this on TV just about) but held them back somehow. Emotion city. Awesome game Neil.
I saw the tears quite clearly Kirk but then I have an 'eye definition' TV.
For sheer excitement, one of the best ever Countdown games, as so many series' semi-finals are for some reason.
Well done to Neil for his contribution to this classic.
- James Robinson
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 10580
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:38 pm
- Location: Mirfield, West Yorkshire
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
What a fantastic match!
I've been to see the recordings in Manchester today (to be shown September 14-18th) and all of them were fantastic battles.
Then I came straight back to watch this epic match, which kept me wanting more and MORE and MORE
What brilliance by Kirk on ECLAMPSIA! Hope you do well in the final, Kirk! Commiserations, Neil.
If only that had been the final Pure Countdown Gold!
I've been to see the recordings in Manchester today (to be shown September 14-18th) and all of them were fantastic battles.
Then I came straight back to watch this epic match, which kept me wanting more and MORE and MORE
What brilliance by Kirk on ECLAMPSIA! Hope you do well in the final, Kirk! Commiserations, Neil.
If only that had been the final Pure Countdown Gold!
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 825
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:29 am
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
I for one was supporting you to win Neil, I think I told you on a spoiler earlier this year, that if you met Kirk in the final, to go for the six small tactic ("get him on the six smalls" ) may have worked, may not have, but in the heat of a tense battle it's easy to go down a wrong route as you both did in the first numbers, btw bet that must have been a sickener for both of you and Rachel, seeing how easy it was very understandable though given the tense situation.
You shouldn't feel too bad though Neil, you pushed the great man to the end, and not too sure but haven't losing semi-finalists been invited back for the C of C on the odd occassion, in fact wasn't the last one won by a former semi-finalist? So keep practising.
Congrats on making the final, Kirk, well deserved. No offence to Hamish, as he is a very good contestant, but I shall be supporting Jimmy to make the final as I think he would give you a better match than Hamish, but as stated you can never tell with Hamish, he may pull another few rabbits out of his hat and beat both of you. Really looking forward to the second semi, could be another epic.
You shouldn't feel too bad though Neil, you pushed the great man to the end, and not too sure but haven't losing semi-finalists been invited back for the C of C on the odd occassion, in fact wasn't the last one won by a former semi-finalist? So keep practising.
Congrats on making the final, Kirk, well deserved. No offence to Hamish, as he is a very good contestant, but I shall be supporting Jimmy to make the final as I think he would give you a better match than Hamish, but as stated you can never tell with Hamish, he may pull another few rabbits out of his hat and beat both of you. Really looking forward to the second semi, could be another epic.
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 557
- Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:53 pm
- Location: South Yorkshire
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
But they do Neil.Neil Zussman wrote: Nobody ever remembers the losing semi-finalists...
You put up a splendid show, and came across as a very nice fellow.
You`ll be remembered because you were very good.
- Kirk Bevins
- God
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
- Location: York, UK
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
I object. I'd never seen the scramble before - ever. In fact, it's never come up on Apterous as AMSPECIAL either so not sure where you've got this from. I spotted it "pure".Neil Zussman wrote: In a way, it's very annoying- he had a massive advantage in that he'd seen the scramble before, which is a bit of an unfair advantage. It means he 'learnt' the answer rather than solving it, which is not really what the game is about. But I'm probably a bit biased.
Even if I had seen the scramble before, this isn't an unfair advantage; this is the idea of practice mate.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 6361
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Still very impressed by Phil spotting ANORECTAL
I wonder if the letter grouping had been the letters for the conundrum would either player had got it
I wonder if the letter grouping had been the letters for the conundrum would either player had got it
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Glad to be proved a know-nothing chump! Epic match, very well played Neil in pushing Kirk so close, but congrats to Kirk for pulling through with an amazing conundrum spot. I did wonder if Kirk had seen POLITEST but not risked it, as that's what I did watching at home. Got a bit confused that it was maybe one of those words (like LITTLEST) which is used frequently but just not explicitly specified in the dictionary (two syllable adjective) and all that. But it seems not.Jon Corby wrote:Am I the only one that thinks Kirk will piss this? Not to denigrate Neil who is a fantastic player, but Kirk is on another level to practically everyone ...
As for 'nobody remembers losing semi-finalists' indeed - just hang around here an make 2,000-odd shit posts and generally act the twat. There's probably still a few people who haven't sussed out the 'foe' feature yet, and they'll treasure you forever.
- Charlie Reams
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9494
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
- Location: Cambridge
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
This is just so much shit. First, even if Kirk had seen it before, that's not unfair, any more than seeing POLITEST before is unfair. Practice reaps rewards. Second, Kirk hadn't seen it before, as you could've checked in all of five seconds. Third, Damian deliberately changed the conundrum from one that Kirk had seen shortly before the finals, when he could easily have just let it be. So you lost narrowly to someone much, much better than you, and it could've been a lot worse. There's no way you can feel aggrieved about that.Neil Zussman wrote:In a way, it's very annoying- he had a massive advantage in that he'd seen the scramble before, which is a bit of an unfair advantage. It means he 'learnt' the answer rather than solving it, which is not really what the game is about. But I'm probably a bit biased. Why couldn't Damian have picked a word I knew but Kirk didn't?!
Also bollocks. I'm sure I've said this before, but "easy to evaluate" is not remotely the same as "easy to spot", just as you can much more easily confirm that a given 9 is indeed in the selection than spot that 9 in the first place. If you got it sitting from your comfortable position as an armchair hero, congratulations and see you on the show soon, but don't forget to mention all the other rounds in which Kirk/Neil/Rachel beat you.Jojo Apollo wrote:btw bet that must have been a sickener for both of you and Rachel, seeing how easy it was
No.Jojo Apollo wrote:haven't losing semi-finalists been invited back for the C of C on the odd occassion, in fact wasn't the last one won by a former semi-finalist?
- Chris Thomas
- Newbie
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:09 am
- Location: Mountain View, California
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st S
Yipes. Before this turns ungentlemanly, I can't help but ask about this:
Details? That would appear to be a big effort, especially if similar measures were taken for the other heats. Really? I'm impressed, I think.Charlie Reams wrote:Damian deliberately changed the conundrum from one that Kirk had seen shortly before the finals, when he could easily have just let it be.
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 825
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:29 am
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
First of all, on your first point I did not mean to upset/offend you or anyone. If I did, I apologise sincerely, I meant it would have been sickening (given that all three are so good at the numbers), seeing that there was an easy solution to it that they missed initially, I also stated that it was understandable given the tense situation (meaning in the tv studio, in the heat of battle etc rather than at home as a so called "armchair hero") I guess my gentle ribbing (see wink smiley) didn't go down too well. Kirk/Neil/Rachel have beaten me in numerous numerous rounds and I gladly acknowledge it, I also feel proud when I beat them in the odd round or so at home as an "armchair hero", as they are greats at the game, whereas I am not, it's not like I have been posting/saying/bragging I beat them in that round or that round etc. I never even stated if I got that first numbers solution.Charlie Reams wrote:Also bollocks. I'm sure I've said this before, but "easy to evaluate" is not remotely the same as "easy to spot", just as you can much more easily confirm that a given 9 is indeed in the selection than spot that 9 in the first place. If you got it sitting from your comfortable position as an armchair hero, congratulations and see you on the show soon, but don't forget to mention all the other rounds in which Kirk/Neil/Rachel beat you.Jojo Apollo wrote:btw bet that must have been a sickener for both of you and Rachel, seeing how easy it was
No.Jojo Apollo wrote:haven't losing semi-finalists been invited back for the C of C on the odd occassion, in fact wasn't the last one won by a former semi-finalist?
On your second point, as I said I wasn't sure on it. Sorry, I am a bit forgetful, was it a former quarter finalist who won the last C of C?
Again apologies if I have offended anyone.
- Charlie Reams
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9494
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
- Location: Cambridge
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st S
NONAGONAL (from the QF) was deliberately chosen as one of the relatively small number of conundrums which were not on Apterous at the time (I hand-filtered them and removed some that I shouldn't have). For either the semi or the final (I forget which), it was originally going to be SAWLAGERS, but after this Damian changed it. Also Damian had bravely announced before the finals that none of them would be solved instantly, and even though he was proved wrong at least twice, it makes any suggestion that the conundrums were somehow favouring Kirk fairly ridiculous.Chris Thomas wrote:Yipes. Before this turns ungentlemanly, I can't help but ask about this:Details? That would appear to be a big effort, especially if similar measures were taken for the other heats. Really? I'm impressed, I think.Charlie Reams wrote:Damian deliberately changed the conundrum from one that Kirk had seen shortly before the finals, when he could easily have just let it be.
You didn't, I don't take people being wrong about stuff as a personal insult. I had to respond to a fairly large amount of crap being spouted in this thread, which means I get bored of doing it politely. Talking of which...Jojo Apollo wrote:Again apologies if I have offended anyone.
Err, what?Matt Morrison wrote:a total nonsense conundrum like ECLAMPSIA
- Ian Fitzpatrick
- Devotee
- Posts: 620
- Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:23 pm
- Location: Wimborne, Dorset
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
I've just managed to watch yesterday's show and must congratulate both Kirk and Neil for providing a great spectacle. What a great game, well worthy of a final. Very unlucky Neil to be pipped at the post, but to see Kirk's reactions says it all. I hope Dr Phil took his blood pressure afterwards.
I thought I was good at Countdown until I joined this forum
-
- Series 80 Champion
- Posts: 2707
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:07 am
- Location: Sheffield
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Maybe you'll get your own back on a crucial conundrum at a CO-event. Kirk's rubbish at thoseNeil Zussman wrote:I'm glad it was good to watch, but to be honest that was really devastating. I expected to get beaten comfortably, as I said on yesterday's show. But to come so close makes it more difficult to take. I suppose I shouldn't really have any regrets- I did far better than I thought I would do in January when it all started. But all I had to do was push a button and say the word 'Eclampsia' and I'd be in the final, I mean how easy is that?!
In a way, it's very annoying- he had a massive advantage in that he'd seen the scramble before, which is a bit of an unfair advantage. It means he 'learnt' the answer rather than solving it, which is not really what the game is about. But I'm probably a bit biased. Why couldn't Damian have picked a word I knew but Kirk didn't?!
Obviously Kirk is the better player, but he wasn't used to that kind of pressure, which played into my hands a bit. When I pointed out before the final numbers that the conundrum would be crucial whatever happened, he was not happy! But unfortunately for me, my mind games (which were totally unintentional, by the way, I wasn't trying to make Kirk nervous!) didn't quite work.
I know most of you wanted Kirk to win today. You got your wish. But it would've been so nice to be remembered as the person who beat the Kirkulator.
And they also cut out my joke about not solving the conundrum even in 30 minutes, let alone 30 seconds.
I'd definitely prefer this to the alternative. If the conundrum had been Speakeasy, say, Kirk would've buzzed straight away and I'd had so many regrets about losing out just because my reactions were a bit slower. At least this way there was nothing I could do, so I can't really regret it. The only think I'm kicking myself on is the first numbers. It was really a bad miss by us both, and if I'd solved that, and Kirk went behind for the first time, who knows what might've happened...Matt Morrison wrote: I'm not sure what I'd have preferred really - a total nonsense conundrum like ECLAMPSIA that suits the contestant's abilities, or something a bit more reasonable that might have produced more of a crucial buzz-off. I wouldn't have got it in 30 days.
Nobody ever remembers the losing semi-finalists...
- Kirk Bevins
- God
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
- Location: York, UK
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
No, I never saw it. When Neil said POLITEST I knew it was in as I offer POLITER a lot and so POLITEST must also be fine - was a good spot.Jon Corby wrote: I did wonder if Kirk had seen POLITEST but not risked it,
- Phil Reynolds
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3329
- Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
- Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Meant to mention this yesterday but forgot. Did anyone else notice something highly unusual about the conundrum reveal? Here's a screencap to jog your memory. Two halves of a VFSMB to the first person to post the correct answer.
- Kai Laddiman
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2314
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:37 pm
- Location: My bedroom
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Yes. The bottom bit turned over before the top bit.Phil Reynolds wrote:Meant to mention this yesterday but forgot. Did anyone else notice something highly unusual about the conundrum reveal? Here's a screencap to jog your memory. Two halves of a VFSMB to the first person to post the correct answer.
16/10/2007 - Episode 4460
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.
- Phil Reynolds
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3329
- Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
- Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Kai Laddiman wrote:Yes. The bottom bit turned over before the top bit.
- Ian Fitzpatrick
- Devotee
- Posts: 620
- Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:23 pm
- Location: Wimborne, Dorset
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
It's not unusual for the top set of letters to be the same as the bottom!Phil Reynolds wrote:Meant to mention this yesterday but forgot. Did anyone else notice something highly unusual about the conundrum reveal? Here's a screencap to jog your memory. Two halves of a VFSMB to the first person to post the correct answer.
Although I pressed my armchair buzzer and said SPECIALISM - which was incorrect!
I thought I was good at Countdown until I joined this forum
- Darren Carter
- What a lot of bling
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:58 pm
- Location: Shrewsbury
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Weren't they just!James Robinson wrote: I've been to see the recordings in Manchester today (to be shown September 14-18th) and all of them were fantastic battles.
- Phil Reynolds
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3329
- Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
- Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Who said it was?Ian Fitzpatrick wrote:It's not unusual for the top set of letters to be the same as the bottom!
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
None of the letters in the same place? Did the thing turn round the other way to normal? Dunno.
- Ben Wilson
- Legend
- Posts: 4549
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:05 pm
- Location: North Hykeham
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Only one border around the boxes instead of the usual one each?
- Phil Reynolds
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3329
- Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
- Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
You're thinking along the right lines.Ben Wilson wrote:Only one border around the boxes instead of the usual one each?
-
- Acolyte
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:45 am
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st S
Is it that the shot is of the actual board where the conundrum is revealed, and not the template or whatever it is they put on the camera?
- Steve Durney
- Acolyte
- Posts: 181
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:53 pm
- Location: Swindon
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
There's a metal border around them both now.
- Phil Reynolds
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3329
- Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
- Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st S
Correct! This is what it should have looked like:Andrew Hulme wrote:Is it that the shot is of the actual board where the conundrum is revealed, and not the template or whatever it is they put on the camera?
but for some reason the mask got left out on this occasion and viewers were treated to a shot of the actual conundrum board.
How prescient of me to divide this VFSMB in two! Half each to Ben and Andrew.
- Derek Hazell
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1535
- Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:52 am
- Location: Swindon
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
I like the one with the chrome trims better . . . but I suppose that says more about me.
Living life in a gyratory circus kind of way.
- Matt Morrison
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 7822
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: London
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
What, that you ride round in a pimped out lowrider Caddy with 25" rims?Derek Hazell wrote:I like the one with the chrome trims better . . . but I suppose that says more about me.
- Kirk Bevins
- God
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
- Location: York, UK
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
You bastard. I wanted the 100th post in this threadMatt Morrison wrote:What, that you ride round in a pimped out lowrider Caddy with 25" rims?Derek Hazell wrote:I like the one with the chrome trims better . . . but I suppose that says more about me.
- Matt Morrison
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 7822
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: London
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
It would have been shit compared to mine.Kirk Bevins wrote:You bastard. I wanted the 100th post in this threadMatt Morrison wrote:What, that you ride round in a pimped out lowrider Caddy with 25" rims?Derek Hazell wrote:I like the one with the chrome trims better . . . but I suppose that says more about me.
Anyway, bit of an odd milestone? I didn't even celebrate my 1000th! Countdown things please Countdown minds I guess...
- Neil Zussman
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 328
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:41 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
If this is correct, then obviously I apologise totally. I thought when Jeff asked you how you spotted it so quickly (not broadcast) you said something along the lines of 'I was lucky... I'd seen those words before.' But clearly not. Which begs the question, out of curiosity, where had you come across the word before?Kirk Bevins wrote:I object. I'd never seen the scramble before - ever. In fact, it's never come up on Apterous as AMSPECIAL either so not sure where you've got this from. I spotted it "pure".Neil Zussman wrote: In a way, it's very annoying- he had a massive advantage in that he'd seen the scramble before, which is a bit of an unfair advantage. It means he 'learnt' the answer rather than solving it, which is not really what the game is about. But I'm probably a bit biased.
Even if I had seen the scramble before, this isn't an unfair advantage; this is the idea of practice mate.
However, this:
...I totally disgree with. Since Kirk has said he hadn't seen the scramble before it's all immaterial, but I'll give you my reasons anyway. There is a difference between seeing a word before and seeing a conundrum scramble before. Kirk practises a lot. He is very good at spotting words, and then knowing which letters can be added to those words to make longer words. And fair play to him. It takes a large amount of skill to spot a long word from a randomly chosen set of letters. It takes significantly less skill to see a phrase you have seen before (i.e. 'Am Special') and remember that it has a one-word anagram. You practise to get good at certain techniques (e.g. stemming), surely you don't practise with the aim of seeing as many collections of 9 letters as possible and simply learning the longest word you can make from them- it's unfeasible. Remembering is less skillful than solving. It's worth pointing out that if the letters amspecial had come up in a normal letters round, I wouldn't have had any problem- when not presented in the context of a conundrum, it takes more skill to spot the nine. Also there's a good chance Kirk would've seen the word half-way through choosing the letters and thus tried to choose the right consonant vowel combination, which would obviously be much more impressive.Charlie Reams wrote:First, even if Kirk had seen it before, that's not unfair, any more than seeing POLITEST before is unfair. Practice reaps rewards. Second, Kirk hadn't seen it before, as you could've checked in all of five seconds. Third, Damian deliberately changed the conundrum from one that Kirk had seen shortly before the finals, when he could easily have just let it be. So you lost narrowly to someone much, much better than you, and it could've been a lot worse. There's no way you can feel aggrieved about that.
I am also quite aware that Kirk is better than me. That means he should automatically win does it, I should be grateful that I even had a chance of beating him before the conundrum? Rubbish! That's the the beauty of competition. It is true that I could've been thrashed. However that's completely irrelevant; there have been rounds when I have beaten Kirk. If those had all miraculously been in this game, he would've been thrashed. Your point is a waste of time.
Obviously I thank Damian for not giving a conundrum that he knew Kirk had seen before, however it is always possible that Kirk had seen those letters before and Damian was not aware of it.
Since Kirk and I both said at the time we should've got it, I think you're the one who's talking bollocks (on this occassion) Charlie.Charlie Reams wrote:Also bollocks. I'm sure I've said this before, but "easy to evaluate" is not remotely the same as "easy to spot", just as you can much more easily confirm that a given 9 is indeed in the selection than spot that 9 in the first place. If you got it sitting from your comfortable position as an armchair hero, congratulations and see you on the show soon, but don't forget to mention all the other rounds in which Kirk/Neil/Rachel beat you.Jojo Apollo wrote:btw bet that must have been a sickener for both of you and Rachel, seeing how easy it was
Nobody made this claim. I wasn't trying to belittle Kirk's achievements, I would think it was unfair if anybody had seen the exact scramble before.Charlie Reams wrote:...it makes any suggestion that the conundrums were somehow favouring Kirk fairly ridiculous.
Maybe I haven't expressed myself very well, but then again, maybe I should only post when I'm wide awake and sober.
- Matt Morrison
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 7822
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: London
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Dammit. Charlie would have really enjoyed my joke about the chrome rims. Now it's just going to get lost in amongst all the "no, you're talking bollocks".
-
- Series 59 Champion
- Posts: 574
- Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 4:26 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Neil, I agree with much of what you've said, but not with the notion that seeing a scramble before is lucky.
As an analogy, suppose you prepare for an Integration exam; you learn all the techniques necessary. Moreover you've attempted lots of past papers, many more than any of your fellow peers. Then, in your exam, a really tough question comes up. Except you've seen it before so can churn it out from memory, unlike your peers who are stumped. Surely you would come out saying you've been rewarded for the extra revision you did. Okay, you didn't plan to have seen the question before, but the fact that you spent so much time going through past questions increased the likelihood that you would see a familiar question. No?
As an analogy, suppose you prepare for an Integration exam; you learn all the techniques necessary. Moreover you've attempted lots of past papers, many more than any of your fellow peers. Then, in your exam, a really tough question comes up. Except you've seen it before so can churn it out from memory, unlike your peers who are stumped. Surely you would come out saying you've been rewarded for the extra revision you did. Okay, you didn't plan to have seen the question before, but the fact that you spent so much time going through past questions increased the likelihood that you would see a familiar question. No?
- Neil Zussman
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 328
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:41 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
That's actually a very good point Junaid. I'll try to come up with a good reply when I'm more awake. However, I do hate the fact that exams are essentially a giant memory test rather than a test of learning and applying techniques, because I do feel that there is too much luck involved. So I'll still disagree with you.Junaid Mubeen wrote:Neil, I agree with much of what you've said, but not with the notion that seeing a scramble before is lucky.
As an analogy, suppose you prepare for an Integration exam; you learn all the techniques necessary. Moreover you've attempted lots of past papers, many more than any of your fellow peers. Then, in your exam, a really tough question comes up. Except you've seen it before so can churn it out from memory, unlike your peers who are stumped. Surely you would come out saying you've been rewarded for the extra revision you did. Okay, you didn't plan to have seen the question before, but the fact that you spent so much time going through past questions increased the likelihood that you would see a familiar question. No?
In the Countdown context, would you disagree with my claim that remembering is less skillful than solving?
Would you like me to use a different word next time?Matt Morrison wrote:Dammit. Charlie would have really enjoyed my joke about the chrome rims. Now it's just going to get lost in amongst all the "no, you're talking bollocks".
Nobody needs to read my last post anyway, it's probably mostly bollocks.
- Kirk Bevins
- God
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
- Location: York, UK
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
It was broadcast and was along the lines of "I was lucky", i.e. I spotted the word. I knew the word in the second semi final but didn't spot it.Neil Zussman wrote:I thought when Jeff asked you how you spotted it so quickly (not broadcast) you said something along the lines of 'I was lucky... I'd seen those words before.'
As for where I've heard of ECLAMPSIA before, I'm not 100% but I'm sure Julian Fell mentioned it once in an MSN conversation back in 2005ish.
Last edited by Kirk Bevins on Thu Jun 18, 2009 11:17 pm, edited 3 times in total.
-
- Series 59 Champion
- Posts: 574
- Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 4:26 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
No, but I don't see how it's relevant. The game isn't just a test of pure raw talent. Incidentally, if it was I'd still back Kirk over just about anyone; SUBSPACE alone is testament to his raw spottint ability (if you're still unconvinced just check out his record on speed games). I think it's good that preparation is rewarded; surely your own success is largely down to the hours you put in?Neil Zussman wrote:In the Countdown context, would you disagree with my claim that remembering is less skillful than solving?
- Matt Morrison
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 7822
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: London
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
Whichever side you fall on, it's worth remembering that remembering itself is a reflex action. If you 'remember' a word rather than 'solve' it, you're completely powerless in doing so.
And of course to refuse to declare a word because you remembered it rather than solved it would just be suicidal.
If it's literally impossible to remove a particular aspect of a game, then it has to be seen as an indistinguishable part of that game.
That possibly made sense.
And of course to refuse to declare a word because you remembered it rather than solved it would just be suicidal.
If it's literally impossible to remove a particular aspect of a game, then it has to be seen as an indistinguishable part of that game.
That possibly made sense.
- Derek Hazell
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1535
- Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:52 am
- Location: Swindon
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
My friend said that "gonad" was available in Round 12, but I said "you're talking bollocks".Matt Morrison wrote:Dammit. Charlie would have really enjoyed my joke about the chrome rims. Now it's just going to get lost in amongst all the "no, you're talking bollocks".
Living life in a gyratory circus kind of way.
- Neil Zussman
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 328
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:41 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
It's not relevant to this match in particular, I seem to have gone a bit off topic. You are correct in that the game itself is not just a test of pure raw talent. As I said before, you can get amazingly good at certain techniques through constant practise, e.g. if you see an 8 from the first 8 letters, then it's obviously an advantage to know whether it is better to pick a consonant or vowel to make a 9 (preferably a 9 that your opponent may not know). My only issue is with the conundrums- this requires a slightly different skill to the letters rounds, in that you know what the longest word length is. Thus if you have seen the exact sequence of letters before, you clearly have an advantage. And imho, this is an unfair advantage because the idea is to solve the anagram. Although I'm clearly in a very tiny minority on this one. In the letters rounds, it's different because you have the added difficulty of trying to work out how long the longest available word is, if you see what I mean.Junaid Mubeen wrote:No, but I don't see how it's relevant. The game isn't just a test of pure raw talent. Incidentally, if it was I'd still back Kirk over just about anyone; SUBSPACE alone is testament to his raw spottint ability (if you're still unconvinced just check out his record on speed games). I think it's good that preparation is rewarded; surely your own success is largely down to the hours you put in?Neil Zussman wrote:In the Countdown context, would you disagree with my claim that remembering is less skillful than solving?
You remembered a word from a conversation you had 4 years ago and have never used since? Are you sure you're not a cyborg?Kirk Bevins wrote: As for where I've heard of ECLAMPSIA before, I'm not 100% but I'm sure Julian Fell mentioned it once in an MSN conversation back in 2005ish.
- Charlie Reams
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9494
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
- Location: Cambridge
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
That doesn't even make any sense. Who says what "the idea" is? Getting conundrums which you've seen before is a perk of practising hard and having a good memory, which seem like perfectly legitimate things to reward to me, and certainly things which are rewarded in various ways in the other parts of the game.Neil Zussman wrote: Thus if you have seen the exact sequence of letters before, you clearly have an advantage. And imho, this is an unfair advantage because the idea is to solve the anagram.
- Neil Zussman
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 328
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:41 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st SF]
OK, sure. You could argue that the objective of that round is to buzz in and give the 9 letter word that has been scrambled. In which case it is clearly an advantage to have seen as many different scrambled words as possible. I happen to think that that round is a pure test of anagramming skill, i.e. 'here's a phrase, find it's anagram.' And if you've seen it before, then clearly you are not solving the anagram, you're remembering the answer, which is a different skill. But I'm happy to agree to disagree.Charlie Reams wrote:That doesn't even make any sense. Who says what "the idea" is? Getting conundrums which you've seen before is a perk of practising hard and having a good memory, which seem like perfectly legitimate things to reward to me, and certainly things which are rewarded in various ways in the other parts of the game.Neil Zussman wrote: Thus if you have seen the exact sequence of letters before, you clearly have an advantage. And imho, this is an unfair advantage because the idea is to solve the anagram.
- James Robinson
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 10580
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:38 pm
- Location: Mirfield, West Yorkshire
Re: Spoilers for Wed 17 June 2009 [Series 60 1st S
It's not the first time it's happened during that series. I definitely recall it happening on at least one other episode, I think it was just after the Champion of Champions tournament.Phil Reynolds wrote:Correct! This is what it should have looked like:Andrew Hulme wrote:Is it that the shot is of the actual board where the conundrum is revealed, and not the template or whatever it is they put on the camera?
but for some reason the mask got left out on this occasion and viewers were treated to a shot of the actual conundrum board.
How prescient of me to divide this VFSMB in two! Half each to Ben and Andrew.