Seamy
Countdown Catch-Up:
Preparation for the show
Arriving in the studio
So there I was. The mascot my 6-yr-old and I had picked out (a teddy bear with FELIX embroidered on its bottom by his nan) was under the desk rather than on it, after I realised at the last minute that such things were banned. I was sitting rigidly still in an attempt to keep clothing, pendant chains and rustly noises under control.
I guess I should explain here how Countdown works. There are 15 rounds altogether: Three numbers rounds, one conundrum, and the rest are letters rounds.
For the letters, you get nine randomly selected letters consisting of at least three vowels and four consonants, and the contestants take it in turns to decide whether the final two letters are vowels or consonants. You then have 30 seconds to create as long a word as possible.
For the conundrum, you have 30 seconds to solve a nine-letter anagram.
For the numbers, you get six randomly selected numbers between 1 and 100, and one randomly selected 3-digit number. You use the six smaller numbers to create an expression, using only the four standard arithmetical operators (+, -, x, /), which equates to the 3-figure number. You have 30 seconds to do this. Contestants take it in turns to decide how many of the six smaller numbers will be "large", up to a maximum of 4 large. The large numbers are 25, 50, 75 and 100. If you choose 4 large, you know you will have those four numbers. Any less, and you know only that you will get a subset of those four. My opponent favoured "six small", which means no large numbers at all - the largest number available is 10. You have to get within 10 of the target, with a sliding scale of scores according to how close you get.
I knew (from watching the previous episode) that my opponent was likely to choose 6 small. I'd practised all possible numbers combinations, and the two I found the hardest were 4 large and 6 small. But I preferred 6 small. Indeed I kind of liked it as a neat intellectual exercise, but in terms of winning the game... it didn't bode well. So I came up with an idea. I thought I might try a bit of gamesmanship. My plan was to breeze in that morning and say to Shane, "Oh, I see you like 6 small? Me too! It's so satisfying. It's my favourite. I never normally choose it though, because statistically you have a lower chance of achieving the exact target."
The statistical thing is true. It's also true that I find 6 small satisfying. But I'm not actually that good at it. My theory was that he was choosing 6 small in an attempt to outdo his opponents, most of whom would flounder. But if he thought that I was unfazed by it, he might change his strategy. Of course the risk was that he would choose 4 large instead, in which case I would be scuppered and serve me right. Anyway, I hadn't managed to spout my little spiel at him that morning, so I'd given up on it. But then at the beginning of the programme there we were, sitting around doing nothing while the technical staff did their stuff, nobody to talk to but each other... so I did it. I gave him my rehearsed line. He seemed interested. I hoped it might work.
And then there was the chat with Jeff, and me saying morning instead of afternoon, and then I was picking letters. I tried to remember the guidelines, which specify to say please on the first and last letters, but not the ones in the middle (they get complaints about too many pleases... but also too few). I'm not sure I got it right, but anyway. Rachel was smiley and encouraging, and this was the selection:
D A P E T N V E O
For this bit of the post, I'll put the answers found by me, my opponent and dictionary corner (a lexicographer and daily celebrity guest) in blue text on a blue background. Just highlight them, and they'll suddenly become visible. That way, you can play along as you read.
Solutions:
I saw DEVOTE. I was worried because it was only 6 letters, so it was a relief when Shane declared 6 too. He had PEDANT. I've since checked using various software tools, and I think the best words available were 7-letterers such as ADOPTEE, PENTODE and TONEPAD.
Phew. My first round, and I scored. 6 points each.
And so we moved on to another letters round, which gave us the following selection:
D O R S E A L N I
Solutions: I saw SLANDER. I had a feeling there might be an 8-letterer in there, but if there was I couldn't see it. Shane declared 7, which was a relief. He had seen SANDIER.
When Shane declared SANDIER, I groaned quietly. SANDIER was one of the 52 7-letter stems I had been revising the night before. There was a good chance there was at least one 8-letter word hiding in there somewhere. And then dictionary corner said it: ISLANDER. At which point I was already scanning the letters to see what the remaining letter was: O. SANDIER + O = ANEROIDS. And I've since spotted another of my 7-letter stems in the selection, which is NAILERS. NAILERS + O = AILERONS, and NAILERS + D = ISLANDER.
This was a blow, and one of the things I'd been most afraid of: That after all the hours spent revising my stems, one of them would come up in the game and I would miss it altogether. It wasn't so bad, as Shane hadn't spotted any of those 8s either, but still my confidence dipped. The scores were still equal: 13 points each.
Another letters round. I asked for my usual pattern: five consonants and four vowels, alternating between them. I listened to myself as I spoke to Rachel. I was worried I sounded a little imperious, but I wanted to sound clear as well. This time we got the following selection:
D I N A C O Y U B
Solutions: At first I saw BAND, and then I managed CANDY. I looked desperately for a 6, but I couldn't see one. I didn't feel very confident when I announced that I had five letters, and with reason: Shane had CUBOID, for six. We could also have had BOUNCY.
So Shane went into the lead, with 19 points to my 13.
We were left with one final letters round in this segment (the programme lasts 45 minutes, in three 15-minute segments), and got the following selection:
H I M E A S S T E
Solutions: I was writing each set of letters down twice on my piece of paper: Once in a circle, and once in a 3-by-3 grid (following a technique outlined in Mark Tournoff's book, where common letters such as I, E, S, T and D are always put in the same place). This meant I spotted the potential -IEST ending very quickly. Not long after, I saw SEAMIEST. I thought it would probably be OK, as I know SEAMY is a word (it means a kind of a cross between seedy and steamy). I also reasoned - wrongly, as it happens - that because SEAM is only one syllable, therefore you can stick IEST on the end. Actually the rule is that one-syllable adjectives may always have ER and EST appended (eg GREENER, GREENEST). But anyway SEAMIEST was in the dictionary, and I had the extra satisfaction of Susie not knowing the word SEAMY, and Shane only finding a 7-letter word (which I didn't write down, and have forgotten).
Hurrah! I'd gone into the lead! 21 points for me, whereas Shane was stuck on 19 points. This was a satisfying moment.
Next came a numbers round. It was Shane's turn to pick: Would he choose 6 small?
Bother. Yes, he would. But they looked quite promising as they contained a 10, and the target was small:
8, 10, 5, 8, 5 and 7, with a target of 105.
Solutions: It looked as though it would be easy. All I had to do was add the 5s together to make another 10, multiply it by the first 10... and then find another 5. Ah.
And thus I spent most of the 30 seconds, with increasing desperation, trying - and failing - to get 5 from 8, 8 and 7. What's worse is that it's since been pointed out to me that I could have done ((8+7-5)x10)+5 or ((8+8-5)x10)-5. So I messed up in all directions.
All I could manage was a target of 106, arrived at thus:
(10 x (5+5)) + 7 - (8/8) = 106
Would Shane have reached the target, or did he - like me - get stuck?
He declared 105. Bother. But maybe he'd make an error in his calculations?
No such luck. I couldn't believe it. This is what he did:
(7 x (8-5)) x 5 = 105.
The worst thing about this is its simplicity. I could easily have found it, and if I was sitting relaxed at home, I probably would have done. I'd have seen that I was getting nowhere with the 10, and tried something else instead. But there, in the studio, in panic mode... I didn't think straight.
This really smashed my confidence. The numbers rounds are my favourite rounds. I'm supposed to be good at them, and the worst thing was that I could easily have solved this. I was furious with myself.
But anyway. it was time for the first ad break, and the score was 21 to me, 29 to him.
I had made two stupid mistakes so far, but I was only 8 points behind. I could easily catch up. I had to put it behind me and move on.
Before each ad break, they have a "teatime teaser" - which is an 8-letter anagram with a clue. I haven't written the clue down, but the letters were BASHRIND, and the answer was BRANDISH. I got it before I finished writing the letters down, and this cheered me a little.
The technical staff did whatever it is they do, the warm-up guy kept the audience happy, and Shane and I chatted to each other. I was anxious for him to know that I wasn't stupid, just nervous. That I had got distracted by the 10 in that last numbers game, and failed to try other strategies. Bless him, he was really sympathetic. It turned out we both had maths degrees. But I still felt ashamed for having missed such a simple solution.
Ah well. Time for the "second half", as Richard Whiteley used to call it.
[continued here, here, here and here]
Preparation for the show
Arriving in the studio
So there I was. The mascot my 6-yr-old and I had picked out (a teddy bear with FELIX embroidered on its bottom by his nan) was under the desk rather than on it, after I realised at the last minute that such things were banned. I was sitting rigidly still in an attempt to keep clothing, pendant chains and rustly noises under control.
I guess I should explain here how Countdown works. There are 15 rounds altogether: Three numbers rounds, one conundrum, and the rest are letters rounds.
For the letters, you get nine randomly selected letters consisting of at least three vowels and four consonants, and the contestants take it in turns to decide whether the final two letters are vowels or consonants. You then have 30 seconds to create as long a word as possible.
For the conundrum, you have 30 seconds to solve a nine-letter anagram.
For the numbers, you get six randomly selected numbers between 1 and 100, and one randomly selected 3-digit number. You use the six smaller numbers to create an expression, using only the four standard arithmetical operators (+, -, x, /), which equates to the 3-figure number. You have 30 seconds to do this. Contestants take it in turns to decide how many of the six smaller numbers will be "large", up to a maximum of 4 large. The large numbers are 25, 50, 75 and 100. If you choose 4 large, you know you will have those four numbers. Any less, and you know only that you will get a subset of those four. My opponent favoured "six small", which means no large numbers at all - the largest number available is 10. You have to get within 10 of the target, with a sliding scale of scores according to how close you get.
I knew (from watching the previous episode) that my opponent was likely to choose 6 small. I'd practised all possible numbers combinations, and the two I found the hardest were 4 large and 6 small. But I preferred 6 small. Indeed I kind of liked it as a neat intellectual exercise, but in terms of winning the game... it didn't bode well. So I came up with an idea. I thought I might try a bit of gamesmanship. My plan was to breeze in that morning and say to Shane, "Oh, I see you like 6 small? Me too! It's so satisfying. It's my favourite. I never normally choose it though, because statistically you have a lower chance of achieving the exact target."
The statistical thing is true. It's also true that I find 6 small satisfying. But I'm not actually that good at it. My theory was that he was choosing 6 small in an attempt to outdo his opponents, most of whom would flounder. But if he thought that I was unfazed by it, he might change his strategy. Of course the risk was that he would choose 4 large instead, in which case I would be scuppered and serve me right. Anyway, I hadn't managed to spout my little spiel at him that morning, so I'd given up on it. But then at the beginning of the programme there we were, sitting around doing nothing while the technical staff did their stuff, nobody to talk to but each other... so I did it. I gave him my rehearsed line. He seemed interested. I hoped it might work.
And then there was the chat with Jeff, and me saying morning instead of afternoon, and then I was picking letters. I tried to remember the guidelines, which specify to say please on the first and last letters, but not the ones in the middle (they get complaints about too many pleases... but also too few). I'm not sure I got it right, but anyway. Rachel was smiley and encouraging, and this was the selection:
D A P E T N V E O
For this bit of the post, I'll put the answers found by me, my opponent and dictionary corner (a lexicographer and daily celebrity guest) in blue text on a blue background. Just highlight them, and they'll suddenly become visible. That way, you can play along as you read.
Solutions:
I saw DEVOTE. I was worried because it was only 6 letters, so it was a relief when Shane declared 6 too. He had PEDANT. I've since checked using various software tools, and I think the best words available were 7-letterers such as ADOPTEE, PENTODE and TONEPAD.
Phew. My first round, and I scored. 6 points each.
And so we moved on to another letters round, which gave us the following selection:
D O R S E A L N I
Solutions: I saw SLANDER. I had a feeling there might be an 8-letterer in there, but if there was I couldn't see it. Shane declared 7, which was a relief. He had seen SANDIER.
When Shane declared SANDIER, I groaned quietly. SANDIER was one of the 52 7-letter stems I had been revising the night before. There was a good chance there was at least one 8-letter word hiding in there somewhere. And then dictionary corner said it: ISLANDER. At which point I was already scanning the letters to see what the remaining letter was: O. SANDIER + O = ANEROIDS. And I've since spotted another of my 7-letter stems in the selection, which is NAILERS. NAILERS + O = AILERONS, and NAILERS + D = ISLANDER.
This was a blow, and one of the things I'd been most afraid of: That after all the hours spent revising my stems, one of them would come up in the game and I would miss it altogether. It wasn't so bad, as Shane hadn't spotted any of those 8s either, but still my confidence dipped. The scores were still equal: 13 points each.
Another letters round. I asked for my usual pattern: five consonants and four vowels, alternating between them. I listened to myself as I spoke to Rachel. I was worried I sounded a little imperious, but I wanted to sound clear as well. This time we got the following selection:
D I N A C O Y U B
Solutions: At first I saw BAND, and then I managed CANDY. I looked desperately for a 6, but I couldn't see one. I didn't feel very confident when I announced that I had five letters, and with reason: Shane had CUBOID, for six. We could also have had BOUNCY.
So Shane went into the lead, with 19 points to my 13.
We were left with one final letters round in this segment (the programme lasts 45 minutes, in three 15-minute segments), and got the following selection:
H I M E A S S T E
Solutions: I was writing each set of letters down twice on my piece of paper: Once in a circle, and once in a 3-by-3 grid (following a technique outlined in Mark Tournoff's book, where common letters such as I, E, S, T and D are always put in the same place). This meant I spotted the potential -IEST ending very quickly. Not long after, I saw SEAMIEST. I thought it would probably be OK, as I know SEAMY is a word (it means a kind of a cross between seedy and steamy). I also reasoned - wrongly, as it happens - that because SEAM is only one syllable, therefore you can stick IEST on the end. Actually the rule is that one-syllable adjectives may always have ER and EST appended (eg GREENER, GREENEST). But anyway SEAMIEST was in the dictionary, and I had the extra satisfaction of Susie not knowing the word SEAMY, and Shane only finding a 7-letter word (which I didn't write down, and have forgotten).
Hurrah! I'd gone into the lead! 21 points for me, whereas Shane was stuck on 19 points. This was a satisfying moment.
Next came a numbers round. It was Shane's turn to pick: Would he choose 6 small?
Bother. Yes, he would. But they looked quite promising as they contained a 10, and the target was small:
8, 10, 5, 8, 5 and 7, with a target of 105.
Solutions: It looked as though it would be easy. All I had to do was add the 5s together to make another 10, multiply it by the first 10... and then find another 5. Ah.
And thus I spent most of the 30 seconds, with increasing desperation, trying - and failing - to get 5 from 8, 8 and 7. What's worse is that it's since been pointed out to me that I could have done ((8+7-5)x10)+5 or ((8+8-5)x10)-5. So I messed up in all directions.
All I could manage was a target of 106, arrived at thus:
(10 x (5+5)) + 7 - (8/8) = 106
Would Shane have reached the target, or did he - like me - get stuck?
He declared 105. Bother. But maybe he'd make an error in his calculations?
No such luck. I couldn't believe it. This is what he did:
(7 x (8-5)) x 5 = 105.
The worst thing about this is its simplicity. I could easily have found it, and if I was sitting relaxed at home, I probably would have done. I'd have seen that I was getting nowhere with the 10, and tried something else instead. But there, in the studio, in panic mode... I didn't think straight.
This really smashed my confidence. The numbers rounds are my favourite rounds. I'm supposed to be good at them, and the worst thing was that I could easily have solved this. I was furious with myself.
But anyway. it was time for the first ad break, and the score was 21 to me, 29 to him.
I had made two stupid mistakes so far, but I was only 8 points behind. I could easily catch up. I had to put it behind me and move on.
Before each ad break, they have a "teatime teaser" - which is an 8-letter anagram with a clue. I haven't written the clue down, but the letters were BASHRIND, and the answer was BRANDISH. I got it before I finished writing the letters down, and this cheered me a little.
The technical staff did whatever it is they do, the warm-up guy kept the audience happy, and Shane and I chatted to each other. I was anxious for him to know that I wasn't stupid, just nervous. That I had got distracted by the 10 in that last numbers game, and failed to try other strategies. Bless him, he was really sympathetic. It turned out we both had maths degrees. But I still felt ashamed for having missed such a simple solution.
Ah well. Time for the "second half", as Richard Whiteley used to call it.
[continued here, here, here and here]