Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
Moderator: James Robinson
- Kai Laddiman
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2314
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:37 pm
- Location: My bedroom
Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
1st numbers alt: (75+3-2)x(9+4)+7
16/10/2007 - Episode 4460
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.
- Richard Priest
- Devotee
- Posts: 678
- Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:30 pm
- Location: Newcastle-under-Lyme
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
I think Jeff's U2 jokes are lost on today's audience, clearly not many of them are fans.
- Kai Laddiman
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2314
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:37 pm
- Location: My bedroom
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
Did anyone notice Jeff asked Zoe to say her 7 before Lisa's 6?
16/10/2007 - Episode 4460
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.
- Ian Fitzpatrick
- Devotee
- Posts: 622
- Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:23 pm
- Location: Wimborne, Dorset
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
He did something similar yesterday when the challenger didn't write anything down.Kai Laddiman wrote:Did anyone notice Jeff asked Zoe to say her 7 before Lisa's 6?
I thought I was good at Countdown until I joined this forum
- Kai Laddiman
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2314
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:37 pm
- Location: My bedroom
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
Rachel made a reference to ING!
16/10/2007 - Episode 4460
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1123
- Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 3:15 pm
- Location: Harlow
- Matt Morrison
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 7822
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: London
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
can't believe Susie didn't mention 'jack off'
- Matt Morrison
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 7822
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: London
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
was hoping Jeff might say "no, you don't say" or something when Lisa got SARCASTIC
- Richard Priest
- Devotee
- Posts: 678
- Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:30 pm
- Location: Newcastle-under-Lyme
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
I was expecting Jeff to point out that SOCCER was in round 13.
- Les Butterworth
- Rookie
- Posts: 47
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 11:07 am
- Location: Cheshire
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
He did something similar yesterday when the challenger didn't write anything down.[/quote]
She did I believe say it was a dodgy word and the gentleman was confident of his so maybe Jeff went for the dodgey one first.
She did I believe say it was a dodgy word and the gentleman was confident of his so maybe Jeff went for the dodgey one first.
- Les Butterworth
- Rookie
- Posts: 47
- Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 11:07 am
- Location: Cheshire
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
The present champion from ther last series was not presented with any goodie bag and I do remember Jeff saying they had a new clock or was she presented with the old clock at the end of the last series??????????????
- Mark Kudlowski
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 473
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 3:15 pm
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
3rd numbers alt:
(75 - 9) x 8 = 528
528 + (5 x (3 + 1)) = 528 + 20 = 548.
(75 - 9) x 8 = 528
528 + (5 x (3 + 1)) = 528 + 20 = 548.
- Martin Bishop
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 471
- Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 4:29 pm
- Location: Tadworth, Surrey
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
My ridiculously overcomplicated numbers game of the day came in the second numbers:
50+(2*10)=70
70*7=490
490+4=494
I saw this straight away and then sat back for 29 seconds thinking "there's no way they'll get that".
A good debut from Lisa there, hanging with me for the first two halves. She may well be staying put for a few games.
50+(2*10)=70
70*7=490
490+4=494
I saw this straight away and then sat back for 29 seconds thinking "there's no way they'll get that".
A good debut from Lisa there, hanging with me for the first two halves. She may well be staying put for a few games.
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 6:29 pm
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
Moroccos was in the round where Susie had roomers. I would have risked morocco but wasn't sure about the plural, however OED says it's OK.
Personally I loved the U2 jokes, but I'm not sure the contestant got them either, or maybe she was too polite to groan ...
Personally I loved the U2 jokes, but I'm not sure the contestant got them either, or maybe she was too polite to groan ...
- Martin Bishop
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 471
- Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 4:29 pm
- Location: Tadworth, Surrey
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
Sorry, there were only two Os.Heather Culpin wrote:Moroccos was in the round where Susie had roomers. I would have risked morocco but wasn't sure about the plural, however OED says it's OK.
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 825
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:29 am
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
Yeah noticed that aswell Why do they do it???Kai Laddiman wrote:Rachel made a reference to ING!
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 6:29 pm
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
Doh! Thanks Martin. In another round OUTWARD is an alternative to OUTDRAW.
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 825
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:29 am
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
Is the word OUTDARE still allowed? (used to be in their ninth edition COD)
-
- Series 80 Champion
- Posts: 2707
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:07 am
- Location: Sheffield
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
Frayed knot. Recap will be on its way some time tomorrow after my Organic chem exam.Jojo Apollo wrote:Is the word OUTDARE still allowed? (used to be in their ninth edition COD)
- Martin Gardner
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1492
- Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:57 pm
- Location: Leeds, UK
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
Seems I'm the only person so far to get ENJOINS in the MELONS/LEMONS round.
Wow, that sounds exciting. Oh wait it says 'organic'.Dinos Sfyris wrote: Recap will be on its way some time tomorrow after my Organic chem exam.
If you cut a gandiseeg in half, do you get two gandiseegs or two halves of a gandiseeg?
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
We have been spoilt these past few weeks with the creme de la creme players- now we have winners who think "Verucca" is spelt with ONE K! I wonder how some of these people ever get on- especially who've already won a game. I know anybody can make mistakes but that is a really bad spelling mistake, does anyone else agree?
- Jon O'Neill
- Ginger Ninja
- Posts: 4554
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:45 am
- Location: London, UK
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
No, probably not. Have you been on?AnnieHall wrote:We have been spoilt these past few weeks with the creme de la creme players- now we have winners who think "Verucca" is spelt with ONE K! I wonder how some of these people ever get on- especially who've already won a game. I know anybody can make mistakes but that is a really bad spelling mistake, does anyone else agree?
- Martin Gardner
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1492
- Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:57 pm
- Location: Leeds, UK
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
In fairness under the studio lights, I've seen players go for much sillier things than that!Jon O'Neill wrote:No, probably not. Have you been on?AnnieHall wrote:We have been spoilt these past few weeks with the creme de la creme players- now we have winners who think "Verucca" is spelt with ONE K! I wonder how some of these people ever get on- especially who've already won a game. I know anybody can make mistakes but that is a really bad spelling mistake, does anyone else agree?
If you cut a gandiseeg in half, do you get two gandiseegs or two halves of a gandiseeg?
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13382
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
I still think it was worthy of comment, whether one has been on the show or not!Martin Gardner wrote:In fairness under the studio lights, I've seen players go for much sillier things than that!Jon O'Neill wrote:No, probably not. Have you been on?AnnieHall wrote:We have been spoilt these past few weeks with the creme de la creme players- now we have winners who think "Verucca" is spelt with ONE K! I wonder how some of these people ever get on- especially who've already won a game. I know anybody can make mistakes but that is a really bad spelling mistake, does anyone else agree?
- Charlie Reams
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9494
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
- Location: Cambridge
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
And have you been on?Gavin Chipper wrote:I still think it was worthy of comment, whether one has been on the show or not!
- Jon O'Neill
- Ginger Ninja
- Posts: 4554
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:45 am
- Location: London, UK
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
I think the wonderment at how somebody that thick can get on the show could only have come from the position of somebody who has already been on, so I was confirming this. If it isn't the case, then it seems pretty ridiculous to me that this person is mocking a superior player's ability. More ridiculous than spelling it with ONE K!!Gavin Chipper wrote:I still think it was worthy of comment, whether one has been on the show or not!Martin Gardner wrote:In fairness under the studio lights, I've seen players go for much sillier things than that!Jon O'Neill wrote: No, probably not. Have you been on?
MG is right, here. Ergo, you don't know shit.
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
I tried to get on about 10 years ago but failed, I wouldn't make a stupid spelling mistake like that. I'm hopeless at the numbers, that's why I don't try to get on it again. Most days I can keep up with the contestants, often I beat them (Except the champions, of course!)
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
I would like to add that, although I do accept just how nerve-wracking being a contestant can be (Another reason why I won't apply again) there is no excuse for a spelling muistake to that degree (She didn't even say she thought it was risky, so must've believed that was the correct spelling).
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
You know how to spell every word then? If you google VERUKA you'll find over a million hits, some where it has been used as a corporate name, so it's quite plausible that it could have stuck from an encounter with such a brand.AnnieHall wrote:I tried to get on about 10 years ago but failed, I wouldn't make a stupid spelling mistake like that. I'm hopeless at the numbers, that's why I don't try to get on it again. Most days I can keep up with the contestants, often I beat them (Except the champions, of course!)
I laughed at LEYLANDII when it came up last week because I'd never heard of the word, but the majority of people I've spoken to about it have, so I feel a bit silly now. Just one of those things, I like to think I have a fairly good vocabulary but I genuinely can't remember ever remember coming across it (I'm not a keen gardener) - maybe you suffer from warts?
Either way I look forward to seeing your faultless letters games when you sign up for apterous.org.
-
- Series 80 Champion
- Posts: 2707
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:07 am
- Location: Sheffield
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
lolcats can you say Pot calling the Kettle black?AnnieHall wrote:there is no excuse for a spelling muistake
- Martin Gardner
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1492
- Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:57 pm
- Location: Leeds, UK
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
In fairness Zoe the champion gave the game away a bit, they were both pretty good I thought, quite a few maxes in the early round between them, but including words and numbers, how many solutions did Zoe have disallowed? I think it was 4, or more.
If you cut a gandiseeg in half, do you get two gandiseegs or two halves of a gandiseeg?
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1955
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:02 am
- Location: UK
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
I made it four rounds disallowed for Zoe, including one numbers round.Martin Gardner wrote:In fairness Zoe the champion gave the game away a bit, they were both pretty good I thought, quite a few maxes in the early round between them, but including words and numbers, how many solutions did Zoe have disallowed? I think it was 4, or more.
Regarding them both being pretty good, that doesn't fit with how I saw them. Playing along at home, I rarely beat anyone by more than about 20, but on this game, I beat Lisa by 48 and Zoe by 75. Of course, Lisa will now go and thrash me in her second game.
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
I am a better speller than I am typist!
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13382
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
Nope.Charlie Reams wrote:And have you been on?Gavin Chipper wrote:I still think it was worthy of comment, whether one has been on the show or not!
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13382
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
I'd still say it's worth a mention, even if not as a criticism (well actually yeah why not). We can all have a laugh even if we know that we could all make silly-looking errors ourselves (just not that one).Jon O'Neill wrote:I think the wonderment at how somebody that thick can get on the show could only have come from the position of somebody who has already been on, so I was confirming this. If it isn't the case, then it seems pretty ridiculous to me that this person is mocking a superior player's ability. More ridiculous than spelling it with ONE K!!
MG is right, here. Ergo, you don't know shit.
I suppose the best response to your last bit would be to say that I do know shit, but I'm not sure that sounds any better.
- Kirk Bevins
- God
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
- Location: York, UK
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
Wow I risked LEASINGS^ too. Was well surprised to hear it not in.
-
- Series 59 Champion
- Posts: 574
- Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 4:26 pm
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
You can have GLASSINE as an anagram, though.Kirk Bevins wrote:Wow I risked LEASINGS^ too. Was well surprised to hear it not in.
- Kai Laddiman
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2314
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:37 pm
- Location: My bedroom
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
*prod*Dinos Sfyris wrote:Recap will be on its way some time tomorrow after my Organic chem exam
16/10/2007 - Episode 4460
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.
- Kirk Bevins
- God
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
- Location: York, UK
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
Ah I learnt this one ages ago and had forgotten it. Thanks.Junaid Mubeen wrote:You can have GLASSINE as an anagram, though.Kirk Bevins wrote:Wow I risked LEASINGS^ too. Was well surprised to hear it not in.
-
- Series 80 Champion
- Posts: 2707
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:07 am
- Location: Sheffield
Re: Spoilers for Tuesday 3rd February 2009
Sorry mate. I was busy with a post exam afternoon celebratory piss-up (sorryKai!) followed by work (which was a massive anticlimax ). Don't have time now but it's the first thing on my agenda after I get back from karate tonight thoughKai Laddiman wrote:*prod*Dinos Sfyris wrote:Recap will be on its way some time tomorrow after my Organic chem exam