Maximum – 100points
- 94 – Alexander Hoh, Andre Teh, Gary Guna, Rosemawani A Rahman
- 89 – Muhammad Razif, Darmataksiah Abai,Hanna Hamizah Muhammad Razif, Sam Rahman
- 87 – KK Chai, Margaret Sha, Chong Voon Kit, Woo Ee Wen
- 85 – Dato’ Ramesh, Liew Kok Seng, Chong Foo Seong, Lim Kong Yew
- 85 – Wong Chiang Chuen, Claire Chin, Julie Tan, Goh Teck Koon
- 83 – Johan Salul, Dr. Ben , Kheirul Nazib, Aziz A. Rahman
- 82 – Salehuddin Yusof, Mohd Asri, Mazri Muda, Rozaman Ismail.
- 77 – Pirabarkaran, Navamalar, Sivakumar, Lim Chuan Leng
- 76 – Venka, Eeswaran, Kumaran, Simon
- 75 – Yeah Heng Boon, Ho King Mun, Ho Mun Yee, Janet Tan
Teams were required to explain their answers for the treasures. If teams get the right treasure but fail to explain why they brought in that treasure they only get 3 out of 6 points for treasure.
What’s your opinion about this new development?
Can anyone please email me the Q&As for this hunt? Would love to analyse route Qs, but especially the treasure Qs.
Interesting development on treasures. Can’t comment until I see the nature of the treasure clues. But how many teams were there, Mike? Was there a time limit for the explanations?
[Reply]
Mike Reply:
January 11th, 2010 at 10:36 pm
Bro, I didn’t take part. I don’t know how many teams.
[Reply]
CK Loh Reply:
January 12th, 2010 at 8:46 am
Ckoh, there are 34 teams participated, 12 teams are official master teams in TOS book, and there are at least 5 very strong regular teams there, if not more. A good turnout I would say.
On the explanations, I think there is meant to the F&N Cool Ice Cream Soda treasure clue, where the COC expected not every team can explain leaders of Zulu inmates = ICE. According to the COC in the Q&A, the champion team is the only team that get full scores of 30 points for treasure, although base on the scoring given I would guess more than 1 team submits perfect treasure.
I would think that most probably, the COC have reached his objective. However, since this is started, I would say, I am fine with this latest development of explanation in treasure clues.
However, in this particular hunt I am not really happy in the implementation. Our team have 9 points missing due to the explanations haven’t been marked, after a second check with the COC, and cost us top 8 positions with the 9 points left unmarked.
The missing nine points is due to our team write all the explanations at the back page of the treasure clues, as in the briefing, Zahrol mentioned, teams can do that, if not enough space to write in the small box given. We did exactly that, and somehow the COC or his marshal fail to look on the back page of the explanation, and assume that we didn’t write it at all.
However, since there is no difference in the prizes, it doesn’t really matter to the COC, although I feel that the COC create more opportunity to tabulate the wrong scores by doing this. What happen if it involves higher prizes, will the COC top up the remaining balance from his own pocket, due to wrongly mark the subjective explanation? If yes, why he wants to introduce something that will risk him making mistakes in points tabulation?
Reason I said this is the COC might think that the participants explanation is incorrect as he have different explanation. But, what if the participants can prove that their explanations also valid, and the COCs overlook the logic of the answer. Then how?
[Reply]
Someone has since informed me that the explanations were to be written, as opposed to be made orally, on the question sheets themselves.
I think this opens up the door to further disputes—as to what constitutes a correct and complete explanation. Maybe the former is easier to establish, but the latter is a bit more complicated. So what’s next, perhaps the requirement of explaining the answers to route Qs too?
Personally, I am not a big fan of such a format. In fact, I think the CoC is inviting trouble, and this format can give rise to a great deal of injustice.
My 2 cents’ worth.
[Reply]
CK Loh Reply:
January 12th, 2010 at 9:34 am
Another point is, the Q&A suppose to start at 3pm, 1.5 hours after the hunt ends according to the original schedule.
However, not sure whether this is the root cause, but the Q&A actually start much more later than that, maybe 1 hours later, and that also due to Johan volunteer to help the COC to do the Q&A presentation whilst the COC still tabulating the scores.
I guess, with the explanations, it will impact in a way to prolong the waiting time for Q&A presentations which is not a really good idea for a non-overnight hunt. I aware that there is a mid point control, but I personally feel that it doesn’t really help in this hunt. With explanations, the COCs really need to spend some time to check every single explanations written in bad hand writing for some, is properly check.
[Reply]
I remember TOS already done this before, long time ago in their time out challange from Subang to Kuantan. There was a several check point and participant was given a picture clue at every check point. Then from the picture given we have to solve one treasure and also required to explain in writing. I’m not really sure but if I’m not mistaken no point if you fail to explain correctly even you bring a correct treasure. (if someone can recall please correct me if I’m wrong)
[Reply]