c4countdown

We got off to a great start yesterday with the 30th Birthday Championship, hopefully we can keep it going today. In a perfect world I would have liked to give a theme to the prelim match-ups, but the only clear theme I can see between these two competitors is the letter W, so we'll stick with that. One W is Wayne Kelly, who was the runner up of series 28, losing to some guy who may still be involved with the show a little. The other W is Nick Wainwright, the champion of series 56 as well as a semi-finalist in a very tough Champion of Champions. This one's interesting to call because I don't know how much Wayne has been involved since his original run, so he may be a wild card. We'll see how it goes.

Join Jack for the recap later.

Here are the stats for this game (Note, that all Wayne's games are in the 9-round format (except 1 in the 14-round format) and all Nick's are 15-round format):

Firstly, Series 28 Runner-Up & CoC VII Quarter-Finalist Wayne Kelly - 11 Games, 8 Wins, 640 Points (Average: 58.18 / 55.70 (Excluding 14-Rounder))
Highest Score: 83 vs. Damian Eadie (Grand Final - 14 Rounder) / 71 vs. Mike Salt (3rd Prelim - 9 Rounder)
Lowest Score: 36 vs. Richard Campbell (CoC Quarter-Final - 9 Rounder)
9's Achieved: 1/3
Total Points/Max/%: 640/873 (73%)
Letters Points/Max/%: 365/519 (70%)
Numbers Points/Max/%: 195/234 (83%)
Conundrum Points/Max/%: 80/120 (67%)

Secondly, Series 56 Champion & CoC XIII Semi-Finalist Nick Wainwright - 14 Games, 13 Wins, 1,307 Points (Average: 93.36)
Highest Score: 107 vs. Jean Webby (Semi-Final)
Lowest Score: 76 vs. David Senior (4th Prelim)
9's Achieved: 1/9
Total Points/Max/%: 1307/1784 (73%)
Letters Points/Max/%: 882/1224 (72%)
Numbers Points/Max/%: 365/420 (87%)
Conundrum Points/Max/%: 60/140 (43%)

CORPUSES in R1 for a beater

ALMIRAH in Round 6, I think it is.

I have to say I'm slightly surprised at today's outcome, just because I didn't really know how Wayne was as a player and how much he kept up since 1994, so very well done to him. Commiserations to Nick, I know how good of a player you can be, maybe just wasn't your day today.

Great stuff by Wayne, no sign of the 'CSW curse' whatsoever. If that's the kind of standard we can expect from the other Scrabblers in the tournament, we could have some real dark horses on our hands.

Jordan F wrote:I have to say I'm slightly surprised at today's outcome, just because I didn't really know how Wayne was as a player and how much he kept up since 1994, so very well done to him. Commiserations to Nick, I know how good of a player you can be, maybe just wasn't your day today.

Having annotated for him at the Scrabble finals I know Wayne is a very strong player - he must have put in some decent study too, because there were many potential words he could have declared which were not in OED. Well done Wayne in avoiding those pitfalls (Especially in the first round with POUNCERS*. It is always crucial to get points on the board first in this game). Nick very unlucky with MURIALS* and EPIGEALS*. I echo what Jordan said. Well played guys.

Mauro

Good game.

My comment is about Nick Hewer's political rant against Cuba at the end of the show. Did anyone else think it was bang out of order??? I'm certain that Cuba doesn't have a prison every 100 yards as claimed by Mr Hewer, and even if it did, might it have something to do with the extreme poverty that country finds itself in after over 50 years of crippling US sanctions?

The United States is by far and away the biggest jailer in the world as shown by this league-table here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... ation_rate
Yet we are unlikely to ever get a similar rant directed at the US by Mr Hewer. Not very fair is it?

Jordan F wrote:I have to say I'm slightly surprised at today's outcome, just because I didn't really know how Wayne was as a player and how much he kept up since 1994, so very well done to him. Commiserations to Nick, I know how good of a player you can be, maybe just wasn't your day today.

Seconded.

Wayne was excellent on the letters rounds, more practise on the numbers and who knows how far he can go.

ENARGITE in round 2.

Wayne looks like a strong player, although his numbers let him down a bit. Anyone who's been wondering whether the scrabblers can compete with the apterites will surely have been answered after his performance today. Bad luck Nick, you came up against someone in red hot form.

Well played Wayne! It looked like it could go either way after the first half, but you pulled away very strongly in the end. Commiserations Nick, you were right in it for a while and unlucky that some of your letters declarations didn't pay off.

There's some Apto snobbery going on right here which is painful. Wayne's an elite Scrabble player. Elite Scrabble players are probably better at anagramming than elite Aptos. The judgment calls between dictionaries is the only factor in play, but seemingly it's a very surmountable obstacle. Well done Wayne, you were incredible. And tough luck Nick on just some rough bounces there. Especially the no-show six small, real momentum killer.

Mark Deeks wrote:There's some Apto snobbery going on right here which is painful.

Who?

The undertone (which is pretty overt to me) is, if you're not an Apterite, you're not a favourite. I get that the huge overlap between c4c and Apterous means that the respective skills of Aptos are better known to the c4c community, and that there is something of a burden of proof there, but I think it goes beyond that into elitism. It's not a shocker that a NATIONAL SCRABBLE CHAMPION is really freaking good at anagramming, and it's rather jarring to see people surprised at this.

Mark Deeks wrote:The undertone (which is pretty overt to me) is, if you're not an Apterite, you're not a favourite.

Is this a good time to mention the predict-o-matic had Kelly down as favourite in this one?

The best time.

Mark Deeks wrote:The undertone (which is pretty overt to me) is, if you're not an Apterite, you're not a favourite.

This isn't that unreasonable a thing to think, given how deeply in sync the top apterites are with the thoroughly unintuitive ODE, and how much difference a single mistake can make in this game. Quite a few other very high-profile Scrabblers have been on the show in recent years and lost their first game. Based on this (and probably not researching extensively into these two player's practising habits) it's hardly that illogical for people not to have expected this one to beat a recent series champion by 40 points. Give them a break.

I don't think the margin of victory was ever the issue in play here.

As I feel like I started all of this mess in the first place, I apologize for any arguments or debates this might have caused. It was just me expressing surprise because I've played Nick at his best, I know how good Nick can be. I knew nothing about Wayne, and I knew nothing about how he'd been keeping up with Countdown practice, or how he used his Scrabble training to effectively have the right words. Is there an apto-bias within me? Perhaps some, to be honest; but I think it's more based on my ignorance of how Scrabble players practice and prepare and the players themselves as opposed to Apterous where I've come to know at least 1/3rd of the people in this particular tournament and witness the way they can whoop my ass at Countdown in a second. Apologies for any perceived snobbery, I never meant to look down on any scrabblers, I just probably am ignorant to a lot of the other competitors in the field and their methods.

My aim here was to try and stop anything detracting from a great performance by a quality player. It appears I've had the opposite effect it appears so I'm gonna duck out now and go egosurf or something.

Wayne was always going to put up a hell of a fight in this one and- with all due respect to Nick who is obvioualy a hell of a player himself- I actually would've picked Wayne to win pre-game. As Mark says, elite Scrabble players get in a lot of anagramming practice and are always going to be able to pick out stonkingly good words- it's just a case of deciding whether or not they're valid that's the deciding factor. Webb/Francis next week should be a belter of a match.

It's also a little-known fact that Wayne's Countdown days actually predate his tourney Scrabble career.

Jordan F wrote:As I feel like I started all of this mess in the first place, I apologize for any arguments or debates this might have caused. It was just me expressing surprise because I've played Nick at his best, I know how good Nick can be. I knew nothing about Wayne, and I knew nothing about how he'd been keeping up with Countdown practice, or how he used his Scrabble training to effectively have the right words. Is there an apto-bias within me? Perhaps some, to be honest; but I think it's more based on my ignorance of how Scrabble players practice and prepare and the players themselves as opposed to Apterous where I've come to know at least 1/3rd of the people in this particular tournament and witness the way they can whoop my ass at Countdown in a second. Apologies for any perceived snobbery, I never meant to look down on any scrabblers, I just probably am ignorant to a lot of the other competitors in the field and their methods.

No apologies necessary, I didn't see any snobbery. I don't think anybody looks down on the Scrabble players, we all know how good they can be eg. Craig Beevers, one of the all time greats and brilliant in all areas of the game of Countdown, it would have been great to have seen him taking part too.

Strong performance, Wayne, and I was particularly impressed to see you not go for POUNCERS (is it valid in Countdown? If so this is even more impressive).

CORNUSES as a DC beater in round 1.

POUNCER(S) is invalid on Countdown, I was half expecting Wayne to go for that but it looks like he may have done some revision.

Jack Worsley wrote:POUNCER(S) is invalid on Countdown, I was half expecting Wayne to go for that but it looks like he may have done some revision.

I think it all came to prominence after Oliver Garner guessed it wrong in Series 62. Always remembered that it's not in ever since.

Excellent performance Wayne, unlucky Nick.

The standard has been really high so far, I'm really looking forward to the rest of the tournament.

I am hoping to see some 4L numbers games in the near future!

If you look very closely Rachel appears to take two different sets of 6 small numbers from the bottom row in the final numbers game - hopefully this was just a problem in editing!

James Robinson wrote:

Jack Worsley wrote:POUNCER(S) is invalid on Countdown, I was half expecting Wayne to go for that but it looks like he may have done some revision.

I think it all came to prominence after Oliver Garner guessed it wrong in Series 62. Always remembered that it's not in ever since.

They should put it back in, we all remember the episode of Only Fools and Horses where the Peckham Pouncer was mentioned.

3rd Numbers Alt.: (10 x 6 x 2 - 7) x 7 - 1 = 790. (Almost got this within the time but accidentally wrote down a plus instead of a minus at the end.)

Congrats Wayne, and good luck in Round One against Mark or Jack.

I shudder to think of how hard the conundrum in the grand final might be.

thanks for all the comments - went in with zero expectations as had not really watched the show since Richard died, and Scrabble took over as my word fix... I wanted to enjoy my experience as I never expected to be on again, and over various quiz shows through the years nothing holds as many wonderful memories as Countdown does. I had a great day and met some great people...

I've not done any specific study re Countdown except for asking Nick Deller is that word or this word valid! I had to play mainly on instinct having spotted Scrabble only DISTUNED* and COONTIE* as well as POUNCERS - I did chicken out of CORPUSES though and did not spot ALMIRAH even though that is Scrabble-valid too....

and in answer to Marcus's question - the second 6 small numbers game had the numbers repicked as they had not been shuffled and we had the same as in the first.

I got drawn Wayne in the sweepstake. I didn't think he'd do very well, but this game seems to have proven me wrong. Well done Wayne, hope you beat Mark/Jack!

Only just watched it on 4oD as I was working... I too was very impressed by your ability to completely be on top of any differences between the two lexicons. Re: 'the debate', I don't think anyone doubts scrabble players' abilities as such, but I for one would struggle with adapting to a new, more limited dictionary, as there is a lot of room for mistakes - maybe other apterous players feel the same way and thus the stereotypes arise. Analogy; a rugby union player playing rugby league for the first time, perhaps. Anyway, if that was all on instinct with very little practice with the ODE then you absolutely destroyed it. Impressive performance and I look forward to your next game, man.

Marcus Hares wrote:If you look very closely Rachel appears to take two different sets of 6 small numbers from the bottom row in the final numbers game - hopefully this was just a problem in editing!

What happened was, when she first picked the set and put them up, they were exactly the same six small numbers as in the previous game. So it was decided it was best to reshoot.

Just watched the episode back and it actually wasn't quite as bad a I remembered. Well played Wayne for what was a very comprehensive victory - all the more impressive knowing that you had done limited ODE specific practice. Although disappointing not to have played at my best, I'm glad for the opportunity to come back and as always the Countdown production team and presenters were very welcoming and approachable.

Good luck Wayne against Mark/Jack in the next round and to everyone else recording over the next few days.

Jordan F wrote:In a perfect world I would have liked to give a theme to the prelim match-ups, but the only clear theme I can see between these two competitors is the letter W, so we'll stick with that. One W is Wayne Kelly, who was the runner up of series 28, losing to some guy who may still be involved with the show a little. The other W is Nick Wainwright

How about the Wain/Wayne connection?

Jack Worsley wrote:POUNCER(S) is invalid on Countdown, I was half expecting Wayne to go for that but it looks like he may have done some revision.

I think Kirk actually meant Scrabble.

Johnny Canuck wrote:3rd Numbers Alt.: (10 x 6 x 2 - 7) x 7 - 1 = 790. (Almost got this within the time but accidentally wrote down a plus instead of a minus at the end.

I got it this way! Somehow sneaked the win sitting at home despite feeling a bit thrashed by Wayne, as I also got the first numbers and nicked the conundrum before him making 30 points. Is it the done thing these days to say you won at home? Fuck it, why not?

Thomas Carey wrote:I got drawn Wayne in the sweepstake. I didn't think he'd do very well, but this game seems to have proven me wrong. Well done Wayne, hope you beat Mark/Jack!

I had Wain in the sweepstake, so I'm out already!

With the Scrabble thing, I think not being quite as sure on the ODE words can make a difference especially against the very top players, but I don't think it would stop someone from being an 850+ octochamp (unless they came across someone also that good or better in their run) if they generally played solidly, and that sort of total would automatically make them competitive in most games.

Gavin Chipper wrote:

Jack Worsley wrote:POUNCER(S) is invalid on Countdown, I was half expecting Wayne to go for that but it looks like he may have done some revision.

I think Kirk actually meant Scrabble.

Ah yes, I did mean Scrabble. Good spot!

Preliminary 2 2020 Word Update

The max would have increased by 2 points (from 120 to 122) if played today thanks to 8's available in R8 & R11 that weren't around in 2013.

New Words Now Allowed:

R1: POUNCERS (ironically after both declared POUNCES)
R3: NOCIVE, OCTINE, OVONIC, TOONIE
R7: OCREATE, OCTAMER
R8: GALIPEES (New High MAX of 8 available)
R11: JUDDITES (New High MAX of 8 available)
R13: GARDIES, GASEITY, TRADIES

Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:01 pm

Johnny Canuck wrote:3rd Numbers Alt.: (10 x 6 x 2 - 7) x 7 - 1 = 790. (Almost got this within the time but accidentally wrote down a plus instead of a minus at the end.

I got it this way! Somehow sneaked the win sitting at home despite feeling a bit thrashed by Wayne, as I also got the first numbers and nicked the conundrum before him making 30 points. Is it the done thing these days to say you won at home? Fuck it, why not?

That's a shame because yesterday I failed to get either of these numbers (although I was still closer than the contestants) and didn't get the conundrum so I lost.