Octopus of Odstock 2,203 Posted January 16, 2009 Updated for the late Sir John, though the main news sources haven't stated the date of death. Wiki are reporting today and I'm assuming the early hours and, therefore, awarding 349 points. Raskolnikov now emerging as the strongest challenger to Eejit, and look at the surge from our Manx Minx, from nowhere to 700 points in a couple of days. Shouldn't I have about 700 points too? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maryportfuncity 10,657 Posted January 16, 2009 Yeah, if you look at the first post you'll see the scoreboard, your 711 pts clearly in view, leading the chasing pack still in three figures. One decent death amongst the 18 left on your team will put you amongst the leaders. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Raskolnikov 0 Posted January 16, 2009 Just a minor observation. McGoohan died on the 13th not the 14th, so CarolAnn should have an extra point. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maryportfuncity 10,657 Posted January 16, 2009 Sorted! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarolAnn 926 Posted January 16, 2009 Just a minor observation. McGoohan died on the 13th not the 14th, so CarolAnn should have an extra point. Why thank you, sir. You are a gentleman and a scholar. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grobler 35 Posted January 16, 2009 glad to see i'm on the scoreboard at last Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maryportfuncity 10,657 Posted January 18, 2009 And what a race it is, Hart's end changes things bigtime in the podium places, Raskolnikov inching a mere 23 points ahead of Eejit and putting himself within one death of victory. Crucially, should said death be a case like Susan Atkins - picked by Eejit and Raskolnikov - outright victory would go to the player with the most overall points. More deft jokerage is in evidence with Anubis storming to a clear third on the basis of double points for Morph's mate. We could have us a winner within the week at this rate! Go well Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eejit 9 Posted January 18, 2009 I'm so nervous that I can't eat or sleep. Raskolnikov has a fantastic team, so I think that my moment in the spotlight may be already over. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maryportfuncity 10,657 Posted January 18, 2009 Well, to the neutral and/or one hopelessly off the front-end pace it's a gripping spectacle. I wouldn't rule yourself out totally yet Eejit. Tanabe, Allingham and Castro could give you outright victory and the announcement of any of those deaths wouldn't be a complete shock. Go well Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eejit 9 Posted January 18, 2009 I know, I shouldn't have believed the early hype though. My mother is going to be devastated now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maryportfuncity 10,657 Posted January 20, 2009 Amended for Bert Hazell, which takes Grobler to 1050 points. The one local paper report was enough for points but it doesn't specify date of death. I'm assuming 14th on the basis that the newspaper report is timed late morning on the 15th. If anyone knows different post the proof and I'll adjust the points accordingly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Octopus of Odstock 2,203 Posted January 20, 2009 Amended for Bert Hazell, which takes Grobler to 1050 points. The one local paper report was enough for points but it doesn't specify date of death. I'm assuming 14th on the basis that the newspaper report is timed late morning on the 15th. If anyone knows different post the proof and I'll adjust the points accordingly. It was the 11th of January sezs Wikipedia - not seen anything yet to confirm that, mind. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eejit 9 Posted January 20, 2009 I got quite excited to see the latest news on Sen. Ted Kennedy, but now notice that Raskolnikov has him too. I now find myself in the position where I'm hoping that one of my suggestions does not pass away Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rotten Ali 600 Posted January 20, 2009 At this rate it will be all over before I've got a single hit! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grobler 35 Posted January 20, 2009 At this rate it will be all over before I've got a single hit! Nah....you have plenty of prime candidates there...apart from "Maggie the Great One " of course (which was a REALLY silly pick) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maryportfuncity 10,657 Posted January 20, 2009 Amended for Bert Hazell, which takes Grobler to 1050 points. The one local paper report was enough for points but it doesn't specify date of death. I'm assuming 14th on the basis that the newspaper report is timed late morning on the 15th. If anyone knows different post the proof and I'll adjust the points accordingly. It was the 11th of January sezs Wikipedia - not seen anything yet to confirm that, mind. Yeah, I saw that but the paper timing their report in the morning led me to think the 14th. Still, on reflection, I'll add a few more points. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarolAnn 926 Posted January 21, 2009 You know, on reflection, and not that I'm volunteering or anything, but this could be a great monthly contest. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maryportfuncity 10,657 Posted January 21, 2009 Yeah, but an obvious problem is that if we opened it to new entries every month it would just be a mad scramble made up of the same low hanging fruit on every team. Also, the 2009 figure works well if the points start really high - based on the remaining days of the year. Let's see how this ends first, but this would need modification to work on a month - like maybe ten times the remaining days in terms of points. So, if it's February, anyone dying on the first scores 270 points etc. Personally, I think insisting on DDP teams keeps a level playing field. But there's also a bias because it makes management easier, for example making double checking on details of deaths etc fairly easy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarolAnn 926 Posted January 22, 2009 Yeah, but an obvious problem is that if we opened it to new entries every month it would just be a mad scramble made up of the same low hanging fruit on every team. Also, the 2009 figure works well if the points start really high - based on the remaining days of the year. Let's see how this ends first, but this would need modification to work on a month - like maybe ten times the remaining days in terms of points. So, if it's February, anyone dying on the first scores 270 points etc. Personally, I think insisting on DDP teams keeps a level playing field. But there's also a bias because it makes management easier, for example making double checking on details of deaths etc fairly easy. I didn't mean with new teams. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maryportfuncity 10,657 Posted January 22, 2009 Hmmm, so how does it work then? We forget all deaths before the month and only count those in the calender month, awarding points for the remaining month days based on the remaining days of the month x10? And wipe the slate clean every month? So - for example - my team march into February 18 strong, minus Bill Stone and Dai Llewellyn? Would be interesting, because the early winners would be short on team members to die by the middle of the year, and the early losers could have brilliant months later on. Also, do you open it up to other DDP teams, like those who've regretted not entering? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarolAnn 926 Posted January 22, 2009 Hmmm, so how does it work then? We forget all deaths before the month and only count those in the calender month, awarding points for the remaining month days based on the remaining days of the month x10? And wipe the slate clean every month? So - for example - my team march into February 18 strong, minus Bill Stone and Dai Llewellyn? Would be interesting, because the early winners would be short on team members to die by the middle of the year, and the early losers could have brilliant months later on. Also, do you open it up to other DDP teams, like those who've regretted not entering? Yes, yes and no. Adding new teams through the year would be too much like work. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maryportfuncity 10,657 Posted January 23, 2009 Aye, that sounds workable. Though it could usefully be renamed 'Deathrace' because there are bound to be months when nobody hits 2009 points. Bear in mind the points awarded will drop quickly, anyone copping it at the end of the month will be worth one thirtieth of the front runners, so the tension in terms winning might be lacking sometimes. Two neck and neck leaders on the other hand, could be decided by a last minute winner. If it's that easy to do.........just an idea, like........should one of us draw up a set of rules and then punt it out to tender? If everyone is in agreement we could rotate the management of the whole scheme. Passing on an increasingly small masterlist to new posters every month. It wouldn't be like hard work for anyone. What do our readers think? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarolAnn 926 Posted January 24, 2009 Oh yeah, the 2009 points thing was brilliance for January, but I would think that for February onward it would just be whoever got the most points from their DDP list. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eejit 9 Posted January 24, 2009 Maybe we got a bit carried away. The way things have been going over the last week or so, there'll be no winner in January. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarolAnn 926 Posted January 24, 2009 It can start from whatever month is after whoever reaches 2009 points for the first contest. Whatever. It was just a thought. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites