Tuesday, 8 August 2017

NG 977

New game 977 is now available.


Anonymous said...

Hi Geoff, I haven't commented here for a long time, but after watching tonight's quarter final, wanted to check something with you.
The conundrum was DILIGENCE, but I worked out CEILINGED. I thought there wouldnt have two results for a cunundrum. What would have happened if either came up with CEILINGED?

Anonymous said...

Nope - not accepted by the Macquarie. Sorry

Mike Backhouse said...

Hi Jan.

(6-2)*50+8/2+7=211 (2 off) then after time (7-2)*(50-8)+6/2=213
5*10*(6-1+5)=500 (2 off)

Geoff Bailey said...

Nice to hear from you again, Jan!

As you've noticed, CEILINGED is not listed in the Macquarie (fifth edition) as an adjective, nor is CEILING listed as a verb. So CEILINGED is not valid for the show's purposes, and a contestant who tried it would be scored incorrect. The closest the show has come to this in practice, I think, is episode 256, where Rebecca Skovron found the word UNDERFLOW instead of the intended WONDERFUL. Sadly for her, the Macquarie (fifth edition) did not list that.

The conundrums are supposed to be unique, but if they do slip up I believe that they would accept the alternative answer (and then perhaps yell at whoever creates the conundrums for missing that). I'm only aware of one instance where they have had multiple potential solutions, in episode 87, where the intended answer was SPECULATE but PECULATES is also valid. Presumably they were using the Target checker at the time, which rejects verb forms ending in S.