c4countdown

Countdown recap for Thursday 6 June 2002.

C1: Champion John Mitchell (3 wins, 287 points.)
C2: Challenger Julia Wilkinson from Southampton.
DC: Susie Dent and Kathryn Apanowicz.
CV: Carol Vorderman.
OT: Other words or solutions.

R01: G N S T I E O D R
R02: M P C A E A L G T
R03: R N H D O E I I F
R04: S L T O E A P R C
R05: 1, 8, 10, 3, 6, 7. Target: 619.
TTT: WILKNEL
R06: M S D E O I N V R
R07: T L G D A U E Y P
R08: R W M I A E K T O
R09: J S L N I E U O F
R10: 100, 6, 5, 9, 1, 10. Target: 786.
TTT: BEANTOY
R11: C S D H A E I R G
R12: S T N E A I L P M
R13: C S R T O E U Z D
R14: 100, 6, 8, 5, 1, 9. Target: 450.
R15: M I N O R P I G S (conundrum)


And now a brief interlude before our main feature:

SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER

No rest from the family disputes this week for Richard, as his partner is in Dictionary Corner. (Do I have the wrong person in mind, or does she look like Sandi Toksvig? Maybe I've just converted them into one person in my mind.)

Round 1: G N S T I E O D R

C1: STRINGED (8)
C2: RESTING (7)
DC: GENITORS (8)
OT: TRIGONES (8) STODGIER (8)
Score: 8–0 (max 8)

Round 2: M P C A E A L G T

C1: GLEAM (5)
C2: PLACATE (7)
DC: PALMATE (7)
Score: 8–7 (max 15)

Round 3: R N H D O E I I F

C1: FONDER (6)
C2: FONDER (6)
DC: HEROIN (6) FRIEND (6) HORNED (6)
OT: DEHORN (6) DINERO (6) IRONED (6) FINDER (6) HINDER (6) HONIED (6) IODINE (6)
Score: 14–13 (max 21)

Round 4: S L T O E A P R C

C1: patroles
C2: PLASTER (7)
DC: PECTORALS (18)
Score: 14–20 (max 39)

John's attempt falls short, while Julia's letting go of polestar^ pays off.

Round 5: 1, 8, 10, 3, 6, 7. Target: 619.

C1: 619. (8*7 + 6) * 10 - 1 (10)
C2: 612.
Score: 24–20 (max 49)

Teatime teaser: WILKNEL -> INKWELL

Round 6: M S D E O I N V R

C1: VENDORS (7)
C2: MINDERS (7)
DC: DEVISOR (7) VERSION (7) VERISMO (7)
OT: DEVOIRS (7) VISORED (7) ROSINED (7) MERINOS (7) REMINDS (7) MINORED (7) MODERNS (7) NIMRODS (7) VERDINS (7)
Score: 31–27 (max 56)

This round was enlivened by Carol finding a spider (or presumably some type of creepy crawly) in the vowel box.

Round 7: T L G D A U E Y P

C1: PLAGUED (7)
C2: PLAGUED (7)
DC: ADEPTLY (7)
OT: PLAGUEY (7)
Score: 38–34 (max 63)

Round 8: R W M I A E K T O

C1: WAITER (6)
C2: MARKET (6)
DC: WARTIME (7)
OT: TEAMWORK (8) WORKMATE (8)
Score: 44–40 (max 71)

Round 9: J S L N I E U O F

C1: FUSION (6)
C2: JOINS (5)
DC: INFUSE (6) JOULES (6)
OT: elusion (7) OLEFINS (7)
Score: 50–40 (max 78)

The recap writer suggests elusion here, although in Mike's notes it has an X next to it, so apparently he didn't find it in his NODE.

Round 10: 100, 6, 5, 9, 1, 10. Target: 786.

C1: 785. 100*(9-1) - (10+5) (7)
C2: 785. 100*(9-1) - (10+5) (7)
CV: 785. (7)
OT: 786. (100-10)*9 - 6*(5-1) (10)
Score: 57–47 (max 88)

Teatime teaser: BEANTOY -> BAYONET

Round 11: C S D H A E I R G

C1: DISGRACE (8)
C2: DISCHARGE (18)
Score: 57–65 (max 106)

Julia called this 9 risky, for whatever reason. Also for whatever reason, she doesn't get the usual flashing lights on set for it.

Round 12: S T N E A I L P M

C1: PLAINEST (8)
C2: PANTILES (8)
DC: MANIPLES (8)
OT: AILMENTS (8) ALIMENTS (8) MANLIEST (8) IMPANELS (8) IMPLANTS (8) PALMIEST (8) SEPTIMAL (8)
Score: 65–73 (max 114)

Round 13: C S R T O E U Z D

C1: COURTED (7)
C2: CRUSTED (7)
DC: DETOURS (7)
OT: COURSED (7) SCOURED (7) SOURCED (7) CROUTES (7) SCOUTER (7) CRUDEST (7) DOUREST (7) ROUSTED (7) SCOUTED (7)
Score: 72–80 (max 121)

Round 14: 100, 6, 8, 5, 1, 9. Target: 450.

C1: 450. (100-8) * 5 - (1+9) (10)
C2: 455.
Score: 82–80 (max 131)

Round 15: M I N O R P I G S

C2 buzzes on 5 seconds to say PROMISING which is correct.
Score: 82–90 (max 141)

Further summaries are at:
http://www.apterous.org/cdb/series.php?series=47

R9: elusion is definitely not in NODE

Andrew Feist wrote:No rest from the family disputes this week for Richard, as his partner is in Dictionary Corner. (Do I have the wrong person in mind, or does she look like Sandi Toksvig? Maybe I've just converted them into one person in my mind.)

I suppose they do look a bit similiar, although it's never occurred to me before!

Julia called this 9 risky, for whatever reason.

For the record, whenever I put '(risk)' against a contestant's offering (something I've done for a number of years), it simply means that they indicated that they weren't confident of their declaration (for example, perhaps they'd only just got it at the end of the time, but hadn't had a chance to check all the letters were there. The word itself might not be a risky one in terms of it possibly not being in the dictionary). Hope that's clear.

Mike Brown wrote:

Andrew Feist wrote:No rest from the family disputes this week for Richard, as his partner is in Dictionary Corner. (Do I have the wrong person in mind, or does she look like Sandi Toksvig? Maybe I've just converted them into one person in my mind.)

I suppose they do look a bit similiar, although it's never occurred to me before!

Do they sound quite similar too? I remember during a discussion a while ago Damian said that Sandi Toksvig has never been a DC guest, while I and a few others were adamant we could remember her. I guess it must have been Kathryn?

Jon Corby wrote:Do they sound quite similar too?

Think they do a bit, come to think of it. Sandi Toksvig is a better name for anagram-making, though. It's just crying out to be rearranged.

I knew with a bit of hunting I could come up with the only time I've ever actually seen Kathryn Apanowicz:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWUrQNm3jVs

Peter Mabey wrote:R9: elusion is definitely not in NODE

Even under elude?

Kirk Bevins wrote:

Peter Mabey wrote:R9: elusion is definitely not in NODE

Even under elude?