Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Moderator: James Robinson
- Kai Laddiman
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2314
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:37 pm
- Location: My bedroom
Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Very tricky first numbers there. Difficulty rating 15%.
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.
- Matt Morrison
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 7822
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: London
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Fafux Ache. forgotten to turn on TV again... I hate catching up on +1, means I can't take part in this thread... well not live anyway. boo.
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 327
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 10:18 am
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 327
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 10:18 am
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
I didn't even know it was a real word... have been meaning to ask that for ages.
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 327
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 10:18 am
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Sorry, not much of a spot really since dic corner saw it, but I posted here before they said it, honest.
That last round... DEFLATOR?
edit: Yup, DEFLATOR is in.
That last round... DEFLATOR?
edit: Yup, DEFLATOR is in.
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
In the 7th round (LREKNOYQI) I made YOLKER (as in double yolker) Is that allowed? (DC saw "YOLKIER")
- Adam Dexter
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 494
- Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:41 pm
- Location: Kidderminster
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
APTEROUS!
And they didn't mention the site! Bitch.
And they didn't mention the site! Bitch.
ADAM DEXTER: MAXED DATER
We're off to button moon
We're off to button moon
-
- Rookie
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 1:06 am
- Location: Lincolnshire
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Letters 1 – ABATE
Letters 2 – POSTED
Letters 3 – MATIER
Letters 4 – HOMIES
Numbers 1 – 844 (2 out)
Tea Time Teaser 1 – Nope!
Letters 5 – PLANES
Letters 6 – MANGOES
Letters 7 – ROLE
Letters 8 – BEDHEAD
Numbers 2 – 459 - GET THOSE 10 POINTS IN THERE, GIRL! YES!!!!!!
Tea Time Teaser 2 – got GARGLING
Letters 9 – SPROUTS (yeeks! Missed Apterous!)
Letters 10 – FLOATED
Letters 11 – COINED
Numbers 3 – 165!!!!!! ANOTHER ONE SOLVED!!!!!!! This can’t be happening!!!!!
Conundrum – Nope!
Letters 2 – POSTED
Letters 3 – MATIER
Letters 4 – HOMIES
Numbers 1 – 844 (2 out)
Tea Time Teaser 1 – Nope!
Letters 5 – PLANES
Letters 6 – MANGOES
Letters 7 – ROLE
Letters 8 – BEDHEAD
Numbers 2 – 459 - GET THOSE 10 POINTS IN THERE, GIRL! YES!!!!!!
Tea Time Teaser 2 – got GARGLING
Letters 9 – SPROUTS (yeeks! Missed Apterous!)
Letters 10 – FLOATED
Letters 11 – COINED
Numbers 3 – 165!!!!!! ANOTHER ONE SOLVED!!!!!!! This can’t be happening!!!!!
Conundrum – Nope!
- Neil Zussman
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 328
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:41 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
I don't know the exact figures, but it seemed like there were very few round today where both contestants scored? Anyone know what the record for that is? (I guess excluding one-sided games would be better, and yes I am thinking of DoD when I say that!)
- Martin Gardner
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1492
- Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:57 pm
- Location: Leeds, UK
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Not really a record, just a poor game. I suppose that's why I stopped watching Countdown for quite a while - a lot of poor games, and the celebrity guests are usually tedious. Now that I watch on "Watch Online" that's less of a problem, because you don't even need to fastforward, it's just one click! So yeah, I wish Zoe had won yesterday, as she seemed better than those two.
Nothing particularly to add, apart from PODCAST - still only seven, but it's a recent word, and a "Jeff equaller" with HEADEND in the BEDHEAD round.
Nothing particularly to add, apart from PODCAST - still only seven, but it's a recent word, and a "Jeff equaller" with HEADEND in the BEDHEAD round.
If you cut a gandiseeg in half, do you get two gandiseegs or two halves of a gandiseeg?
- Ben Hunter
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1770
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:54 pm
- Location: S Yorks
- Charlie Reams
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9494
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
- Location: Cambridge
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Brilliant!
-
- Series 59 Champion
- Posts: 574
- Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 4:26 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
I got NOPALES and DEFLATOR as DC beaters and made up the invalid SMUDGEON in one round. In the final numbers I thought it was a shame viewers would miss seeing the 33x5 solution and then Rachel stepped up. Class act, that one.
-
- Rookie
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 8:57 pm
- Location: Bisley, Surrey
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Nobody's mentioned MODEST in Round2; I was hoping one of the contestants would declare "a modest 6", but (I think) it was only a 4 & a 5.
- Steven Tew
- Rookie
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 7:35 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Lisa's MARRIER was disallowed, but she could have had TARRIER.
I got the conundrum.
I got the conundrum.
- Joseph Bolas
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2446
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:19 am
- Location: Liverpool, UK
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Awesome pictureBen Hunter wrote:
I was hoping that they would go to the board when Susie said APTEROUS and they did
That should be Apterous's new logo
-
- Rookie
- Posts: 59
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 7:56 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
I'm upset with myself for not getting the easy 459
After the first numbers round included a 9 and a total divisible by 9 AND Rachel highlighted the fact I was too caught up in making 51 to multiply by the 9 to get the 459 in the same way. Totally ignored the conventional technique!
After the first numbers round included a 9 and a total divisible by 9 AND Rachel highlighted the fact I was too caught up in making 51 to multiply by the 9 to get the 459 in the same way. Totally ignored the conventional technique!
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 6:29 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
I may have got the letters wrong again, but I think ENDGAMES was in there somewhere. And as for Apterous - love to try it but over the last two weeks I've tried repeatedly from numerous different macs and PCs and have never once managed to get past the screen that counts down until it times out so it's probably just as well it didn't get a plug. Sorry Charlie.
- Kai Laddiman
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2314
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:37 pm
- Location: My bedroom
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Another plug from Charlie without even appearing on the show!
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.
- Kai Laddiman
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2314
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:37 pm
- Location: My bedroom
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
What exactly did Roy declare in Rd2?
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.
- Martin Bishop
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 471
- Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 4:29 pm
- Location: Tadworth, Surrey
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Have you got up-to-date Java?Heather Culpin wrote:I may have got the letters wrong again, but I think ENDGAMES was in there somewhere. And as for Apterous - love to try it but over the last two weeks I've tried repeatedly from numerous different macs and PCs and have never once managed to get past the screen that counts down until it times out so it's probably just as well it didn't get a plug. Sorry Charlie.
- Charlie Reams
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9494
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
- Location: Cambridge
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Yeah that doesn't really make any sense. I don't know why you're having such problems but clearly lots of other people aren't.Heather Culpin wrote:I may have got the letters wrong again, but I think ENDGAMES was in there somewhere. And as for Apterous - love to try it but over the last two weeks I've tried repeatedly from numerous different macs and PCs and have never once managed to get past the screen that counts down until it times out so it's probably just as well it didn't get a plug. Sorry Charlie.
- Kai Laddiman
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2314
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:37 pm
- Location: My bedroom
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Similarly, loads of people have their chat break in-game, but that has never happened to me. But it could be my computer, as the exclamation mark Java works better for me than the other one.Charlie Reams wrote:Yeah that doesn't really make any sense. I don't know why you're having such problems but clearly lots of other people aren't.Heather Culpin wrote:I may have got the letters wrong again, but I think ENDGAMES was in there somewhere. And as for Apterous - love to try it but over the last two weeks I've tried repeatedly from numerous different macs and PCs and have never once managed to get past the screen that counts down until it times out so it's probably just as well it didn't get a plug. Sorry Charlie.
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.
- Charlie Reams
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9494
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
- Location: Cambridge
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Chat has improved a lot lately, although it still has some wrinkles. I would now advise people to upgrade to Update 11 if they're having problems, I'm pretty sure I've fixed the teething difficulties now.Kai Laddiman wrote:Similarly, loads of people have their chat break in-game, but that has never happened to me. But it could be my computer, as the exclamation mark Java works better for me than the other one.Charlie Reams wrote:Yeah that doesn't really make any sense. I don't know why you're having such problems but clearly lots of other people aren't.Heather Culpin wrote:I may have got the letters wrong again, but I think ENDGAMES was in there somewhere. And as for Apterous - love to try it but over the last two weeks I've tried repeatedly from numerous different macs and PCs and have never once managed to get past the screen that counts down until it times out so it's probably just as well it didn't get a plug. Sorry Charlie.
- Martin Bishop
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 471
- Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 4:29 pm
- Location: Tadworth, Surrey
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
I did have that problem once recently, but it was working again the next day.Charlie Reams wrote:Yeah that doesn't really make any sense. I don't know why you're having such problems but clearly lots of other people aren't.Heather Culpin wrote:I may have got the letters wrong again, but I think ENDGAMES was in there somewhere. And as for Apterous - love to try it but over the last two weeks I've tried repeatedly from numerous different macs and PCs and have never once managed to get past the screen that counts down until it times out so it's probably just as well it didn't get a plug. Sorry Charlie.
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
And you didn't see (6*7-25)*3 to make the 51? Pff.Vikash Shah wrote:I'm upset with myself for not getting the easy 459
After the first numbers round included a 9 and a total divisible by 9 AND Rachel highlighted the fact I was too caught up in making 51 to multiply by the 9 to get the 459 in the same way. Totally ignored the conventional technique!
-
- Rookie
- Posts: 59
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 7:56 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Nope I realised I wanted to do 17*3*9 but couldn't get the 17. If I were a proper contestant playing against you, I think I'd have been whitewashed.Jon Corby wrote:And you didn't see (6*7-25)*3 to make the 51? Pff.Vikash Shah wrote:I'm upset with myself for not getting the easy 459
After the first numbers round included a 9 and a total divisible by 9 AND Rachel highlighted the fact I was too caught up in making 51 to multiply by the 9 to get the 459 in the same way. Totally ignored the conventional technique!
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Haha, not really. I too spotted that it was divisible by nine and set about finding the 51. It was only about a minute after the time (paused on Sky+) that I finally found it. I unpaused my box and was stunned when both players declared 459. "How can I have missed an easier way of making the 51?" I thought, until they gave their solutions. OhVikash Shah wrote:Nope I realised I wanted to do 17*3*9 but couldn't get the 17. If I were a proper contestant playing against you, I think I'd have been whitewashed.Jon Corby wrote:And you didn't see (6*7-25)*3 to make the 51? Pff.
-
- Rookie
- Posts: 59
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 7:56 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Well if the great Jon Corby slipped up too, I will try to put it behind me and get on with my lifeJon Corby wrote:Haha, not really. I too spotted that it was divisible by nine and set about finding the 51. It was only about a minute after the time (paused on Sky+) that I finally found it. I unpaused my box and was stunned when both players declared 459. "How can I have missed an easier way of making the 51?" I thought, until they gave their solutions. Oh
-
- Rookie
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 8:57 pm
- Location: Bisley, Surrey
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
This is probably the way Martin Bishop did itJon Corby wrote:And you didn't see (6*7-25)*3 to make the 51? Pff.Vikash Shah wrote:I'm upset with myself for not getting the easy 459
After the first numbers round included a 9 and a total divisible by 9 AND Rachel highlighted the fact I was too caught up in making 51 to multiply by the 9 to get the 459 in the same way. Totally ignored the conventional technique!
... then was equally surprised when there was an easier solution
- Martin Gardner
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1492
- Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:57 pm
- Location: Leeds, UK
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Just a little note, SIGH should have been disallowed in one round because he declared 5, and that's 4. In another round, he offered FATE for 4 when he could have FATED or FATES!
If you cut a gandiseeg in half, do you get two gandiseegs or two halves of a gandiseeg?
- Ian Fitzpatrick
- Devotee
- Posts: 621
- Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:23 pm
- Location: Wimborne, Dorset
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Except that there wasn't an F in the selection!Martin Gardner wrote:Just a little note, SIGH should have been disallowed in one round because he declared 5, and that's 4. In another round, he offered FATE for 4 when he could have FATED or FATES!
I thought I was good at Countdown until I joined this forum
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Actually, he had made "Sighs" as there were 2 "S's"
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
He didn't say that though - he said SIGH and then even spelt it out.AnnieHall wrote:Actually, he had made "Sighs" as there were 2 "S's"
- Martin Gardner
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1492
- Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:57 pm
- Location: Leeds, UK
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Yeah we've been debating that on the recaps forum. It sounded like FATE to me, but if it wasn't that, what was it? Oh and in the SIGH round he said SIGH (with no S) and then spelt it out loud S-I-G-H.Ian Fitzpatrick wrote:Except that there wasn't an F in the selection!Martin Gardner wrote:Just a little note, SIGH should have been disallowed in one round because he declared 5, and that's 4. In another round, he offered FATE for 4 when he could have FATED or FATES!
If you cut a gandiseeg in half, do you get two gandiseegs or two halves of a gandiseeg?
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
He was funny.
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 2:25 pm
- Location: Blairgowrie
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Hi! My first time on this forum! It's been very interesting watching the comments here the last few days. I think I was quite lucky with who I've been up against. I didn't play very well. I know I can do better. I can't believe some of the words and numbers I missed but I was extremely nervous.
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Hi Lisa! I think you've been great and I look forward to recapping your game tonightLisa Thomson wrote:Hi! My first time on this forum! It's been very interesting watching the comments here the last few days. I think I was quite lucky with who I've been up against. I didn't play very well. I know I can do better. I can't believe some of the words and numbers I missed but I was extremely nervous.
(Especially as I now know to avoid making certain comments in light of your presence here...)
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 2:25 pm
- Location: Blairgowrie
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Oh wow! Thanks. I get the feeling people think it's a bit dull, but that's because we've just been spoilt with cofc. Not all of us are "champion" status!!
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
I doubt it, I'd imagine the majority of viewers are pleased to get rid of the nerds and get some "normal" people back on, and words they've heard of.Lisa Thomson wrote:Oh wow! Thanks. I get the feeling people think it's a bit dull, but that's because we've just been spoilt with cofc. Not all of us are "champion" status!!
Your opponent yesterday was a bit bananas, but obviously you can't help that.
(btw, I also don't deserve 'champion' status, as my workmates delight in pointing out to me )
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 2:25 pm
- Location: Blairgowrie
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Well, champion or not, I did have a fantastic time down in Leeds. Everyone there is so nice, and I felt really looked after.
-
- Series 59 Champion
- Posts: 574
- Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 4:26 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Welcome Lisa! I am enjoying being able to watch the show as an avid viewer again, without knowing the result. I hope you go a long way, so far so good. I think everyone who's been on the show will admit to suffering from nerves at some point, especially in the beginning, so don't worry about that!
-
- Series 80 Champion
- Posts: 2707
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:07 am
- Location: Sheffield
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Missed first couple of rounds but if you're referring to round 6, letters were MGSNDUEOA so you got the wrong letters again! I had OSMUNDA which raised a few eyebrows when I blurted it out in the staff breakroom!Heather Culpin wrote:I may have got the letters wrong again, but I think ENDGAMES was in there somewhere.
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 6:29 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
Irrelevant to this but as I mentioned Apterous earlier - I had the day off today and tried it from a PC this morning. It worked and I was able to get in and play a game, so maybe it's just a problem in the evenings when it's probably busier. Anyway it was very good, so thanks Charlie. Martin - yes, I've got the most up to date versions of Java on the two PCs and two Macs I've tried it on.
- Charlie Reams
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9494
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
- Location: Cambridge
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 4th February 2009
My guess would be just that you happened to try logging in at some time when it was broken anyway.Heather Culpin wrote:Irrelevant to this but as I mentioned Apterous earlier - I had the day off today and tried it from a PC this morning. It worked and I was able to get in and play a game, so maybe it's just a problem in the evenings when it's probably busier. Anyway it was very good, so thanks Charlie. Martin - yes, I've got the most up to date versions of Java on the two PCs and two Macs I've tried it on.