Rounds: Here.
Disclaimer: I attended the filming of this show some months back;
obviously this may lead to me recollecting some solutions that eluded me
at the time, and my scoreline is not necessarily a fair one.
Richard asks Brett what being a navy auditor involved; Brett explains that it was about ensuring compliance with defense regulations. No-one wants to see the dreaded auditor! He didn't go to sea, but did have occasion to visit ships when they were in port.
Challenging Brett is Toby Baldwin, a pathology aide and former audio engineer. Richard notes that this is an unusual transition, and asks what prompted it. Toby responds that it was a combination of things, but mostly being very tired from working long days and being away on the road, and he wanted a bit of stability in his life. His former job involved doing live engineering for bands, recording bands, and fixing a lot of equipment. Richard remarks that pathology is probably a lot quieter, and Toby agrees. He says that fixing humans tends to be a lot easier and a lot more pleasant. I'm not sure that surgeons would agree...
As I've mentioned earlier, I met Toby during the audition, and we caught up a little during the day. In fact, we caught a taxi to the studio together in the morning as there was some large confusion about taxi bookings which gave some extra enjoyable time to chat with him. He just barely outpointed me in the previous game (at the time), so I was particularly keen to win this one.
It's another close game, and Brett seems back in form again, which is a relief. Brett just barely has the better of the vowel-heavy letters rounds, while Toby fractionally outdoes him in the numbers, and the scores are level going into the conundrum. Once again both contestants see the answer quickly and buzz in at approximately the same time, but Toby got there first and wins with a score of 59 to 49.
For my part, I did much better than both; there were plenty of longer words to be found (much like my game against Brett). In fact, in the audience this was a game where I held my own against David and Lily in the main eight rounds; I don't recall what happened with the conundrum. This time I get it instantly, due to its appearance on Countdown, rather than a memory of this episode. Either way, a comfortable win to me, although I probably did a point better in the audience due to round 2.
As usual, details after the jump.
Showing posts with label Brett Edwards. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Brett Edwards. Show all posts
Friday, 2 December 2011
Thursday, 1 December 2011
Ep 329: Brett Edwards, Alicia Neilsen (December 1, 2011)
Rounds: Here.
Disclaimer: I attended the filming of this show some months back; obviously this may lead to me recollecting some solutions that eluded me at the time, and my scoreline is not necessarily a fair one.
Richard reveals that Brett is a Sherlock Holmes fan, and asks him what it is that he likes about Holmes. Brett says that it is his logical approach and reverse-engineering of things -- the deductive reasoning, as Richard puts it.
Tonight's challenger is Alicia Neilsen, an accountant who has an office on the 34th floor of the Rialto building in Melbourne. She has a window, too, with a view of the Yarra river and the MCG. Richard suggests that the view might be a little distracting, and she admits that sometimes it's good to just stare outside and let the mind process things.
Alicia seemed nice, but was giving out an unsettled vibe throughout the day. This shows up occasionally during the episode; I wish that I had been more reassuring at the time.
It's another very close game, but I'm afraid not in a good way. There's five invalid declarations made, and the words are mostly fives and sixes. Only one numbers round is scored, with a total nine away from the target. This is all rounded out by an unsolved conundrum, allowing Brett to limp to safety with a 24 to 18 victory -- both the lowest winning total and the lowest combined total of the series so far. Alicia very nearly defeated him; all she needed to do was to hold her head in the numbers rounds, but it was very much a case of the nerves getting to her.
Watching this game from the audience was more disheartening than losing the previous game. My score was slightly better this time as I could risk the nine, but both times I kept Alicia to seven points and Brett scoreless, with a total over 60. It was an extremely disappointing followup to what I shall immodestly call the game of the series so far.
As usual, details after the jump.
Disclaimer: I attended the filming of this show some months back; obviously this may lead to me recollecting some solutions that eluded me at the time, and my scoreline is not necessarily a fair one.
Richard reveals that Brett is a Sherlock Holmes fan, and asks him what it is that he likes about Holmes. Brett says that it is his logical approach and reverse-engineering of things -- the deductive reasoning, as Richard puts it.
Tonight's challenger is Alicia Neilsen, an accountant who has an office on the 34th floor of the Rialto building in Melbourne. She has a window, too, with a view of the Yarra river and the MCG. Richard suggests that the view might be a little distracting, and she admits that sometimes it's good to just stare outside and let the mind process things.
Alicia seemed nice, but was giving out an unsettled vibe throughout the day. This shows up occasionally during the episode; I wish that I had been more reassuring at the time.
It's another very close game, but I'm afraid not in a good way. There's five invalid declarations made, and the words are mostly fives and sixes. Only one numbers round is scored, with a total nine away from the target. This is all rounded out by an unsolved conundrum, allowing Brett to limp to safety with a 24 to 18 victory -- both the lowest winning total and the lowest combined total of the series so far. Alicia very nearly defeated him; all she needed to do was to hold her head in the numbers rounds, but it was very much a case of the nerves getting to her.
Watching this game from the audience was more disheartening than losing the previous game. My score was slightly better this time as I could risk the nine, but both times I kept Alicia to seven points and Brett scoreless, with a total over 60. It was an extremely disappointing followup to what I shall immodestly call the game of the series so far.
As usual, details after the jump.
Wednesday, 30 November 2011
Ep 328: Geoff Bailey, Brett Edwards (November 30, 2011)
Rounds: Here.
Disclaimer: I was a contestant on this episode. Obviously there are some parts I will remember strongly and my scoreline cannot remotely be considered a fair representation. I'll frequently refer to my past self in the third person, to avoid having to clarify all the time whether I mean my current or past performance.
We're running out of things to talk about, so Richard remarks to me that "you and your partner were actually youth champions in a very different area many years ago." As I heard him make that comment it struck me that it was misinterpretable (I worried that I might have left it similarly unclear when I submitted my checklist of points to talk about, but on checking I see that I did say "bridge partner" in my email), and I perhaps put a little too much emphasis into pointing out that it was my bridge partner. Together, we won the NSW State Youth Pairs bridge competition (which honestly involved a lot of luck, but I didn't manage to point that out very clearly); we then accepted the invitation to the Nationals and the more sensible order of things asserted itself as we got crushed, eventually finishing in 25th place (out of 26 pairs).
Tonight's challenger is Brett Edwards, a retired navy auditor, and his last appearance on TV was back in the eighties, on The Krypton Factor. Richard describes it as an ABC quiz show, but I think it was the New Zealand version (which the ABC did air, admittedly). It involved five different activities -- a mixture of mental and physical exertion -- and Brett got through to the semifinals, coming second to the eventual winner.
Brett was a bit of a dark horse leading up to this game; he tried to downplay his ability, but at the same point it was clear that he was doing well in the letters. His numerical abilities were unclear, although I thought I should have the edge if things got difficult.
It's an extremely close game; neither contestant can get clear of the other although David found longer words in four of the five rounds. The numbers prove unchallenging and it takes until round 7 before a split emerges, as Brett sees an eight that turns out to be riskier than he thought, and Geoff's seven gives him the lead going into the conundrum. But the conundrum is too easy, and Brett wins the buzzer race to squeak home by 66 to 63 -- the highest combined total of the series so far.
Geoff leaves after four shows with an average of over 60 points a game, but will it be enough to reach the finals? We'll find out in 65 more games...
This time around I do vastly better, of course -- every letters round is etched into my memory. As usual, I'd not remembered the numbers rounds; they were too easy in any case, negating my perceived better ability there. Brett used the challenger's advantage to good effect.
As usual, details after the jump.
Disclaimer: I was a contestant on this episode. Obviously there are some parts I will remember strongly and my scoreline cannot remotely be considered a fair representation. I'll frequently refer to my past self in the third person, to avoid having to clarify all the time whether I mean my current or past performance.
We're running out of things to talk about, so Richard remarks to me that "you and your partner were actually youth champions in a very different area many years ago." As I heard him make that comment it struck me that it was misinterpretable (I worried that I might have left it similarly unclear when I submitted my checklist of points to talk about, but on checking I see that I did say "bridge partner" in my email), and I perhaps put a little too much emphasis into pointing out that it was my bridge partner. Together, we won the NSW State Youth Pairs bridge competition (which honestly involved a lot of luck, but I didn't manage to point that out very clearly); we then accepted the invitation to the Nationals and the more sensible order of things asserted itself as we got crushed, eventually finishing in 25th place (out of 26 pairs).
Tonight's challenger is Brett Edwards, a retired navy auditor, and his last appearance on TV was back in the eighties, on The Krypton Factor. Richard describes it as an ABC quiz show, but I think it was the New Zealand version (which the ABC did air, admittedly). It involved five different activities -- a mixture of mental and physical exertion -- and Brett got through to the semifinals, coming second to the eventual winner.
Brett was a bit of a dark horse leading up to this game; he tried to downplay his ability, but at the same point it was clear that he was doing well in the letters. His numerical abilities were unclear, although I thought I should have the edge if things got difficult.
It's an extremely close game; neither contestant can get clear of the other although David found longer words in four of the five rounds. The numbers prove unchallenging and it takes until round 7 before a split emerges, as Brett sees an eight that turns out to be riskier than he thought, and Geoff's seven gives him the lead going into the conundrum. But the conundrum is too easy, and Brett wins the buzzer race to squeak home by 66 to 63 -- the highest combined total of the series so far.
Geoff leaves after four shows with an average of over 60 points a game, but will it be enough to reach the finals? We'll find out in 65 more games...
This time around I do vastly better, of course -- every letters round is etched into my memory. As usual, I'd not remembered the numbers rounds; they were too easy in any case, negating my perceived better ability there. Brett used the challenger's advantage to good effect.
As usual, details after the jump.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)