Quirks presents...

1:01pm: Further to the Week
I think the biggest problem is that it's more tempting to quit after two Duels than three when it really should be the reverse. £5k/5% and £25k/25% perhaps? That might at least tempt people on to three Duels.

That said, I think my strategy now would be to turn down the fixed sum but take the proportion of the jackpot. Note also that the size of the jackpot would barely affect my decision-making - as it starts at the final point of inflection on my utility curve - but for the percentage chip. Ten (or indeed fifteen) grand with one more win for either One Rock or thirty grand, and two more for £150k? The former step means rather less than the latter. Ten grand with one more win for either One Rock or sixty grand, and two more for £300k? Completely different proposition.

The Commentariat are likening this to Greed; I think this is perhaps down to a combination of risk-averse contestants, perhaps a slight uncertainty about the true nature of the gamble, probable uncertainty over the prospective opponents and the fact that M.N. No Deel Sod is a couple of hundred miles west-north-west of the Duel Arena, and Nick Hancock is a couple of hundred million miles away in his approach.

(Seriously, I don't think there's ever been a UK game show where contestants have been consistently less risk-averse than Deal or No Deal. The only other possibility is Millionaire, but even then the Duncan Bickleys and Rob Mitchells were very much the exception. How many people stopped on £64,000 even with a 50:50? Too many, that's for sure. If it were not, the new tree would not have gone £50k - £75k - £150k.)

1:37pm: Canny consumerism
Saturday morning saw me spend a non-trivial amount of money in shops in central Southampton for, I believe, the first time ever. It's certainly the most I've ever spent there.

Every purchase, though, has 'long-term thinking' written all over it:

* Pack of two airers, Argos. Saves money and CO2 from using the tumble driers in the hall launderette.
* Four rechargeable D batteries, Argos. For powering my cheap-but-useful electronic keyboard.
* Solar-powered recharger, Maplin. Which goes with the last one, natch.
* Old book of short classical pieces, Oxfam. Many of these are English translations; composers represented by more than one piece are Brahms, Schumann, Schubert, Franz and Arne (with two settings of Shakespearian text, one of which is familiar to me).

And here lies the long-term thinking. All these are written in the treble clef, are all seen as suited to transpositions of an octave... out of twenty-five, no fewer than eleven have a highest note of F5. Most of the rest seem to go up to F#5... on the other hand, precisely one goes below C4.

Oh heck, summary. I think we have a regular feature here.

The Hundred Best Short Songs, Book Two
Lowest note: B3
Highest note: G5
Largest range: compound sixth
Smallest range: one octave
Note: apparently Books One and Two are intended for 'Soprano, Mezzo-Soprano, and Tenor' and Three and Four for 'Contralto, Baritone and Bass'. The ranges of each other song in the other books are listed, though Two was the only one in this Oxfam; all seem to be similarly demanding, and roughly in an order from highest (One) to lowest (Four). The differences are not that significant, however; roughly one tone separates each book on average, and there is more intra- than inter-book variation.)

A mildly interesting comparison with Clarkson, there. Yes, this analysis is going to come with every book of sheet music I acquire.

There is now actually a strategy here, which shall be suggested to Helen tomorrow. Flit between styles - pop, classical art song, musical theatre - while making a general progression, specifically towards songs that stretch my range upward, perhaps working on other things. That said, the stylistic variation will account for those 'other things', I suspect.

One way to do it; after Breakaway, move on to one of the art songs, the obvious choice in this collection being the English translation of Brahms' Wiegenlied (Cradle Song), the range of which is Eb4-Eb5. (Read: Eb3-Eb4, in my case.) The next reversion to the Clarkson canon - which may or may not then be preceded with something from musical theatre, and if it does then that probably means I Couldn't Be Happier - could then be to Because Of You. Recall that this was recorded such that its highest note is F5, but is written a semitone lower. Instant opportunity for progression! After that, the art songs can come back, and then... goodness knows.

I am, of course, a strategist in almost anything I do. This is certainly no exception.