c4countdown

I figured we may as well have a new topic for this, since the last one is kinda spammed with me asking people to help out with topics. Episode 1 is here.

Wondering what people's thoughts on the new format are. I think it's definitely an improvement; the head to head especially is much better. Not too sure I like the multiple choice round though, kinda benefits the weaker players (but at the same time means they can ask harder questions). Their 'fix' for the usual problem at the jackpot round of people giving their best answer (i.e. the one most likely to win them the money) first was good to see, even if it is a bit awkwardly done.

I have other thoughts, but can't really say them yet without potentially spoilering.

Edit: Oh, and if people don't want to watch the new series, but are interested in the new format, you can read a rough summary here. It features a question from episode 1 and episode 2 (although no answers), just in case you're super spoiler wary.

I've quite enjoyed the new series so far, although I'm still fuming over missing out in the audition phase. Having said that, both the final round questions have been stinkers so far. (Poets Laureate & Whitney Houston Top 40 Singles)

I definitely like this new head-to-head format, because it adds an extra bit of thinking, since there are only a few answers to each question, so you have to think of the most obscure from a small bunch. (although I was amazed that General was the best answer in the GNVQ question!)

I look forward to seeing your attempt at the show, Michael.

I think I'll get used to it. My immediate reaction was to groan when AA introduced the multi-choice round, but I always used to react the same way to the not infrequent rounds (usually about films) where I hadn't the faintest idea of any of the answers. There will be fewer of these now.

I assume the changes are designed to enable the programme to utilise questions which wouldn't have been usable in the "traditional" format - those with an indeterminate number of correct answers, which will be used in the multi-choice round, and those with a small number correct answers which are not unversally known, which fit well in the new head-to-head. However, the latter is diverging somewhat from the original "pointless" concept.

I think that at its best the old head-to-head was really good, but only rarely. The new one will be more consistent and has the enormous merit of not being swung by knowledge of one subject.

In the multi-choice round I think it's unfortunate that one team doesn't get the chance to pick first from a list, but since they're still not conferring at that point I can't see an obvious way round that. I hope they mix things up a bit, perhaps sometimes putting up a list with 4 incorrect answers.

Clive Brooker wrote:I assume the changes are designed to enable the programme to utilise questions which wouldn't have been usable in the "traditional" format - those with an indeterminate number of correct answers, which will be used in the multi-choice round, and those with a small number correct answers which are not unversally known, which fit well in the new head-to-head. However, the latter is diverging somewhat from the original "pointless" concept.

I think that at its best the old head-to-head was really good, but only rarely. The new one will be more consistent and has the enormous merit of not being swung by knowledge of one subject.

Yep, this sums up most of my thoughts pretty well.

James Robinson wrote:I've quite enjoyed the new series so far, although I'm still fuming over missing out in the audition phase. Having said that, both the final round questions have been stinkers so far. (Poets Laureate & Whitney Houston Top 40 Singles)

Well they weren't very easy, but they were very predictable.

Hugh Binnie wrote:

James Robinson wrote:I've quite enjoyed the new series so far, although I'm still fuming over missing out in the audition phase. Having said that, both the final round questions have been stinkers so far. (Poets Laureate & Whitney Houston Top 40 Singles)

Well they weren't very easy, but they were very predictable.

Yep. Bizarrely we hadn't prepared for the poets question, but we knew the divas one (although we wouldn't have gone for either, as I'd've gone for winter olympics, hoping for either host cities or sports).

Michael Wallace wrote:...as I'd've gone for winter olympics, hoping for either host cities or sports.

Both Sporcle quizzes!

The head-to-head is better, but don't like the other changes. Kept in all the state-the-obvious bullshit and waffle. Kept the same 'look at me' contestants who are unrelentingly annoying.

Craig Beevers wrote:The head-to-head is better, but don't like the other changes. Kept in all the state-the-obvious bullshit and waffle. Kept the same 'look at me' contestants who are unrelentingly annoying.

The 'waffle' was (we were told) one of the reasons they've taken it down to four pairs, to allow more time for it. They claimed that people loved it, but I find that very hard to believe.

Michael Wallace wrote:

Craig Beevers wrote:The head-to-head is better, but don't like the other changes. Kept in all the state-the-obvious bullshit and waffle. Kept the same 'look at me' contestants who are unrelentingly annoying.

The 'waffle' was (we were told) one of the reasons they've taken it down to four pairs, to allow more time for it. They claimed that people loved it, but I find that very hard to believe.

Ugh. People are such total morons, so I can well believe it. I mean why would you want to watch a gameshow, has to be for the inane bollocks that's repeated every show and some Big Brother rejects rambling on.

Craig Beevers wrote:Ugh. People are such total morons, so I can well believe it. I mean why would you want to watch a gameshow, has to be for the inane bollocks that's repeated every show and some Big Brother rejects rambling on.

I must say, I'm looking forward to your critique of mine and CF's appearance(s) (I think you're going to hate us).


(YES THAT (S) IS ME BEING DELIBERATELY VAGUE AGAIN AAAARGH SPOILERS AAAAARGH)

Michael Wallace wrote:

Hugh Binnie wrote:

James Robinson wrote:I've quite enjoyed the new series so far, although I'm still fuming over missing out in the audition phase. Having said that, both the final round questions have been stinkers so far. (Poets Laureate & Whitney Houston Top 40 Singles)

Well they weren't very easy, but they were very predictable.

Yep. Bizarrely we hadn't prepared for the poets question, but we knew the divas one (although we wouldn't have gone for either, as I'd've gone for winter olympics, hoping for either host cities or sports).

I was so thinking that the Winter Olympics would be in my audition, and kept trying to remember the obscure hosts, but kept forgetting that very long Nazi host city.

Must say I saw episode one of the new series and the 2 all-female teams were absolutely wappy, OTT, jumping up and down excited at every answer they gave that I almost turned off. Still it beats watching someone completely devoid of personality, eh Craig?

James Robinson wrote:I was so thinking that the Winter Olympics would be in my audition, and kept trying to remember the obscure hosts, but kept forgetting that very long Nazi host city.

We did very little revision for the audition (seemed a bit pointless (yes, yes) when they're not just going to be looking for whether you're really good at the show or not), although I did bother to start learning countries, which meant I got an audition pointless with South American countries (Suriname).

Edit: Spoilers from today: wtf? How was the Ridgeway a pointless answer? or do I just have a weird perception of famous walks?

Dinos Sfyris wrote:Must say I saw episode one of the new series and the 2 all-female teams were absolutely wappy, OTT, jumping up and down excited at every answer they gave that I almost turned off. Still it beats watching someone completely devoid of personality, eh Craig?

I like to be different, I figure other people had the stock insults and losing covered.

Michael Wallace wrote:although I did bother to start learning countries, which meant I got an audition pointless with South American countries (Suriname).

I wonder if I had the same questions as you then, because I had a question where Suriname was Pointless and I got the only other Pointless answer, which happened to be Guyana.

James Robinson wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:although I did bother to start learning countries, which meant I got an audition pointless with South American countries (Suriname).

I wonder if I had the same questions as you then, because I had a question where Suriname was Pointless and I got the only other Pointless answer, which happened to be Guyana.

Sounds about right, I was quite surprised to hear that Guyana was pointless for that, but I got the impression they might have made a lot of the answers up. The others were things in a Delia Smith lasagne and Gladiators, sound familiar?

Michael Wallace wrote:

James Robinson wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:although I did bother to start learning countries, which meant I got an audition pointless with South American countries (Suriname).

I wonder if I had the same questions as you then, because I had a question where Suriname was Pointless and I got the only other Pointless answer, which happened to be Guyana.

Sounds about right, I was quite surprised to hear that Guyana was pointless for that, but I got the impression they might have made a lot of the answers up. The others were things in a Delia Smith lasagne and Gladiators, sound familiar?

Indeed. My sister got just 8 for the lasagne question, and I got another Pointless in the Gladiators question.

Used to be a Gladiator's addict when I was younger. Was it just the original UK series Gladiators or did they allow those from the series relaunch and the Australian, Russian versions etc?

Dinos Sfyris wrote:Used to be a Gladiator's addict when I was younger. Was it just the original UK series Gladiators or did they allow those from the series relaunch and the Australian, Russian versions etc?

Just the original. CF and I were a bit rubbish at it, (we knew a bunch of reasonable but safe ones), but we took a punt with Vixen. Turns out I was thinking of Fox, which was a bit oops.

Ah yeah. Hunter/Lightning/Wolf are the ones that spring to mind. I've forgotten them all now but I'd probably go with Ace, Saracen or Panther.

Dinos Sfyris wrote:Ah yeah. Hunter/Lightning/Wolf are the ones that spring to mind. I've forgotten them all now but I'd probably go with Ace, Saracen or Panther.

Yeah, I *think* Ace was a pointless, and there were loads of crazy ones which you only remember when someome tells you then (like Rocket). One pair in our audition went for Jet

Michael Wallace wrote:Edit: Spoilers from today: wtf? How was the Ridgeway a pointless answer? or do I just have a weird perception of famous walks?

I think this was a poor question. The three suggestions the players came up with were all real. All that seems to distinguish the one that was a valid answer is that an outfit with a grand-sounding title has decided to market it as one of theirs.

Michael Wallace wrote:

Dinos Sfyris wrote:Ah yeah. Hunter/Lightning/Wolf are the ones that spring to mind. I've forgotten them all now but I'd probably go with Ace, Saracen or Panther.

Yeah, I *think* Ace was a pointless, and there were loads of crazy ones which you only remember when someome tells you then (like Rocket). One pair in our audition went for Jet

There was a pair who gave wrong answers to the first 2 questions, then went with Jet, so they finished with 275 out of 300

Whereas I went with Diesel, which got me a nice Pointless.

Saracen got about 50, I don't recall Ace or Panther being Pointless, although was well surprised that Nightshade was Pointless.

James Robinson wrote:Saracen got about 50, I don't recall Ace or Panther being Pointless, although was well surprised that Nightshade was Pointless.

Yeah, it's that sort of thing (like Guyana being pointless) that made me wonder if they were genuine questions or not. OTOH it seems as much effort to come up with their own questions and answers as it is to just nab some spare questions from the show. And as we've seen on the show, some really obvious stuff can end up being pointless.

Clive Brooker wrote:

Michael Wallace wrote:Edit: Spoilers from today: wtf? How was the Ridgeway a pointless answer? or do I just have a weird perception of famous walks?

I think this was a poor question. The three suggestions the players came up with were all real. All that seems to distinguish the one that was a valid answer is that an outfit with a grand-sounding title has decided to market it as one of theirs.

Surely it's a bit like the National Parks. There are plenty of beautiful places in this country but they are not all officially designated national parks. That was always going to be the pitfall with that question - luckily for them, one of the ones they knew was pointless. The final category is usually pretty tough - they aren't going to give the money away that easily.

Karen Pearson wrote:Surely it's a bit like the National Parks. There are plenty of beautiful places in this country but they are not all officially designated national parks. That was always going to be the pitfall with that question - luckily for them, one of the ones they knew was pointless. The final category is usually pretty tough - they aren't going to give the money away that easily.

Obviously it's a bit subjective, but I think National Parks is a much fairer category than National Trails, but I might just be saying that because I learnt about National Parks at school, so they feel more 'proper' to me.

Two days to go.

ARE YOU EXCITED?!?!!!!

(I don't mind if you say yes)

Michael Wallace wrote:Two days to go.

ARE YOU EXCITED?!?!!!!

(I don't mind if you say yes)

Yes, actually. It'd be nice to see a friendly face, although I don't actually know what your face looks like.

Having said that, these final round questions are getting noticably tougher

That Round Table one yesterday. Good god that was hard.

I was well laughing though when that couple went with it, on the basis that one of them thought they had a well obsure answer, which turned out to be the 3rd most popular answer

James Robinson wrote:Having said that, these final round questions are getting noticably tougher

That Round Table one yesterday. Good god that was hard.

CF would've been fine with that (he knew Mordred, which was a pretty surprisingly pointless).

So far the only jackpot question we didn't get a pointless on was poet laureates, because we didn't learn them for some reason (although we'd've picked winter olympics for the first three/four shows, which we'd learnt, so it wouldn't've mattered).

But yeah, it was pretty lol them thinking Gawain was obscure.

Edit: Also, play school toys? wtf? Completely and utterly lost on us.

Editedit: Actually no, I've just remembered the oscar winners over 50. That would have completely flummoxed us as well.

James Robinson wrote:Yes, actually. It'd be nice to see a friendly face, although I don't actually know what your face looks like.

Michael Wallace wrote:But yeah, it was pretty lol them thinking Gawain was obscure.

The really strange thing was that the dude assured his wife that he knew a really obscure one, but he didn't tell her what it was until they'd picked the category. In that situation surely the sensible thing to do is to run it past her, and maybe she would've said "actually that's not very obscure". (As it turns out she didn't know either, but it's still basic tactics.)

Some of the head to head categries are getting increasingly obscure.
I am waiting for the names of the firemen in Trumpton.

I cannot believe that only 67% of people named 'Christianity' when they were given 100 seconds to name as many religions as possible. Thats just mind-boggling. I would have found it amusing if it had been 99% but for it to be that low makes me feel even better about emigrating from this shithole.

Matthew Green wrote:I cannot believe that only 67% of people named 'Christianity' when they were given 100 seconds to name as many religions as possible. Thats just mind-boggling. I would have found it amusing if it had been 99% but for it to be that low makes me feel even better about emigrating from this shithole.

Haha yep. I was also amused that Islam came higher, clearly the terrorists have already won.

(Where are you emigrating to?)

Michael Wallace wrote:

Matthew Green wrote:I cannot believe that only 67% of people named 'Christianity' when they were given 100 seconds to name as many religions as possible. Thats just mind-boggling. I would have found it amusing if it had been 99% but for it to be that low makes me feel even better about emigrating from this shithole.

Haha yep. I was also amused that Islam came higher, clearly the terrorists have already won.

I'm actually more surprised that there still has been no correct answer where 100 points would have been scored.

James Robinson wrote: That Round Table one yesterday. Good god that was hard.

I was well laughing though when that couple went with it, on the basis that one of them thought they had a well obsure answer, which turned out to be the 3rd most popular answer

I was' surprised that SIR MELEAUS DE LILE (our George Jenkins' "King Arthur") didn't appear among the pointless - there must have a Southern railfan among the 100

Peter Mabey wrote: I was' surprised that SIR MELEAUS DE LILE (our George Jenkins' "King Arthur") didn't appear among the pointless - there must have a Southern railfan among the 100

If this is a joke I don't get it. If it's a serious point I... still don't get it.

James Robinson wrote:That Round Table one yesterday. Good god that was hard.

Hard but totally predictable, again.

Matthew Green wrote:I cannot believe that only 67% of people named 'Christianity' when they were given 100 seconds to name as many religions as possible. Thats just mind-boggling. I would have found it amusing if it had been 99% but for it to be that low makes me feel even better about emigrating from this shithole.

I guess a lot of people didn't think to be so general — they were probably too busy saying Protestantism and Catholicism to think of saying Christianity.

James Robinson wrote:I'm actually more surprised that there still has been no correct answer where 100 points would have been scored.

Yeah, there are some real thickos out there.

Charlie Reams wrote:

Peter Mabey wrote: I was' surprised that SIR MELEAUS DE LILE (our George Jenkins' "King Arthur") didn't appear among the pointless - there must have a Southern railfan among the 100

If this is a joke I don't get it. If it's a serious point I... still don't get it.

As it happens this post was directed at you:

http://www.c4countdown.co.uk/viewtopic. ... 93&p=33041

No. 800 was named Sir Meleaus De Lile.

Clive Brooker wrote: As it happens this post was directed at you:

http://www.c4countdown.co.uk/viewtopic. ... 93&p=33041

No. 800 was named Sir Meleaus De Lile.

I got that bit, but having the title Sir doesn't make you a Knight of the Round Table. Maybe I was just expecting the joke to make more sense than it actually does, I dunno.

Charlie Reams wrote:...but having the title Sir doesn't make you a Knight of the Round Table. Maybe I was just expecting the joke to make more sense than it actually does, I dunno.

Having a King Arthur Class engine named after you does make you a character from Arthurian legend, and if you're also a Sir there must be a reasonable chance that you're a Knight of the Round Table. That's certainly how I would have tried to answer the question. Equally certainly I wouldn't have won the money.

I thought that round was classic television btw, especially the mickey-take about the restaurant on the IOW. She was not amused! I was already angry with them for getting 2 pointlesses on horse racing when they plainly knew nothing about it.

Keep an eye out for that young couple who went out first round yesterday. CF and I noticed them in the green room because they'd brought a huge folder of notes to revise from. Admittedly, you might've expected them to be ok on a capital cities question, but I'm still interested to see how they get on.

Michael Wallace wrote:Keep an eye out for that young couple who went out first round yesterday. CF and I noticed them in the green room because they'd brought a huge folder of notes to revise from. Admittedly, you might've expected them to be ok on a capital cities question, but I'm still interested to see how they get on.

Yeah, what was in her mind to think "Now, Tokyo will be a very safe option". I had about half of those Pointless cities yesterday

James Robinson wrote:Yeah, what was in her mind to think "Now, Tokyo will be a very safe option".

Well it was a safe answer, in that I presume by safe she meant "definitely correct" rather than "will definitely see us through. Charlie (who watched this recording) reckoned that the guy was pretty nasty to her after that (but it looks like it got edited down a bit).

Charlie Reams wrote:

Clive Brooker wrote: As it happens this post was directed at you:

http://www.c4countdown.co.uk/viewtopic. ... 93&p=33041

No. 800 was named Sir Meleaus De Lile.

I got that bit, but having the title Sir doesn't make you a Knight of the Round Table. Maybe I was just expecting the joke to make more sense than it actually does, I dunno.

I checked here http://sacred-texts.com/neu/celt/cml/cml27.htm
- see p.359 on "the Cornish Melwas" - sorry I've not located a more concise reference

James Robinson wrote:Yeah, what was in her mind to think "Now, Tokyo will be a very safe option". I had about half of those Pointless cities yesterday

A lot of surprisingly pointless cities there. Did Richard show them all? If so, I'm surprised somebody said Sri Jayawardenapura Kotte yet nobody said, e.g., Kathmandu.

Hugh Binnie wrote:

James Robinson wrote:Yeah, what was in her mind to think "Now, Tokyo will be a very safe option". I had about half of those Pointless cities yesterday

A lot of surprisingly pointless cities there. Did Richard show them all? If so, I'm surprised somebody said Sri Jayawardenapura Kotte yet nobody said, e.g., Kathmandu.

They did, yeah (I've got the impression that people complained last series that they didn't always go through all the answers, because they seem to do that every time now). Kathmandu surprised me as well, but not as much as Kabul and Pyongyang did. Of course, it's going to be a bit distorted by the fact there are so many to name in the first place, but missing Kabul especially seems a bit shocking.

I guess Asia conjures up images of the far east and not Israel, The Lebanon or Afghanistan.

Clive Brooker wrote: Having a King Arthur Class engine named after you does make you a character from Arthurian legend, and if you're also a Sir there must be a reasonable chance that you're a Knight of the Round Table.

Gotcha. Thanks for deepening my trains knowledge.

When is raccoon actually on? I missed that bit.

Felt sorry for the people in the final as they seemed really desperate to win: I thought the woman might actually start crying at the end.

Jimmy Gough wrote:When is raccoon actually on? I missed that bit.

Today!!!

Jon Corby wrote:

Jimmy Gough wrote:When is raccoon actually on? I missed that bit.

Today!!!

4:30pm, although more nearer 4:29pm on BBC2.

I've never watched this Pointless game - is it anything like Topranko!?

Gavin Chipper wrote:I've never watched this Pointless game - is it anything like Topranko!?

You could always read the Pointless page on the ukgameshows site.

Unless I'm very much mistaken, today's show featured former Countdowner Caroline Ambrose. Can she become the first person to win both shows?

Charlie Reams wrote:Unless I'm very much mistaken, today's show featured former Countdowner Caroline Ambrose. Can she become the first person to win both shows?

And Sarah Duncan. Wasn't she also on Countdown?

Charlie Reams wrote:Unless I'm very much mistaken, today's show featured former Countdowner Caroline Ambrose. Can she become the first person to win both shows?

I recognised her straight away. She must work the gameshow circuit as I've seen her on a few things now including The Weakest Link and Vorderman's Big Brain Game when it was on.

In today's (April 9) game contestants were asked for elements beginning with C.
As Copernicium(112) wasn't mentioned, I assume programme was recorded before the name was formally accepted.
Of course, Cassiopeium(71) wouldn't have been accepted, as the official name adopted is Lutecium.

Peter Mabey wrote:In today's (April 9) game contestants were asked for elements beginning with C.
As Copernicium(112) wasn't mentioned, I assume programme was recorded before the name was formally accepted.
Of course, Cassiopeium(71) wouldn't have been accepted, as the official name adopted is Lutecium.

Kevin Philips and Frank Lampard have reached 1oo goals since the show was recorded too.

I also forgot to mention Columbium(41), now Niobium.