Sunday, April 18, 2010

KK Challenge 6

The KK Challenge 6 is by far the most successful of the KK Challenge series. Actually, I have assembled a larger crowd in one of the past KK Challenges, but in terms of quality of participation, KK Challenge 6 is most certainly the winner!

Over the last couple of days, after the article of this treasure hunt appeared in the Daily Express, I received quite a number of calls from people interested to join, but I had to reluctantly reject because the venue of the hunt was simply too small.

I started the hunt with what I thought was a mild clue:

Q1) Inside here, we notice the business name.

A1) E'WEN (Unisex) Hair & Beauty Saloon

Yet I was surprised to note that most of the teams, including the regular ones, were stumped! Maybe they were somewhat rusty from lack of hunts; maybe it was a case of blind spot. But later on, still early in the game, I had another surprise—a number of teams got stuck with this clue:

Q) Di pulau ini kuda kepang lompat tinggi.


I didn't think that questions in this hunt were impossibly tough to solve. I gave some easy ones too, like:

Q12) Sudah tentulah sakit jika kepala dan ekornya dipotong!


A treasure question and its intended solution caused something of a stir during the presentation. I gave a bit of leeway to the audience to debate for a short moment, but in the end, I cut short the debate with my CoC's authority (smile), and promised to discuss it here in this blog. Check out the clue:

I need some food to fill my stomach
Something forbidden in the Garden of Eden
The red kind, not green, for the full mark
Submit both for 5 points in return

I think I can safely assume that most of you would know that we are talking about apples. But the debate was mainly because of the last 2 lines. What do you think am I asking for?

(1) 1 red apple & 1 green apple; or

(2) 2 red apples; or

(3) 1 red apple

(4) 1 red apple & a bunch of grapes

Think about it, and we will discuss and, if must, debate about it later.

As the Clerk-of-Course for this hunt, the challenge I faced was how best to set the hunt in such a way that would ensure the majority of the teams would pass with at least 50% score, but at the same time the best teams in the field still find it tough enough to whet their appetite! Well, in the end, 15 out of the 21 teams passed the hunt!

Another thing I did differently in this hunt was to include a Trivia Challenge to add a slim percentage of "uncertainty" into the game. I didn't think it would actually make any difference in the end results—as it usually would—but I suppose the Trivia Challenge made some teams happier.

As usual, I will follow up with discussions of some of the interesting questions in separate posts later. But now, the winners!

(1) Chai Koh Khai, Claire Chin Siow Lyn, Sin Yoong Leong (91/100)
(2) Bernard Liew, Alvin Wong, Christine Netto, Audrey Chin (81/100)
(3) Francis Omamalin, Eileen Yeoh, Lee Tze Jim, Moina Liew (70/100)
(4) Tan Cher Kian, Teo Chen Lung, Frederick Samson (61/100)
(5) Mary Lokupi, Shirley Lim, Ellen Yee, Dr Liaw Yun Haw (59/100)
(6) Ernie Ripin, Roland Ripin, Jude R Ripin, Norazimah Shazana Abdullah (59/100)
(7) Harry Koh, William Ting, Buddy Jiliun, Sophia Lai (59/100)
(8) Elizabeth Malangkig, Robinetta Malangkig, Talissa Kiandee, Andrea Abidin (58/100)
(9) Richard Tsen, Liaw Lam Thye, Jeffrey Fong, George Ligunjang (57/100)
(10) Gan Po Tiau, David Wong, Winnie Chee, Shirley Chai (57/100)


Scho said...

The Bible does not mention what colour is the apple.

2 Romans 1 Impostor said...

Knowing your penchant for grammar, my pick would be:

(1) 1 red apple & 1 green apple

Submitting 1 or more red apples would likely garner only a full mark or 1 point.

Let me know if I had drifted off-course!

Cornelius said...


It is immaterial if no colours were mentioned in the bible. We are only interested to know the ITEM in this case. And then I specify the colour(s) in THIS clue.

Cornelius said...


Now you can see why this clue and its intended solution became a subject of debate during the presentation. The top teams submitted correctly, i.e. 2 red apples. But some other teams submitted 1 red & 1 green apples; or even 1 red apple.

I think the confusing word in this clue is "BOTH". I could have used other words which are not so confusing, but I used "BOTH" anyway for the sole purpose of confusing the solver.

But the question now is whether the solution (2 red apples) can still be correct with "BOTH". And can we correctly rule out 1 red & 1 green apples ; 1 red apple?

Now generally speaking, when we have several sentences, and there's a mention of 2 items, and at the end there is that word "both", then that "both" usually refers to those 2 items mentioned in the earlier sentence.

For example:

There are 2 beauty contestants on stage. They are both very beautiful.

Where "both" refers to the 2 contestants mentioned in the first sentence.

Since 2 kinds of apples were mentioned in the 3rd line of this clue, and because of the usual use of that word "both", it makes sense to assume that "both" in the last line is referring to red and green apples.

But here we are immediately faced with impossibility. I said, "The red kind, not green..." That can only mean one thing - it means green apple is out, no matter how you see it!

Then why "both"? Shouldn't that word be referring to items already mentioned earlier?

I will post this first and continue shortly...

Cornelius said...

Now imagine a guy who inherits something from his late grandfather - a short note containing a silver key and a map.

The note says:

John, this map will lead you to a place where I have hidden a chest containing gold coins worth millions! The key will open that chest. Further instructions are found on the chest itself.

So John sets out to look for that hiding place. When he finds it, there's something carved on the chest:

Both keys must be used together to open.

Now John would probably say something like, "What 'both'? Gramps did not mention any other key in his note!"

Yet, there is that word "both" on the chest. John should be able to deduce that there is the existence of a second key in this story.

Sometimes, riddles are like that. Not everything, not every information, not all the details will be given to the solver. In fact, sometimes, the clues appear to mean nothing! The solver may have to "crack" the clue - he may have to deduce something which is not mentioned!

Oops! I'll be late for work!... this will have to wait till later!

scute said...


Congrats for clerking another hunt under your KK Challenge series. And for that, appearing in the best selling English daily in Sabah too. 30% of Sabah's population would by now know your face, your name, your number and your passion.

Apart from the endless torture for aged hunters to spot minute signs in the most unlikely place (like 6" out from a drain across a dual lane highway), this Treasure Question probably opened the most debates.

You have used many references from the Bible like Manoah and ARK but this one is definitely wrong biblically. The Bible did not mention that the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden was APPLE. So red and green can actually refers to other fruit. So what happens if someone submitted two red grapes?

There are many wrong intepretations from the Bible like the three Wisemen. There were three gifts but not necessarily three men. And when they arrived, it was years later, not when Jesus was still in the manger.

It may be a bit tricky to quote references which you do not fully understand. (For me, I could be rolling a dice to see who gets to move first in chess! Ha ha ha )

Cornelius said...


Thanks for kind words, my friend!

Regarding the apples, I do not claim to be an expert in biblical interpretation, far from it! Whether or not the apples were mentioned specifically, I would still say that the "apple as a forbidden fruit in Eden" is a common-enough knowledge for many people! Anyone with reasonable general knowledge would think of apple first, and not other fruits. I suppose some people, for numerous justifications of their own, would interpret the "fruits" as grapes or oranges or durians, but I don't believe that is in accordance with the general perception.

Q33) He is not the first to go onboard.

A33) Black Hair Salon

In the game of chess, White is always the first "to go", meaning to start the game. I suppose, like you said, some people prefer to roll the dice to determine who starts first. And I suppose if they want to, they can also give a handicap of a bishop or knight or rook to the weaker player. But I'd say that is not really chess. I can only base my questions on the official rules of chess to be fair to the solvers, and not make my own rules of the game.

Regarding small signs, yes, I must agree that there were some in this hunt. But most of the answers were huge signs. However, I'd like to mention here that, if I'm not wrong, only 2 Qs were unanswered in this hunt:

Q13) When everything is taken into account on this.

A13) BALANCE @ Alice Beauty


Q32) One who goes camping to the south and east?


But when I set those Qs, I didn't think that anyone would be able to answer them anyway. I will discuss them later in separate posts. But I want to say here that big or small, 33 of the 35 Qs were answered! Therefore, scute, like I said in my sms to you, I think we have the same weakness in observation skills lah... hehehe.

Well, I'm still not finished with my story of the chest of gold coins above... hehehe... but that will have to continue later. Have to clear my desk first!

Anonymous said...

With your penchant for grammar perfection and tight fit questions, is there a difference between onboard and on board? And for your question, isn't on board more relevant?

2 Romans 1 Impostor said...

In my opinion, the point of debate here should not be BOTH, which is clear to mean 2 (in kind or quantity).

But should the hunters interpret it as:
1) 1 red apple & 1 green apple
2) 2 red apples
3) 2 green apples
4) >1 red apple & >1 green apple

Rather, we should be discussing Line 3. Should FULL MARK or FULL MARK(S) be used to represent 5 point(S)? Can FULL MARK be used to represent a SINGLE point?

ie. You will get a a FULL dollar for helping me wash my car.

If FULL MARK can be used to represent a SINGLE point, I dont see why 1 red apple & 1 green apple should be rejected since:

Line 3 & 4 can be interpreted to mean, "Handing in the red variety will only garner you 1 point" where else "Handing in both the red and the green variety will garner you the full 5 points".

Must admit though my solution was also biased by the fact that it is so not you to (lol):

1) give-away treasure points.
2) use redundancy (repeating the fact that 5 points is awarded for 2 red apples".

Perhaps it is good to hear the side of the story of those who had handed in 1 Red & 1 Green apple. Then we can decide if this treasure is just not tight enough!

Cornelius said...

Ah! I see a few more comments have since been added. Before I reply those comments, let me just quickly finish the earlier story about the gold coins.

Now imagine an alternative scenario where John receives a note accompanied by a silver key, a bronze key, and a map. And this time, the note says:

John, this map will lead you to a place where I have hidden a chest containing gold coins worth millions! The silver key will open that chest. The bronze key has nothing to do with the chest, but it will become useful to you for another mission! Further instructions are found on the chest itself.

And then John sees the same instruction on the chest when he finds it:

Both keys must be used together to open.

Here, John may become temporarily confused, because on the one hand, the note says clearly that the bronze key is not connected to the chest. Yet on the chest, it says "both" keys. Does it not make sense to deduce, then, that there must be yet another key involved in this story?

Obviously, the instruction found on the chest could have been written in a clearer way. Ideally, if possible, name what other key is required, and where to get it! But we won't get so many details if we want a good and suspenseful story, would we?

And so, as a riddle, I say I have done my part to block out the green apple in line 3. I did not specifically spell out that I wanted 2 red apples, but it should be deduced anywhere even if I have omitted a required line between lines 3 and 4 to make it absolutely certain.

Cornelius said...

Anonymous friend,

I must apologise. I try as much as I can to check every single letter, and all the punctuations, and grammar etc whenever I write. But sometimes, especially when I'm rushing, I may make mistakes - either grammatically or typos. I didn't mean to confuse my readers.

You are right about "onboard" vs "on board". The fact that those words are joined or not will result in different meanings. I think the more correct one in this case should be separated into 2 words, i.e. "on board". Therefore, in the question sheet of the hunt, they were given as separated words. Just that when I typed them here this morning, I mistakenly left out the space between the 2 words.

That said, however, I have also seen "onboard", as a single word, used in a cryptic clue much for the same purpose as that in this clue, i.e. referring to the chess board. I don't really like it. But it's worthwhile to remember it!

Cornelius said...


I must say that you put up very good arguments, my friend!

In the ordinary sense of the word MARK, and when looking up for its meaning in a dictionary, it can be equated to 1 point. However, in the context of this clue, I would say that it's not very clever to interpret FULL MARK as referring to a SINGLE point.

Again, in the context of this clue, there is a mention of "5 POINTS" in the last line. I think it would be strange, to say the least, to equate MARK to POINT in this same clue if the setter had intended those words to mean the same thing.

There is another thing that is against MARK=POINT in this case, i.e. the existence of FULL before MARK.

I would reason out the riddle like this:

In one line, there's a mention of FULL MARK. In the other line, there's 5 POINTS. I'm inclined to take MARK more in the nature of STANDARD. We say, not up to the mark, meaning not up to the standard.

And what is the STANDARD here?

Well, every hunter knew (or at least should've known) that each correct treasure scores 5 POINTS. The FULL MARK (standard) for this riddle is therefore 5 POINTS.

And because the grading system is "all or nothing", there is no possibility for the allocation of a SINGLE-POINT score anyway, thus making that interpretation somewhat very far-fetched.

On redundancy or additional or repetition of clues, that is a separate issue. In a treasure clue, it may happen sometimes. In fact, some CoCs have the habit of giving 2 or even 3 clues even for route Qs, though admittedly the latter is very rare, meant for the same answer. But repeated or not, in my opinion, it does not render the 2 red apples wrong.

2 Romans 1 Impostor said...

My friend, just like in past debates, I am not infering that your answer is wrong, just that the riddle is worded such that it opened up a multitude of possibilities. And it has nothing to do about the solver being CLEVER or OTHERWISE. Just take two steps back to think about it.

In fact, I just had a good laugh over renroc's submission and explanation which seemed to hold water too!

Regarding the contention that treasure points are expected to be 5 or nothing does not really hold water unless specifically mentioned in the riddle or briefing. We have had instances in the past where:

a) partial points were given based on number of items delivered ie. one point for each correct quantity requested.
b) partial points were given for the right brand but incorrect treasure.
c) partial points were given just for bringing anything in.

Cornelius said...

Ah! I'm fairly certain that I mentioned the "all or nothing" in the Novice Hunt and KK Challenge 5. But now that you mentioned it, I can't remember if I mentioned it yesterday morning! At any rate, I feel it doesn't change the scenario.

I don't know, maybe it's me, in this clue, I can't see how FULL MARK = 1 (WHOLE) POINT.

A FULL MARK for a correct treasure is 5 points.

The FULL MARK for a correct treasure is NOT 1 point only.

In the context of this clue, FULL MARK is NOT 1 point.

2 Romans 1 Impostor said...

Note that you have worded it as Full Mark and not Full MarkS!

While you can interpret (which I dont deny that most hunters will regard) as the maximum points for a treasure riddle (in this case 5 points), there exist others like me who can interpret a Full Mark as 1 whole point and not a fraction of a point.

So like I commented earlier, when reading Lines 3 & 4 in tandem, I can interpret both phrases to mean, "Handing in the red variety will only garner you 1 point" where else "Handing in both the red and the green variety will garner you the full 5 points".

Again, I am not trying to purposefully find fault with the riddle. Just wanted to point out (since you asked my opinion) that it would be hard to wrong those who chose to hand in 1 red & 1 green apple!

Cornelius said...


Yes, I did ask for your opinion, and yes, I appreciate it. So please don't get me wrong, I'm not getting all stressed up here because of your opposing view! (smile).

I don't know if I should actually spend some time to properly compose a clear-enough explanation to present my views. But I will try again anyway.

If one looks at the phrase "FULL MARK" alone, standing on its own, not in connection with this clue whatsoever, then yes, it is open to liberal interpretation. Maybe one can look at it as "1 whole point", and maybe as "full (maximum) score." Perhaps there are other possible interpretations also, other than those mentioned here, I don't know.

But here, "FULL MARK" is used in the context of this clue, i.e. a treasure clue, of which we know the maximum score is 5 points. And especially if I had meant to use lines 3 and 4 together - in tandem - as you term it, it makes little sense for me to use 2 different words to mean the same thing. If I had wanted to mean WHOLE ONE POINT (as opposed to just a fraction of it), I would say so, because I have used "POINT" for the unit of score in line 4. If I used RINGGIT in line 4 for the unit of price, I would of course use RINGGIT also in line 3, if indeed I am referring to the unit of price also, especially if I meant those 2 lines to be read together.

But in this clue, I'm using POINT as the unit of score in line 4 (5 points), but MARK in line 3. Yet you propose to treat those two as the same unit. What's more, you're trying to force FULL mark to mean FULL SINGLE point. It's in that sense that I'm saying I can't accept your interpretation. And it's also on that grounds that I'm rejecting the "1 red & 1 green apple."

What I'm saying MARK here must have a different meaning from POINT because of the nature of the clue as a whole. Here, MARK takes the meaning of STANDARD, just like score. FULL MARK=FULL SCORE (no "S" required). It is a different word than POINT and has the duty of a different meaning. That is my logical way of interpreting it.

Anonymous said...

Just wanted to know the statistics, out of the 21 teams, how many submitted;
a). 2 Red apples
b). 1 Red Apple & 1 Green Apple
c). Other combinations
d). Did not submit / submitted other than apples

I must aggree that the wording could have been better but on the other hand, line 3 was very clear what colour you wanted.

Similarly for 'Black Hair Salon', there is definately a difference between 'onboard' & 'on board'. 1st time I read it, I thought it refers to a ship or boat....anyway, we got this wrong at the end.

In regards to the MONROE question, i just wanted to quote my teammate, 'some people tend to over-decipher or over-analyse'...therefore, it can only meant MONROE.

For me, I learnt 2 valuable lessons;
1. always consider Roman Numerals
2. ampersand - this one I like!

Looking forward to another hunt from either you or Alvin


Cornelius said...

Before I proceed to post some discussions on some of the interesting questions in this hunt, I'd like to bring up here some of the feedback I received from some hunters.

1) Time Control

This is of course not a new issue. 35 route Qs + 4 treasure Qs + 90-second trivia challenge, all to be completed within 5 hours, with a possible 30 minutes penalty time. As I have said, I gave a mixture of easy, average and tough Qs, but on the whole, 5 hours should be enough. I was appalled to see many teams lingering on stubbornly on the first 2 Qs for more than half an hour. One of those Qs was the E'WEN sign. The second was this:

Q2) Oh! He writes crookedly!


I must admit that it's a hard-to-see sign, but a few teams found it. But many teams spent more than half an hour and in the end left that sector with nothing to show!

In most of the sectors, there were no traffic jams. I carefully selected those sectors. However, little did I know that the Giant Megalong opened this week, and I was told that the jam was quite bad there.

Even taking that into account, I still think teams spent way too much time in some sectors. But this is a sin that I myself commit regularly when I hunt!

2) Names of Famous People

One of the Qs in the trivia challenge involved the name Fuad Stephens. It was raised during the presentation that when he took office as the 1st Chief Minister of Sabah, that was not his name yet, i.e. he hasn't converted to Islam. I suppose technically speaking, it was a mistake. But later on, I explained to Donald Stephens via sms that out of the 4 available choices, Fuad Stephens was still the best choice anyway. Besides, if one were to google up the info, the official name of the 1st CM of Sabah is Fuad Stephens (Wikipedia).

In a route Q, reference to "lived her life like a candle in the wind..." came up with MONROE (not DIANA in this case), even though her original name was Norma Jean.

Cornelius said...


Actually, many teams did very well in this riddle. The statistics:

1) 1 Red Apple - 5 teams
2) 2 Red Apples - 11 teams
3) 1 Red & 1 Green - 3 teams
4) 1 Red Appple & bunch of grapes - 1 team

But there was one team which wrote down ONE RED APPLE, yet submitted 2 RED APPLES. I did not award points for this submission. During the briefing, I made it clear that I wanted the answers to be written correctly in the respective blanks.

Regarding the MONROE question, when I set it, I knew that some people did not know that the song was originally a tribute to Marilyn MONROE. Many people, especially of the younger generation are only aware of Princess DIANA. And laziness of checking is of course not a new problem in treasure hunting.

Q24) She lived her life like a candle in the wind; and impulsive too.

A24) MONROE Reflex

Because they did not know MONROE, then the next best thing to do was to "force fit" DIANA or DI. And that's the reason why that team arrived at DIESEL instead of MONROE.

His solution:


Which I don't know where he got from.

IMPULSIVE = anagram indicator

Which in itself is dubious.

DI + ELSE -> anagram -> DIESEL

It's a good try, but one which fails on the first count!

Must consider Roman numerals!... yeah, I get that comment at the end of ALL OF MY HUNTS. Because after all, I almost ALWAYS give questions on Roman numerals, and I ALWAYS beat the teams over and over again, I don't know why! As I have said many times before, some people just never learn!

Don't worry, am trying very hard to "force" Alvin to organise a hunt soon! Will surely make the announcement here if it happens!

Anonymous said...

11 teams submitted 2 red apples.... I think it's safe enough to say that your treasure question was sufficiently worded to meant this. Case closed.

p/s. thanks for the printer!


Cornelius said...

Hahaha! TBST, I wish it's that simple! But yes, at least from the stastitics, we have established 2 points.

1) That an overwhelming majority of the participants considered the APPLE as the thing that is forbidden in the Garden of Eden; and

2) That "2 RED APPLES" answers the clue better.

Being the CoC, of course I have the final say, but this debate is for the sake of improving, if any, and discussing finer points. Please don't get it wrong, actually I was the one who invited 2R1I to give his opinion. I frequently comment on hunts which I do not join too, and I also welcome comments from the west! We may appear like we are enemies all out to kill each other, but actually we are good friends!

Oh yes, regarding Roman numerals, I have just received an amusing sms from one participant. Sometimes, just because a question is answered, it doesn't necessarily mean that it is solved.

Q22) Mix two more here.

A22) M7 Fashion

As usual, it is so easy and obvious when the answer has been revealed. It was a very short sector, and a huge sign, yet a number of strong teams did not solve this question. I suspect they were stuck when their mind is "locked" on the track of adopting "MIX" as the anagram indicator (just as I had intended) when actually MIX is 1,009 as a Roman numeral.

I was quite impressed when an average team found the intended answer. But later on, she told me that it was just tembak solely because she remembered that whenever there are numbers in my riddles, they almost always have something to do with Roman numerals! So I guess I should take back my words in my earlier comments. Some people do learn in the end! Perhaps I should go easy on Roman numerals, huh?

Claire said...

Dear Cornelius, Thanks for organizing the hunt (and allowing us to enjoy it!). It was indeed an enjoyable hunt with little tricks hidden here and there.

My 2 fave Qs - C&E (Tricked by my own trick! You know what I mean!) and M7. We were stumped for a while at M7, partly because we weren't sure the sign said M7 or NC7 because of its fancy font. I stared at the sign for quite a while and thought it looked more like NC because the cursive strokes weren't joined. Anyway, we solved it the way you intended it to be...

scute said...


TBST is looking forward to another hunt either by YOU or Alvin. 50% of his hope is on you, my friend. And his first preference is YOU.

Cornelius said...

Claire Chin (must include surname here because there was another Claire in this hunt,

Glad you enjoyed the hunt. Hopefully most, if not all, of the teams enjoyed the hunt too!

I consider myself lucky because I did not realise you had that idea of "ampersand" before this hunt. I'm lucky because in spite of having used that idea before, you still failed to see it in this hunt! It's a classic case of blind spot I think!

Regarding the M7 (or NC7), I will comment further in the other post shortly.

Cornelius said...


I think the fact that TBST mentioned my name first had something to do with winning a brandnew colour printer by merely naming 5 of the 7 dwafts! I must make it clear to all the participants that they won't get such a good deal in all my KK Challenge hunts! (smile)

Claire said...

Speaking of the printer, best joke of the day (and probably for some time) from the CoC:
"Well, being a true Malaysian..... I have to find someone, something, somehow to blame!!"

Please correct me if I heard wrongly, but that was darn funny!

teo said...

And the printer story was originated from us...De SToneS!!! haha.

Good job Corny on the Hunt, our 3 wheels performed badly lah that day. We missed our front wheel which is the MASTER in the making and struggled all the way from Q2 onwards. 61 pts is a bad score if compared to 81 (Main Tembak). 91 (Winner)is not in our category, we only can think of challenging them in some Ayam Hunts lah with lots of challenges. Anyway, we did enjoy ourselves. Next, KENA TEMBAK Series 2.

Cornelius said...

Claire Chin,

I was just telling the truth mah! Aren't we Malaysians usually like that? Last year, my team got second in the KK City Hunt, then we won the Tembak Series 1. And after that we won the Palliative Care Hunt. We were rolling! I knew we could not keep that up for very long, so the printer coming into my possession was very timely. After that my team did not do very well, so what else was I supposed to do but to put the blame on that printer?... hahaha! Oh I love myself for being a Malaysian!

Cornelius said...


Not that I think you actually planned to run on 3 on a day when 2 master teams were hunting, but the moment you informed me at the last minute that Leslie's out, I knew that it would be an uphill task for your team - not with the kind of "challenge" that I had prepared that day!

Well, the good news is that I don't normally put up such a challenge. When I do my KK Challenge 7, I will try to let the regular hunters get 70%+, how's that for a hunt to look forward to?... hehehe

scute said...

Yeah, we are all looking forward to KK Challenge 7 which do not need to be in 2011. You can have 5 or 6 Challenge Hunts a year.

If you do not like the above idea, you can start DUMB HUNT 1 this year.

Cornelius said...


The prestige of the "brandname" KK Challenge series would be diluted if we have too many of it in a year! Just imagine if we have 6 or 7 theSun Hunts in a year, it surely won't be the same as just ONE a year, right?

But of course it's still possible to organise other hunts without that word "challenge" in it. That can be considered. But not so soon lah.

Anonymous said...

I think you said before you will allow the top teams get very close to full mark, but not actually get it?? 91% in this hunt is not very close to full mark??

In KK Challenge 5, I notice also same story. I think top team got 94%. Closer, but not "very" close. Maybe you misjudged difficulty level of you questions??

Cornelius said...

Ah! Anonymous friend, you remember!

Yes, I still maintain that I always try to allow the top team get very, very close to the full score, but not actually achieving it! However, there is only so much I can do. I set the hunt in such a way, and having taken into account all aspects, the hunting route, the combination of all the questions, the sectors, and other psychological factors, and then try to make my best guess - hoping that the top team will fail in just ONE question, but certainly not more than 2 questions!

That's how much I can do. Unfortunately, sometimes, the top teams just won't do their part, and I will inevitably fail to achieve what I set out to achieve.

In the KK Challenge 5, I had planned that team Main Tembak would only fail in ONE route question. I thought even if they made a silly mistake, they would not drop more than 2 questions. But in the end they dropped 3 questions! One of them was something about King Midas, of which the intended answer was "TURN TO GOLD". Main Tembak actually found that answer, but when they wrote it down on the answer sheet, it was written as "TURN TO GO", without "LD".

In the KK Challenge 6, apart from the Trivia Challenge, the top team again disappointed me in the sense that they failed in a question which they would not have failed on any other day.

Q14) The famous leader is nearer to the ground of this shop.

A14) The Flower Shop

I'm not blaming Main Tembak or Innocent Hunters for my failure, but all I can do is try my best. The rest is totally up to them. Freak accidents like these can happen once in a while. But I will try to live with it.

Wannatolearn said...

Referring to the team that brought 2 red apples but wrote 1 red apple and it is consider as a wrong answer, I wonder what if the intended treasure for instance any kind of snack "perisa udang", and hunters bring a correct treasure but write only a brand nama such as "ROTA" but yet fail to write "perisa udang", should it consider as a wrong answer? Appriciate your view. TQ

Cornelius said...


Thanks for the question. And that is a good question too! Before I embark on a long-winded reply (for the sake of clarity), let me first caution you that there is no fixed rule on this. However, it seems that there is a kind of implied understanding amongst CoCs on what constitutes a perfect treasure submission. Let me first answer the question from my own perspective and try to justify myself, and then I will invite other CoCs, if they would like to share their views, to contribute on this subject.

In my opinion, the blanks provided on the treasure question sheet are there for several reasons. First and foremost, of course teams are expected to fill them up! Otherwise there is no meaning to those blanks.

Secondly, I think what we write in a specific blank should be an accurate description of the item actually submitted. I have heard of CoCs who insist that teams should actually write down the answers to each line of the clue, e.g. 1 CAN, AYAM BRAND, KARI AYAM, 425G. I think I can agree with such requirement.

However, sometimes, it is also possible that the clue does not specify the brandname, or the weight of the item, but instead only asks for 1 can. In such a case, I think it should be sufficient to just write something like: 1 CAN OF SARDINES, and leave out the brandname and weight. And in this case, any size should be acceptable too.

In the example that you have quoted, if there is something in the clue that points directly to “perisa udang”, then I’m inclined to think that if you left out “perisa udang”, you do so at your own risk. If there is nothing on brandname in the clue, it means that the brandname is not important for that particular riddle, so I would say writing down ROTA does not really help your case, although I would also not rule out that some kind-hearted CoCs may still accept the submission as “perfect”. I would say that the inclusion of “perisa udang” is a significant part of the riddle, if so indicated in the clue, and must therefore be included in your answer, both in the written form or on the item itself. Therefore, if the clue asks for APPLE, you should write down APPLE, not just FRUIT even if you submitted APPLE, although again some CoCs may still accept that submission.

In one of my hunts, I gave a pantun which I translated, loosely, into English, of which I mentioned something about “one turned yellow on the chest” (masak sebiji di atas peti), referring to the pisang emas. In the last line, I asked for “the one which turned yellow.” Apart from the fact that so many teams wrongly submitted a bunch of pisang emas, one team wrongly wrote the answer 1 pisang emas in the blank allocated for another treasure clue! It gave me the impression that that team got the answer by collaborating with another team, but did not actually understand which clue the pisang emaswas for! So, yes, they submitted the correct item, but wrote down the answer in a different blank, so I did not accept that submission!

Other CoCs, if you please?

Anonymous said...

if you clearly ask for pisang emas, then why reject the pisang emas anyway? please explain??

Cornelius said...

Anon (April 23, 2010 12:57 PM),

That is a separate matter altogether. Those who've hunted in my hunts before will tell you that I have plenty of small tricks here and there in my clues. I did not reject the pisang emas. I said I rejected the bunch of pisang emas. I said I wanted the one which turned yellow. I only wanted one, you see, not a bunch of bananas.

Wannatolearn said...

Thank you, actually this thing happen during one of close hunt that I joined before. in the clue mention "apa apa makanan yang tak berat berperisa satu vokal dan satu konsonan".
The CoC during the answer presentation mention that most of the team crack it by luck and still get full points (including our team). Maybe because it is a close hunt.
We did not know "satu vokal" = U dan "satu consonan" = G, U DAN G = udang, but I like it the element of luck there and most of us are happy.
Bottom line, not everybody can win but to make everybody have fun is also a winning.

Cornelius said...


Thank you for sharing your experience. Like I said, some CoCs may be kind-hearted when compared to others. But I can believe that that can happen in a closed hunt.

The thing about having fun is a complicated matter. In the KK Challenge 6, 15 of the 21 teams passed the hunt. The rest failed it, and 2 teams only managed 20%+. These were the teams which had no hunting experience whatsoever before the KK Challenge 6. On my part, I tried to balance the hunt to account for the new teams, but you have to understand that this was supposed to be a "CHALLENGE" hunt. So making it too easy would not have lived up to its brandname! One way or another, it simply had to be a challenge!

Now this may be surprising, but after the hunt, not only the top teams said they enjoyed and were happy with the hunt, but even those at the bottom said they enjoyed the hunt too. In fact, they said they would love to join my hunt again! So everyone may struggle during the hunt, but that is just one aspect of the hunt.

So I can say that the CoC can still organise an enjoyable hunt for everybody without sacrificing the requirements for accuracy! During the hunt briefing, the answer presentation, and up to the prize presentation, I conducted my hunt in such a way that everyone had some good laugh, regular and new hunters alike. And I did so without being lenient on my marking standard.

I will post this first, and will continue shortly...

Cornelius said...

Leniency in the marking standard may not be exactly a good thing. Yes, it may make some new hunters happy. But beyond that it can also lead to injustice.

Some teams work very hard to check and double-check on their answers, both for route Qs and treasure Qs to ensure that they submit perfect solutions. Would it be fair if they have to lose out to those teams which submit inaccurate solutions?

In the KK Challenge 6, for example, I had this:

Q16) Excellent purpose for a business name.

And several teams submitted what appeared like the correct answer in CEMERLANG STATIONERY, because EXCELLENT = CEMERLANG.

Some other teams submitted another answer in BRILLIANT HEALTH CARE PRODUCTS (K.K.) SDN. BHD.

Yet some others submitted BRILLIANT POINT.

And I only accepted BRILLIANT POINT because that answer covered "purpose" in the clue.

Would it have been fair if I accepted all three answers? Wouldn't that amount to injustice to the teams which worked extra hard to submit the perfect answer?

So in my opinion, the requirements for precision should be maintained. They are other ways to make the hunters happy.

wannatolearn said...

Tq again. Actually after hunting a few time than I realised that accuracy is the most important thing since there is a lot of possible answers especially in route Qs.
Yes I'm happy at that moment because my answer was accepted and consider I'm lucky but as you mention there is a teams that lose out to those teams which submit inaccurate solution. Unfair ..
To be lucky, team also by luck write the intended answer even they dont know the answer!
Hope CoC's in West also have a same principle as you and looking forward to participate in your hunt one day. TQ

Cornelius said...


In treasure hunting, guesses, when eventually found to be the correct answers, deserve the full score as those actually solved clues. Usually, guesses are not entirely blind guesses. There will be at least a bit of reasoning behind those guesses as well. But of course I will admit that there are also some which are just blind guesses. Whatever the case may be, when those answers are written down in the answer sheets, they will still have to be written clearly and in full according to the rule of the game. So yes, luck sometimes can help, but to be a successful team, one can't count on luck alone!

Regarding the policy of CoCs in the west, I'm inclined to believe that they, too, adopt much the same standard as mine. And that is especially so ever since I started commenting, and in some cases, criticising numerous inaccuracies in hunt questions in recent years.

However, from time to time, CoCs may want to introduce something new, perhaps to add new dimensions, or just something fresh into the game. For example, in one recent hunt, there was the requirement of actually explaining one's treasure submissions. This would apparently completely block out guesswork on the part of the hunters. One must actually solve the clue, not merely submit based on hunches.

However, such approach opens the door to several problems which would suggest that it's an ill-perceived idea! Does the CoC have the resources to actually read all those explanations to the submissions one by one, and is he thorough enough to do that? Has he got the time to do all those reading, especially if there are many teams hunting? And if he employs the help of his marshals, are those people sufficiently competent to do the job? How would the CoC ensure consistency in the grading of explanations, i.e. what constitutes the "perfect explanation"? And so many more questions may be asked.

So as you can see, new ideas may not be always good, especially if some teams are unfairly disadvantaged by those new rules, e.g the CoC completely failed to even read the explanations, let alone grade whether those explanations are accurate!