Palliative Care Association Treasure Hunt 2009

Taken as a whole, it was a very tough hunt—at least by the Sabahan standard. But well, luck was on our side, and we ended up winning the grand prize. So that's the second time we've won a hunt by Team Kena Tembak.

I didn't know it at first, but upon seeing the above picture on my pc shortly ago, I noticed that when we were up on stage, posing for the cameras, Vivian was amused by her boss. She was obviously trying very hard to suppress a laugh. What's tickling you, Viv?

As usual, I will give a general overview of the hunt, i.e. the general format, the overall time provision against the number of questions and challenges etc. Then I will go into detailed discussions on some of the interesting questions in separate posts.

But first, the official results (Full score 125pts):

1) Edward Baki, Vivian Cham, Cornelius Koh, Dennis Koh (90pts)
2) Chai Koh Khai, Margaret Sha, Chong Voon Kiat (81pts)
3) Francis Omamalin, Eileen Yeoh, Lee Tze Jim, Moina Liew (77pts)
4) Renee Khoo, Dr Liaw Yun Haw, Shirley Lim, Mary Lokupi (76pts)
5) Frederick Samson, Teo Chen Lung, Tan Cher Kian, Leslie Liew (72pts)
6) Liaw Lam Thye, Richard Tsen, Tsen Mei Fong, Florence Lajagang (72pts)
7) Josy Majalap, Suzanne Majani, Adoree Malinjang (70pts)
8) Jeremy Pinso, Alister Kong, Onalia Kong, Lionel Wong (70pts)
9) Gan Poh Tiau, David Wong, Winnie Chee, Shirley Chai (67pts)
10)Alexius Daut, M Jennifer G Sham, Coreen R A Sham, Monsu Godon (61pts)
11)George D Ligunjang, Jeffrey Fong, Emmanuel Edward, Ava Kessey (59pts)
12)Masri Khan, Ag Sarpuddin Ag Kassim, Zurinah Hanafiah (57pts)
13)Malcolm Abidin, Talissa Kiandee, Callum Abidin, Andrea Abidin (54pts)
14)Claire Andrew, Grace Joy Chin (50pts)
15)Julie Chan, Jaco Swanepoel, John Saw Say Kee, Mior Asman Musa (49pts)

________________________________________________

Format:

The hunt was divided into 3 legs. Each was given a specific time window to complete, failure of which would result in disqualification to proceed to the next leg (Yes, some teams did not make it). Leg 1 and Leg 2 each had 3 sectors with a total of 15 questions to answer, i.e. total questions for Legs 1&2 = 30. Leg 3 was a walk-hunt within 1Borneo itself (10 questions). Total hunting time for all 3 legs was 7 hours with a 30 minute penalty time (2pts to be deducted per 5-minute block).

Scoring:

40 route questions, each worth 2 points, i.e. maximum 80 points; 4 treasure questions, each worth 5 points, i.e. maximum 20 points; 3 challenges worth 25 points. Therefore, the full score of 125 points for this hunt.

Navigation:

Perhaps the most talked-about element of this hunt. No tulips were provided; hunters were instead given site maps of hunt sectors without naming the estates or areas. Within the site maps names of some shops were given, and at least one landmark picture in black and white in each map. Arrows drawn on the maps to show the directions of question sequence.

The challenging part of such navigational aid was that hunters were first required to figure out the sectors, and this proved to be quite a challenge even for KK folks. After finding the sectors, they had to solve questions in sequence, but there were no "cut-off" points between questions. So, for example, if hunters arrived at a small town comprising, say, 10 rows of shops for a total distance of say 2km, the answers may be found in any of those 10 rows of shops, although in sequence following the direction of the arrows in the maps. If hunters were lucky, they might be able to solve, say Q3, and therefore able to discover the "cut-off" point. But it's still a challenge to further dissect the rest of the sectors.

Further complication arose in the cases of SEDCO and Kg Air, because it was practically impossible to drive through the massive traffic jam, thus forcing the hunters to walk the entire several blocks of shops. In Kg Air, for example, hunters had to find the answers to 5 questions only, from thousands of signboards with no "cut-off" points, all to be done on foot under the hot sun. That's not all. At least one answer was partially hidden, and one would have to almost know the answer to be able to find it! Consider the question:

QD5) LARGE ADDER SPOTTED HERE?

AD5) BIG SUMMER

I think an average hunter with a bit of basic cryptic knowledge would be able to put two and two together to connect LARGE to BIG; and ADDER (one who adds) to SUMMER (one who sums up). But one has to spot the board first to be able to connect them!

The questions, when taken on their own, were not frightfully tough, but when taken as a whole under the condition of the hunt, were very, very challenging indeed. It reminds me of a similar hunt by Hunters R Us some months back, where the questions were very well done and of high quality, but when taken as a whole with the conditions of hunt, I felt it was very tough.

That said, however, I think Team Kena Tembak went one step further. In my opinion, they failed to take into account the traffic condition which forced the energy-sapping walks in Tg. Aru town, SEDCO, Kg. Air and then later on in 1Borneo. On paper, 7 hours seemed like too generous of the CoC, but in reality not so, especially for the new teams which must have spent a lot of time finding the "cut-off" points within sectors.

While hunting, I thought it would be very tough for Hunters R Us, since they're a team from KL. And indeed it was tough, for they totally failed to find Inanam Town, a sector accommodating 10 possible points (5 questions). There's absolutely no doubt that they'd have gained those 10 points had they been able to find Inanam Town. The net result would have been 91 points for them, hence they would have won this hunt marginally. In that sense, my team was lucky and benefitted from the format of this hunt.

In my opinion, the challenge of any treasure hunt should be in the riddles found in the questions. In some cases, I can live with small signages to account for the requirement of observation/spotting skills. But I try my best not to challenge the navigational skills of the hunters. If I can help it, I'd like to direct them to the hunt sectors with as little pain as possible.

Questions:

As I said, I will discuss specific questions in separate posts later. I'd like to say here that on the whole, the questions for this hunt were very good. I only have some minor objections in some of them, but otherwise I saw some interesting ideas. I may add that they're even entertaining. A couple of them were brilliant, and I'd say they were all solvable, unlike some of the questions in KL hunts these days.

However, I thought a few could use a bit of improvements, because they're dangerously "loose". Consider this question in the SEDCO sector:

QF5) COME HERE FOR COFFEE.

AF5) KEDAI MAKAN JAVA

A good example where I would agree with Master Hunter Alexander Hoh about adding more words to the clue to ensure exclusive fit. The point is that there is nothing in the clue to restrict the literal interpretation of the sentence. There were just too many kedai kopi and kedai makan in that sector—one can go to any one of those coffeeshops "FOR COFFEE"!

My overall verdict of the hunt is that Team Kena Tembak did a very commendable job. I am so glad that we now have Sabahans who're willing to put their heads on the chopping board to take up the role of Clerk-of-Course. Seeing how they set this hunt reminded me of myself when I clerked the Sutera Hunt a couple of years ago. I myself failed in many aspects of clerking, but we will all try to improve with each hunt. Therefore, I am sure Team Kena Tembak will only improve themselves further in future hunts. And of course I don't mind winning all of them too (smile).