Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Big L Makes Small Matter of a Major, The Mensa Hunt 2008


[Update:2.1.2009] Photo album courtesy of the MMS.

Kuala Lumpur, 14 Dec, 2008:

This was to be the last Major of the Grand Slam series for 2008, as labeled by HRU, and supported by a large part of the regular community of hunters. Fitting to its billing, the big guns - from as far as Penang and Sabah - turned up for The Mensa Hunt 2008. Credit must be given to the organisers especially "Big L" Lawrence and his life-partner, Jennifer, for successfully drawing in a huge crowd by today's standard - 40+ cars.

As with all previous Mensa Hunts, the organisation was meticulous, running like clockwork. The final briefing was even short - no amendments or anything left out from previous briefing - even started 5 minutes ahead since everyone was already in. The flag off was on time and because there was still so much spare time, a mass flag-off was declared.

The route hunt went on very smoothly. Only some crowding at a couple of places initially. So far, so good - all according to expectations. Until we started to tackle the treasures and questions ...

The theme for the year was "Planet Green" and as very typical of Big L, he kept as much as possible to the theme. There were 6 treasures - 3 of them did not require any "brain" work. Just follow the instructions and get them. The frown lines begun to appear.

T1 - 20 KG or more of old newspapers, collected yesterday and handed in before flag-off.

T2 - biodegradeable plastic re-usable shopping bag from TESCO, GIANT or JUSCO.

T3 needed some "salt". To those not familiar with clues like "start", they would have missed out on an essential part of the clue. What was asked for was a GENIE warm/white 14W energy saving light bulb from Philips. This was not too difficult to decipher - almost everyone knew what to get but were challenged by the scarcity of stock at all major stores and outlets. We heard that some finally found theirs in some obscure electrical shops.

Even we were lucky - at first, I was beaten to the last piece at SenQ by a regular team. Later, it was my turn to repeat the feat. I literally snatched the last piece from right under the nose of another competitor at the ACE Hardware, Ikano Power Centre. She was still discussing with the "team" on the mobile, when I did that to her! Sorry, Ma'am. It's just business!

T4 - biodegradable garbage bags of a certain brand and size. All stated there for us.

T5 needed just a pinch of anagram - everything else was provided as was. I am sure you can pick out the brand from this obviously nonsensical sentence "Al pass on dirty patches will be helpful", for the product that "helps to relief different aches and pains". Nothing green about this that I know of - maybe some tinge of green on the box? Perhaps, it helps in the conservation of peace? You know how disturbing an irritated person can be.

T6 did require a bit more "storming of the brains" and turned out to be most difficult to decide - not decipher though. It was easy enough to know that one had to get a recyclable can of Campbell with vegetable contents. There were actually only 2 choices : Campbell Tomato Juice or V-8 100% Vegetable Juice by Campbell. Some teams got themselves into more complications with a slightly longer shopping list that included Campbell "pumpkin soups".

The single line in T6 that stirred the most trouble was "A vegetable and a nutritious consumable":
"Is a tomato a fruit or vegetable?"
"There are 8 vegetables, including tomato, inside a can of V-8. So, is that still "A Vegetable"?

OK, I know you are curious. "Why the pumpkin?" It was no big matter, but made a big difference in points to some. They missed the 1st line that said "The juice that is required for this treasure". Simple carelessness on the part of the hunters, like the Nutty Gang.

What did Big L decide? That's the biggest decision everyone waited for 2 hours plus to find out. I will make you wait a little while too. Tell you later.

Let me first share with you the big numbers behind the route questions.

30 Qs

13 General Knowledge (43%).
Of the 13, 2 needed a bit of charade work (dictionary reference). No other tricks to it.
Q:WELL KNOWN WILDLIFE CONSERVATIONIST WHO WAS IMPALED BY SWIMMER.
A:Irwin @ TMP

9 straight forward, single-level anagrams.
Q:TOY TAG TIED WRONGLY REQUIRES PROMPT ACTION.
A:Get It Today! @ Parking machine

8 "look up the thesaurus" charades.
Q:CONCISE AND IMAGINATIVE.
A:Laconic Creative

3
TBs ("no point" Tie Breaker questions) - trademark of Big L.
Of which, 1 charade, 1 Anagram and 1 GK.

Surprised? That would be an understatement of the year! Heads shook non-stop throughout the hunt - at least in our car - we just could not believe that we were actually doing a MENSA hunt.

This was so not like Big L. Big L always used GK, that's him. But never without first spicing it up with some tricks that made you wonder if it was really a GK or some word play. All that was missing in this year's edition. Even his trademark red-herrings were like fish out of the bowl - flapping for your attention! And I heard, some hunters even did not notice them and were not affected by them!

The tougher ones were merely straightforward anagrams. The anagram pointers were not even hidden - just plain, stark naked in the open. First timers would not even miss them.

The really big toughie was just this one (applause and please ignore the emoticon at the end of this sentence) :

Q23.Select many ideas from others is a typical characteristic not for the faint hearted.
Ans : ECLECTIC . QUINTESSENTIAL . BOLD @ Bayti Living
This is the type we were expecting more of, Big L! Why stop here?

MENSA hunt a quiz? That was what we were tempted to re-label it. Certainly, not looking like a Major that we expected it to be. It was also observed that the top 5 teams had at least an hour to spare with one team even checking in as early as 11:30 a.m (closing time 1:00 p m).

Big L's partner, Jennifer had even complained to him - "Why are you making it so easy, dear?" As I have said before, "The Truth Is Out There ... with the COC". What had Big L to say about that? "I wanted to make it comfortable for all levels. But I guess I over did it." My thoughts? To err is human, to over-err is painfully puzzling!"

To be fair, Big L did achieve his objective - the 20th team scored 104 points, which was close to 75% of the max. Commendable!

Back to the treasures - no good news here either. Just when we thought the tomato could make a difference in the final standings and thus give hope to some of us in making to the podium - Big L announced - "I will accept both!" Duck Big L - a couple is coming along your way now, in the style that Bush had it. You can tell us what sizes they were later.

"Since the word "Vegetable" appeared on the can of V-8, even though it had 8 vegetables, I have to accept it as fitting to the clue "A vegetable ...". "I know a tomato is technically a fruit, but it is commonly referred to as a vegetable in the "kitchen terminology" and widely accepted as such. I have checked this out very thoroughly."

Big L was so much tighter in his prime days. You could not argue with him, you had no case with him - those were the days. Today, easy-vegetable is on the menu.

So, treasures - nothing to shout about. Questions - nothing to clamour about. What's there left to praise of this supposedly glamourous hunt? Fortunately there is. The Mensa Hunt Puzzle!

Thanks to Big L's Jennifer, it made up for all the disapointments. The puzzle was a very simple puzzle but wrecked the brains of almost all the top guns - almost 99% of them. The Big Guys took a bitter pill from this one, inlcuding ourselves. Some other "not so regular hunters" were not disturbed by it at all, I heard. Probably because they were spared the cloud of disappointment the rest of us carried with us throughout the hunt! That's what the Mensa Hunt should do to hunters.

Look at this picture and you will see why it can hurt the ego of red-blooded hunters who were supposed to have the best trained brains in town:

This was supposed to be solved within 5 seconds! Many of us spent 18,000 seconds and still could not solve it. And every team had 4 brains to work on them, so the effort was x4!

Congrats to the winners and a couple of top ten teams, they worked it out eventually - though not within seconds, more like hours. By the way, Big L left us a clue for this puzzle - but nobody noticed it - here was the clue : "What is the difference that you can see with the digits in the perimeter boxes and those in the middle of each set? Do you see 4 numbers or 8 now?"

So, there you have it - the Mensa Hunt 2008 - the once notorious pot of meat stew had been over-done and simmered down to majorly, only a plain vegetable dish called "Eight Digits" (the puzzle).

We asked around. The consensus was "Time stood still for Big L. Everyone had moved on and progressed with their consistent participation in hunts over the last 2 years; exposed to all the tricks in the book".

Where have you been, Big L? What will you bring us in 2009? You still have that "Persuasive Touch", I am certain. You only needed to be less kind.

BTW, I heard that the Grand Slam selection team is seriously reviewing its List for 2009!

Here are the results:

14 Dec: Malaysian Mensa Treasure Hunt (Full score 140 pts)

1st: Lim Soo Khian, Adrian Wong, Toh Weng Ngai, Michael Pang (140)
2nd: Chin Kar Ping, K Shanker, Jayaram Menon, Liong Chian Min (137)
3rd: Alexander Hoh, Andre Teh, Muhammad Razif, Rosemawarni Abd Rahman (137)
4th: Chai Koh Khai, Vincent Woo, Margaret Sha, Chong Voon Kiat (136)
5th: Teh Boon Kai, Sam Rahman, Angie Teh, Yow Hui Hui (133)
6th: Ruben Chelliah, Angeline Chelliah, Mohan Campos, Raj Kumar (131)
7
th: Wong Chiang Chuen, Claire Chin, Goh Teck Koon, Cornelius Koh (130)
8
th: Selina Yong, Toh Wei Ming, Lily Loh, Teoh Cheow Teong (129)
9
th: Tan Eng Siang, Ong Kheng Heng, Kong Siau Ching, Diana Foong (127)
10
th: Ramesh Rajaratnam, K Pavananthan, Chong Foo Seong, Lim Kong Yew (126)

30 comments:

Cornelius Koh said...

BlogCe5nt,

How about HRU organise a Major for the hunting fraternity on an annual basis? That would complete the list of Majors for a calendar year.

Then again, is there a hard rule that limits Majors to only 4 in a year? Well, let's make a difference in the sport of treasure hunting. HRU do a Major, and I will find ways to do one too, so that we will have not 4, but 5 Majors in a calendar year! That can be our new year resolution! What say you?

Cornelius Koh said...

And by the way, if HRU organise a Major, I'm fairly certain that many will support the hunt!

BlogCe5nT said...

One of the criteria for a Major is the hunt must be patronised by the MAJORity of regulars.

We will do a hunt in March 2009. If we want that to be an annual MAJOR, regulars, please turn up!

CK Loh said...

A HRU motor hunt on March? Great!

Just want to suggest something.

Can we have Majors of e-Hunt as well on yearly basis?


Major 1 - HRU Challenge
Major 2 - ckoh's blog Anniversary
Major 3 - ???
Major 4 - ???


Of course, HRU and ckoh is welcome to do it more often, not yearly basis. HRU can even covers Major 3 and Major 4 by diffent HRU members.

It is time for e-hunters to have their own major too. Don't you think so?

CK Loh said...

From my understanding, major should be a BIG hunt attended by above average number of participations. Usually sponsored by huge sponsors or maybe it has the "history" to attract the crowds.

Major like The Sun Hunt, Putrajaya Hunt and Kiwanis Hunt can easily attract more than 100 over cars, and most of the time, the entry is closed before the proposed entry cutoff date due to more than enough participations.

Mensa KL does not have that crowds, but still easily can get above 40 cars, an above average number of participations for a hunt.

Major doesn't necessary to be a hunt that is difficult and tough, but normally to segregate placings between such a huge crowd, the questions crafted normally have to be slightly above average question.


My opinion is for hunts like Mensa KL that want to attract more participations from newer teams to be fully justified as a major, yet want to maintain the challenging part of the clues, the solution is to have two categories, Master and Novice just like Sun Hunt. Thus, newer team won't shy away to join the hunt and master team will continue enjoying the standard of the Mensa Hunt, they used to be.


Talking about the next possible major, Lexis Nexis hunt is started to look become one, they have above average participations easily in the range of 70 to 80 cars, and most regular teams are at it. Only problem is because there is no master category, and the organiser want to encourage new participants, the challenging part of the questions set is nowhere near a major standard.

BlogCe5nT said...

Hmmm.. e-Major?
Sounds like some Beethoven symphony!
And Why Not? Agree too, there must be e-nough participation both in numbers and "standard".

It can also be a series by itself --- just needs 4 e-COCs who care e-nough not to make things too e-asy regularly.

CK Loh said...

The advantage of e-hunt is it is borderless.

Some logistic problem like Mensa Penang and KK Hunt difficult to be major due to not all regulars will hunt there, can easily be done in e-Hunt.

On the recent ckoh's hunt, he did mentioned that there are participants even from Singapore, and some countries out of Asia are monitoring it too.

My ideal e-hunt is

Major 1: COC by ckoh (KK)
Major 2: COC by one of Penang COC
Major 3: COC by HRU (KL)
Major 4: COC by probably KL COC too, maybe from the major team like Latent Talent, Cryptically Challenged, Nuts or even HRU itself, or of course anyone who care e-nough not to make things too e-asy regularly.

Then it can be said, it is truly Malaysian e-Hunt.

Those COCs that does not have their own blog, can always post their clues via ckoh or HRU blog or even both blogs together, I am sure they don't mind.

BlogCe5nT said...

Corny's idea of e-Majors does seem to be getting somewhere.

CKoh - you have given us some practical ideas on how to make it happen too.

If we can also get one COC from Sarawak involved, the 4 hot-spots of Malaysian T/Hunting can be represented and hunters do not have to leave their homes!

The hunts can be timed to keep us ardent hunters occupied during the "winter breaks".

1-KK (incumbent Corny)
2-Penang (At least 2 there)
3-KL (many COCs can get invovled)
4-Kuching (represented by Razif?)

(not necessarily in that order, of course)

E-Majors - I like the sound of it already.

CK Loh said...

Yeah, one of the e-major should be held on the Puasa month.

And the hunt should be something like HRU Challenge 2, possibly stretch to 18 days.

Then Puasa month for 2009 onwards, will never a boring month for all of us hunters.

BlogCe5nT said...

Sorry Corny and CKLoh. I got your names mixed up in my earlier comments. I always seem to do that whenever the both of you comment on the same post! As they say in cyber talk - "my bad" (wonder if this phrase will ever get into the dictionary one day!).

Nevertheless - I appreciate the support you guys lend to promoting t-hunting - on the road, in cyber space!

Not sure about the rest yet - but I certainly am keen to see this develop into reality.

CK Loh said...

If e-Major can be materialised on Year 2009, it surely will bring hunt to another dimension.

Although majority still preferred the Motor Hunt, e-hunt will enable some new ideas that is difficult to be implemented in Motor Hunt, but is very possible to be implemented via e-Hunt.

Ideas like e-Treasure or something like that can be introduced to the hunt, and hunters will able to experience something that there might not experienced before via Motor Hunt.


HRU & Corny,

Just another suggestion, if you are really interested on going for this idea, how about setting up another blog called 'E-Major', with both of you hold the administrator password. Those COC from around Malaysia that have been identified, will be given access too to post their rules & regulations, clues, reviews and etc.

Why another blog? Just thought that it will be more organised, where you can check all info about e-Major from this blog like e-Major hunt date, e-Major scoring system, e-Major leading scorers and etc.


Just an idea.

BlogCe5nT said...

Another blog.
That could be an eventuality. But for now, since it could experimental, better to use existing resources and blog sites. The familiarity of "home ground" reduces uncertainties.

It is okay to keep each e-Major Hunt within the same domain as the "Coc's".

For COCs who are keen but do not have a blog - this may the time to start one!

Cornelius Koh said...

The idea of a Major e-hunt is very appealing. But perhaps the problem is the duration of the hunt which spans over several days, if not weeks.

In the recent virtual hunt that I organised, I think many more would have participated, but could not keep up with the time.

After the hunt, one of the participants suggested that the hunt should be similar like the motorised hunt in which it should be for several hours only. All the questions are posted at the same time and a given timeframe of, say, 5 or 6 hours within which to work out the solutions. Answers are then to be submitted via email and subject to the usual tie breakers, i.e. Q countdown, time etc.

I see no reason why this can't work. The hunt can be set on a public holiday when instead of hunting in a car, one hunts via the computer. But of course we won't have the fun of interactions between team members, exchange of ideas, those quarrels in the car etc. This is purely brainwork... and how fast you can do it!

I think to contribute one such hunt annually would be possible as far as I am concerned. In fact, I'm planning to do at least once a year anyway. Whether or not my virtual will eventually become the so-called Major is quite a different matter.

I seriously need to look into getting some sponsors advertising in my blog so that I can actually raise some funds. This can then be used for the prizes for the winners. I'm sure that would boost up the number of participants.

However, I doubt that I will have the time to actually separate the so-called masters and novice hunters. I think it's just too troublesome to attempt to classify the hunters, especially when it comes to single-effort hunts.

I've never been a very big fan of the concept of the Boleh-land anyway.

Memanglah boleh kalau kurangkan standard! Kalau nak betul-betul boleh, kena lawan dengan yang paling handal. Kalau gitu masih boleh menang, barulah dikira sebagai betul-betul BOLEH!

Cornelius Koh said...

Oh by the way, CK Loh, when I said about doing a Major, I meant doing it in KL. I shall try my best to do at least ONE next year. Otherwise, I will soon be branded as "cakap tak serupa bikin"!

I've been commenting on hunt questions by other CoCs, so I suppose it's just fair that I put my neck on the chopping board to give others the opportunity to criticise my questions for a change!

CK Loh said...

Ckoh,

On the duration, you know better. Let you decide on the duration, I think what you suggest will work, but every COC might have different opinion. Have to trial and error, I would say.

On creating on master list on the e-hunt, I think it is not necessary, as you said.

On the Boleh concept and questions should not be set easy, it applies to the hunters that want to be serious in improving the hunt skills.

However, not all that join motor hunts want to improve on the hunt skills, some of them, I would say majority of them treat treasure hunts as another social pass time activity, where if the question is slightly tougher, it defeat their initial purpose of having fun and get entertainment for weekend.

In the recent Sun Open Hunt, there are easily 300 plus cars for open category itself inclusive of the waiting list, however sad to say less than 10 percent are serious hunters who want to improve hunt skills. The rest are just treat it as another form of entertainment, just like catching movies in the weekend, they wanted to have movies that are more relaxing on the nature. If you want to relax yourself after a tough weekdays at work, normally you won't get a movie that needs alot of thinking, don't you?

And base on the lack of serious hunters, for the last few years the number of 'serious' new teams emerged are countable by fingers of one hand, I feel like hunt organisers try to tap into the market of non-serious hunters where they will set easier question to encourage them to come, and hopefully some of them will be converted to more serious hunters, after a few hunts.

So, I think the measure of some COC to set some easier question is good for the growth of the hunt base on the believe most want entertainment not improving hunt skills. However, at the same time, it will make the more serious hunters suffer from getting a quality hunt, that is why on the actual motor hunts, I think it is good to have different categories for a major hunt.


Yeah, ckoh I know you refer to crafting a major motor hunt in KL. I believe you can craft a very very good hunt in KL, but even you can craft the best hunt of the year in KL but only get around 20 cars entry, you cannot say that you craft a major.

So, my point is, it is easier for you to craft an e-major than a major in KL, unless you have partners in KL that will do all the advertisement work and marketing and sponsoring work. It is too much work for you to involve on the marketing of a new hunt and to get all the sponsors, as you base in KK. For a new hunt nowaday that does not have huge sponsors, it is unlikely you can get the crowds that qualify your hunt as a major.

Of course, if you can get COC job on the existing major in KL, then it is a different story altogether.

BlogCe5nT said...

Interesting variations to how we could work together to take the concept of a Major (e or vanilla) to the next level.

I think we have all (including myself) moved a couple of steps ahead and just need to see how things develop in near future.

After all, in my opinion, one of the most important criteria for a Major has to be "proven".

Relatively speaking, we have only just begun on e-hunts, so let's see how the fraternity "respond" in the near future to the new e-hunts and then we can see if we have the "making of e-Majors" in sight or not.

Look forward to witnessing the birth of a new "star" through HRU's Challenge 2! Only a few more days away!

Keep your ideas and passion burning, Corny and CKLoh! We may just need them at the right moment to fire us all up in a bright new direction in Malaysian Treasure Hunting!

Peter Tan said...

Why harp on a "Major" at this infant stage?

I am sure that when this treasure hunting craze started decades ago, there was never an intention for a "Major". I believed that it recently that HRU decided to pick some hunts and tagged them as "Major" - with the consensus of some their readers.

So why not we just start the trend of e-hunting, and probably a decade later, we could have a e-Major.

But I salute the idea for e-hunts. This could probably be used as a platform to train young and new hunters to be serious hunters. And there will never be a need to have two categories in future.

It would also be interesting to have some other 'grandmasters' to so some e-hunts - eg. the nutty gango, crytically challenge or the latent people.

Cornelius Koh said...

Peter,

We're not "harping" on the so-called "Major" hunts; merely trying to short-list some of those which stand out from the rest. And there is a good reason for such classification too.

As you probably already know, hunts are of different formats, styles and difficulty levels. Many of them are merely games of luck, really. There are many hunts where the top winners all score the same, and only time factor can decide the exact positions.

A strong master wrote to me once. That master said there is not much recognition for winning such hunts, because after all, although you can get perfect score, several other teams can get the perfect score too.

While it is good to win the money, you'd be surprised that many of these strong masters are hunting for the glory of winning, as in the recognition of being the best amongst the best. How can you be the best when several other teams perform the same as you?

Therefore, we need hunts where most, if not all, of the masters join, and then the questions set tough enough so that it's extremely difficult to get the perfect score. When the winners are decided not based on time, but rather because they can answer more questions then the rest, then the victory is more satisfactory.

If the word "Major" is too grand for the sports of treasure hunting, then we can always call it by a different name, but I think the basic idea of the classification is so that we can identify some of these decent hunts where winning really means winning - not because you're lucky that you rolled the coconut perfectly for that one particular try.

In this connection, I'd like to say that my definition of a "Major" is different from that of CK Loh's. In my opinion, there is no need for hundreds of teams to join. What we really need is enough master teams in the field. If you can win a hunt where most of the masters also join, then surely that should reflect on the achievement of the winning team? But on the other hand, if a team wins in 50 hunts which no other master teams join, then surely that doesn't prove that winner's superiority?

CK Loh said...

ckoh,

I respect your definition of Major.

To me, Major need 'history' factor as well, where it exists for at least a few seasons, and what ce5nt term it as 'proven'. to be considered as major. For example, Kiwanis has just pass it 25th aniversary.

Let me quote you an example. The Grand Slam of Tennis. Australia Open, French Open, Wimbledon Open and US Open has existed for years, some reach hundred years. It is proven. Since it is "grand", the competition levels and the number of participations are high.

Normally, all the top seeded players are there, and the participations are much bigger than a normal tennis tournaments. And for a grand slam it might have 20 plus tennis courts having the game simultaneously. All the big players try not to miss it and win it.

That is why it is called Grand Slam.

Lets say in a particular year, there are some seeded players boycott the US Open for some reason. The competition level is no longer tough, even you win it, you still can't say you are the best. But a grand slam win is a grand slam win.

And for the same year, lets say ckoh and ckloh managed to organise a tennis tournament in Bukit Jalil. Because of our capability to find huge sponsors, all the top 30 players in the world are there.

The competition level for the "CKOH and CKLOH Invitation Tennis 2008" are much better than the US Open itself, where the winner can really say he or she is the best, beating all the best players in the world that go to this tournament. All are them are there.


My question to some to ponder, since "CKOH and CKLOH Invitation Tennis 2008" have greater competition level, can this tournament replace US Open for the next Grand Slam?

Some might say yes, some might say no, just for you all to ponder.

But for me, it is 'No'. It is not possible, we organise 1 Competitive Tournaments, and call it a Grand Slam. It is very possible, our competition will not go on next year due to the financial crisis, don't get the sponsor. It is an insult to the Grand Slam, on my humble opinion.

And also just because of one bad US Open, doesn't mean the next US Open is not considered a Grand Slam.


Grand Slam in tennis = Major in hunt

Cornelius Koh said...

CK Loh,

Imagine for a moment that theSun Hunt and the Kiwanis Hunt are held on the same day and within the same hours as well. All the masters opt for, say theSun Hunt except for ONE master team.

That single master team wins the Kiwanis Hunt easily, beating all the new hunters.

Meanwhile, in theSun Hunt the masters had to fight very, very hard. And then eventually one of them was the Champion.

Both the winners from the Kiwanis and theSun are masters. Which of those two teams, in your opinion, can claim that they have beaten the masters? Which of those two teams, in your opinion, can claim that they've won a MAJOR hunt?

If a MAJOR is decided on the number of participants, then can anyone tell me what's the biggest number of participants the MENSA has had in the past? And what was the biggest prize of the MENSA throughout its history? How did it become a MAJOR in the first place? Was it not deemed to be a MAJOR because of its QUALITY and not the QUANTITY of participants? How come there is this talk about:

"BTW, I heard that the Grand Slam selection team is seriously reviewing its List for 2009!"

theSun Hunt has had less than 10 yrs under its belt. Yet it has gained the popularity as "the mother of all hunts". And that identity is not new - theSun has had it for a number of years now. theSun became a MAJOR without much history to its name. Did it become a MAJOR because of QUALITY or HISTORY?

I think the QUALITY of the questions and participants still counts, not the QUANTITY. So what if you open up 100 courts and everyone from all over the world comes to play. That doesn't make it a major. If it fails to attract the big names, it's not going to hold on to the MAJOR classification.

CK Loh said...

ckoh,

In laymen term, Major means Big, Major Hunts meaning Big Hunts, that most of the hunters (I mean those that are not too active) know of.

If I ask my colleagues in office, for example (those that hunt less than 5 time), what are the treasue hunts they know of, they will tell me Kiwanis, Mensa, Sun Hunt, most probably some say Lexis Nexis.

For the Mensa, you try to google around, you might see some of their past history. 2006 themes is "Diamond Diversion", seems that every year there has different themes hunt.


My definition of major hunt is it is a major hunt, big hunt with reputation and history. Literal thinking.

Your definition of major hunt is it is the 4 most 'Qualitiest' hunt.


To answer your question, both team won major hunts, both are major hunts, litereally speaking. But the team that won the Sun Hunt has the most satisfaction, of course.

A grand slam is a grand slam, not affected by the withdrawal of top seeded players. OF course, winning a grand slam without good turn up is less satisfaction, but you are still a Grand Slam champion, whether you like it or not, the people will call you that.

When there is a tournament that have 100 courts, literally speaking it is a major tournament.

Again, it doesn't mean it is the most 'qualitiest' tournament.

I will be happy if I won the tournament, because it is a major tournament with history. Of course, it will be even more satisfied if the level of the competition is tough, all the best players are there. Even, if I won a minor tournament, I will be happy too, but of course satisfaction level is far less.

The way you mention you give me an impression that if you win the tournament, you feel not satisfied because lack of competition. But as mentioned, I will be happy on every win, of course satisfaction level depends on the level of difficulty.

I never said QUALITY doesn't count, QUALITY of course is one of the many important factors that count.


I think to stop all the trouble, we just create another list

'4 Most DIfficult Hunt in Malaysia in 2009'
- Hunt A
- Hunt B
- Hunt C
- Hunt D

A major can be in the list, and the major can be out of the list. But to me a major, is still a major, literally speaking, a major is a big hunt that even some non-hunters know of, it is a reputable hunt.

Cornelius Koh said...

CK Loh,

I really don't know what the hell I'm doing here at this hour, but just one more post before I go to bed. I have a long day tomorrow!

You obviously talk about a different MAJOR than that mentioned in this blog. According to your definition, MENSA can't be a MAJOR - it simply lacks the number of participants! Clearly, the person who categorised the MENSA as a MAJOR has a different selection criteria than yours.

CK Loh said...

ckoh,

Ok, this is my last post. I will not comment further what ever you post later on. I think we should agree to disagree.

I have repeatedly said my criteria is a BIG + REPUTATION + HISTORY + QUALITY. So, Mensa is a major hunt to me.

Mensa, used to draw alot of participants in the old day, before mother of all hunts, the Sun Hunt even exist and a hunt most hunters eagerly wait for in the hunt calendar.

Imagine around few years back, before I know what treasure hunt is, and join a hunt, I already aware hunts like Kiwanis and Mensa exist. But I don't really know what they are doing, until I join a hunt myself.

When we mention premier league Big Four, by reputation we are talking about MU, Liverpool, Arsenal and Chelsea. Chelsea is the latest Big Four inclusion, take over Everton which are in the Big Four list for a long time.

It is not that the Big Four in Hunt cannot be replaced, just like in the Premier League, it can. But the current Big Four that most hunters looking for each calendar year is Mensa, Kiwanis, Sun and Putrajaya.

If you talk about QUALITY ONLY as a major, which the best cryptic clues are crafted in the hunt, I guess you might be dissapointed, when you actually join a Putrajaya Hunt, a major mentioned here.

FYI, no disregard to the winners, although last Putrajaya hunt joined by most master teams, there is only 4 master teams in the top 10 winners.

http://www.michaelpang.com.my/home/oldblog.php?blog_id=162&category_id=&start=0&arcyear=2007&arcmonth=7&curyear=&curmonth=&curday=


Reason is, there is quite a lot of mission and quiz, where you need to be in a room and identify things about Malaysia. According to the blog above, it mentioned, it is ANYONE's game.

It is nowhere near what you say, a hunt that you win, and you can say you are the best hunt team around.

However, according to the selection panel for the major, Putrajaya Hunt is still a major, despite what happen last hunt. Reputation, maybe, I am not sure.

But if quality alone is a selection criteria, then I think it is out of the major list by now.

2 Romans 1 Impostor said...

Folks, thank you for your invaluable comments. Clearly, all of you have shared very valid for/against reasons for the classification of a particular Major.

Let me share my thoughts on some of the more interesting points raised:

1) No of participation

This is not one of our criterias although it may somewhat influence our decision on borderline cases.

2) Quality of participation

Yes, the event gets our vote if the creme de la creme of hunters return year after year in support.

3) Level of difficulty

Yes definitely. To qualify as a Major in our books, it cannot be just-another-hunt. It has to be unique and of a much higher level of difficulty. However, the challenge need not come from the questions alone, and can come in other forms like TAB events or treasures.

Read our very first posting and you may better appreciate our choices:
http://cluebusters.blogspot.com/2008/08/what-if.html

2 Romans 1 Impostor said...

And Peter, there is a reason behind the need to classify the Majors. Come March 2009 and you will find out!

BlogCe5nT said...

Update : Photo album of the event, courtesy of The Malaysian Mensa Society.

http://picasaweb.google.com/divemuster/MalaysianMensaTreasureHunt2008?feat=email#

Or click on the "Photo Album" link at the top of the post.

Anonymous said...

Your means of explaіning evегything in this post is actually pleaѕant, all be able to easily understanԁ it, Τhankѕ a lot.


Heгe iѕ mу web-site; Bucket truck safety
My website ; bucket truck blog

Anonymous said...

Hello therе, just became alегt to
your blog through Gοogle, anԁ founԁ that
іt's truly informative. I'm gοing tο wаtch out for
brussels. Ӏ'll be grateful if you continue this in future. A lot of people will be benefited from your writing. Cheers!

my blog post :: locate a bucket truck
My page > used bucket trucks

Anonymous said...

Hi! ӏ've been following your website for a while now and finally got the bravery to go ahead and give you a shout out from Lubbock Tx! Just wanted to mention keep up the excellent work!

Feel free to surf to my webpage: www.lgtensunits.com

Anonymous said...

Ηi to all, becauѕе I аm really eаgег οf гeading thіs ωеblοg's post to be updated on a regular basis. It contains nice information.

Also visit my blog post tens units