CCCWC February competition voters’ comments
Clue no. 16: Employment such as Scrooge might offer with Jacob M not about, possibly?
Back to competition result |
All the comments |
Other competitions
A clue to MCJOB.
3 comments refer to this clue (from 3 competitors, 0 others)
Move your mouse pointer over any bold clue number to see the clue.
Here is the text
| Comments on the competition |
|---|
| 1. |
|---|
| Although MCJOB is derived from McDonald's, it doesn't have to be in a fast food outlet, and I preferred clues that allowed for this. Overall I judged 6 to be the best clue – a neat and sound use of the Reggie Perrin idea: could this be from January's winner again? Second place to 16. I thought 2 was the best of the initial letter clues and 38 the best of the Biblical Jobs. Points also to 16, 19 and 24. Some that didn't quite work for me were: 1 Two indirect anagram fragments are too much. 10 CMJ is not a widely recognized set of initials, so this clue has little impact. 28 Using McDonald's in the clue is rather a giveaway! 44 Surely libellous. 46 Doesn't work – MJCOB? 47 Clever idea but a bit too obscure 48 Good clue marred by sloppy punctuation – it needs a capital letter, an apostrophe and arguably a question mark. 52 As in several clues, I thought the definition was too vague. |
| 2. |
|---|
| For the most part, as uninspiring a set of clues as I can remember, almost all being marred by one or more of unsoundness, an unconvincing surface, clumsiness, contorted over-complexity or rather tired predictability. There were, however, a few very honourable exceptions. I found I couldn’t separate 16 and 25 for quality and gave them both 5 points, the latter as neat and economical an &lit as one could ask for and the former offering an excellent anagram and the most original and pleasing surface. 38 – 3 points – is very good too, but slightly spoiled by the rather heavy-handed indication of Job. 19 – 2 points – much the most successful of the many clues using the “first letters” device, melding it with a good and well-disguised definition into an original surface, is let down by the slightly dodgy “to distribute” as an anagram indicator. |
| 3. |
|---|
1st (4 pts): 16 (smooth and efficient — the explanation suggests an Azed regular}
2nd= (2.5 points each): 10 (nice image, although I thought the reference in the explanation to CMJ's job was irrelevant) and 25 (neat, but is the exclam really necessary?)
4th= (1 point each): 2, 19, 26, 30, 34, 35 (most of them initial letters clues, all of which were fine although perhaps a bit of a cop-out; but the clue-word was so hard that this is forgiveable) |
