Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
Moderator: James Robinson
- James Robinson
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 10580
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:38 pm
- Location: Mirfield, West Yorkshire
Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
Well, Oliver is now the #1 seed for at least the next week, but can he reach his 6th win today?
His opponent today should keep his/her guard up, as he has been in fantastic form after his seemingly nervous start last week. Quite a lots of his words have been pretty impressive. (Still amazed that FECKERS/FOCKERS isn't in the dictionary though, well not yet anyway.)
John Stapleton remains in DC for the rest week, as he continues his 2nd stint next to Susie.
Can Oliver make it 6 out of 6 Answers on a postcard, or below this message.
His opponent today should keep his/her guard up, as he has been in fantastic form after his seemingly nervous start last week. Quite a lots of his words have been pretty impressive. (Still amazed that FECKERS/FOCKERS isn't in the dictionary though, well not yet anyway.)
John Stapleton remains in DC for the rest week, as he continues his 2nd stint next to Susie.
Can Oliver make it 6 out of 6 Answers on a postcard, or below this message.
- Kirk Bevins
- God
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
- Location: York, UK
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
Yes.James Robinson wrote: Can Oliver make it 6 out of 6 Answers on a postcard, or below this message.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 6410
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
Spoilers within spoilers?Kirk Bevins wrote:Yes.James Robinson wrote: Can Oliver make it 6 out of 6 Answers on a postcard, or below this message.
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
-
- Rookie
- Posts: 95
- Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 8:10 pm
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
Upset that you haven't mentioned that Huddersfield are going to stuff my team, Bristol Rovers tonight James.
- James Robinson
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 10580
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:38 pm
- Location: Mirfield, West Yorkshire
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
My apologies, Niall. I actually didn't know they were your team.Niall Seymour wrote:Upset that you haven't mentioned that Huddersfield are going to stuff my team, Bristol Rovers tonight James.
P.S. 3-0 to the Terriers tonight, I'm fairly sure.
- Matt Morrison
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 7822
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: London
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
You left a question mark in, James - oops.James Robinson wrote:Well, Oliver is now the #1 seed for at least the next week, but can he reach his 6th win today?
- Matt Morrison
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 7822
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: London
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
She's not been practising her Triggonomics.
- Sue Sanders
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1334
- Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 10:29 pm
- Location: Whitstable Kent
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
FECKERS getting into the dictionary soon makes sense, because FECK is already in ..but why would FOCKERS get in??James Robinson wrote:Still amazed that FECKERS/FOCKERS isn't in the dictionary though, well not yet anyway.
CROONING for 8 in RACCOON round?
'This one goes up to eleven'
Fool's top.
Fool's top.
- Kirk Bevins
- God
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
- Location: York, UK
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
Not two Ns.Sue Sanders wrote:
CROONING for 8 in RACCOON round?
- Sue Sanders
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1334
- Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 10:29 pm
- Location: Whitstable Kent
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
Did wonder if I'd made a mistake. That's the problem with working with pen and paper.
'This one goes up to eleven'
Fool's top.
Fool's top.
- Sue Sanders
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1334
- Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 10:29 pm
- Location: Whitstable Kent
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
Ha - but got both 9's. Pen and paper rule!
'This one goes up to eleven'
Fool's top.
Fool's top.
- Kirk Bevins
- God
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
- Location: York, UK
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
I work with pen and paper and have no problems at all. I do have a degree in copying though.Sue Sanders wrote:Did wonder if I'd made a mistake. That's the problem with working with pen and paper.
Anyway, another marvellous performance, Oli. Would have been a crucial conundrum between us today - you just don't relent. Top stuff.
- Mark Kudlowski
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 473
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 3:15 pm
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
3rd numbers:
(25 + 6 + 3) x 2 x 8
(25 + 6 + 3) x 2 x 8
- James Robinson
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 10580
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:38 pm
- Location: Mirfield, West Yorkshire
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
Alternative To 2nd Numbers:
4 x 100 = 400, 7 + 6 = 13, 13 x 9 = 117, 400 + 117 = 517
4 x 100 = 400, 7 + 6 = 13, 13 x 9 = 117, 400 + 117 = 517
- Brian Moore
- Devotee
- Posts: 582
- Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 6:11 pm
- Location: Exeter
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1272
- Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:57 pm
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
I know what a fine-tooth comb looks like, but I've never seen a toothcomb. Something to do with aggressive flossing? Quite surprised to see it's in the dictionary.
- Kirk Bevins
- God
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
- Location: York, UK
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
Oh? Toothcomb is quite a normal word I thought, i.e. the verb "to toothcomb" meaning to look meticulously.David Williams wrote:I know what a fine-tooth comb looks like, but I've never seen a toothcomb. Something to do with aggressive flossing? Quite surprised to see it's in the dictionary.
- James Robinson
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 10580
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:38 pm
- Location: Mirfield, West Yorkshire
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
HUDDERSFIELD TOWN 0 - 0 BRISTOL ROVERSJames Robinson wrote:My apologies, Niall. I actually didn't know they were your team.Niall Seymour wrote:Upset that you haven't mentioned that Huddersfield are going to stuff my team, Bristol Rovers tonight James.
P.S. 3-0 to the Terriers tonight, I'm fairly sure.
Oh well, at least I was half right.
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
Ollie, how could you?Brian Moore wrote:
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1272
- Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:57 pm
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
The point is that you would look meticulously with a comb with fine teeth - a fine-tooth comb. For some reason most people just get this wrong, and it's become a fine toothcomb. The word has found its way into common usage and even into the dictionary even though there's no such thing.Kirk Bevins wrote:Oh? Toothcomb is quite a normal word I thought, i.e. the verb "to toothcomb" meaning to look meticulously.David Williams wrote:I know what a fine-tooth comb looks like, but I've never seen a toothcomb. Something to do with aggressive flossing? Quite surprised to see it's in the dictionary.
I only need a few hundred more of these and I could do the Susie Dent spot.
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
OR MAYBE THERE IS?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!!David Williams wrote:The point is that you would look meticulously with a comb with fine teeth - a fine-tooth comb. For some reason most people just get this wrong, and it's become a fine toothcomb. The word has found its way into common usage and even into the dictionary even though there's no such thing.
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1272
- Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:57 pm
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
I really should do my research before I make pronouncements! Not sure how to use one for searching, and why only a fine one will do, but there you go.Michael Wallace wrote:OR MAYBE THERE IS?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!!David Williams wrote:The point is that you would look meticulously with a comb with fine teeth - a fine-tooth comb. For some reason most people just get this wrong, and it's become a fine toothcomb. The word has found its way into common usage and even into the dictionary even though there's no such thing.
- Martin Bishop
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 471
- Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 4:29 pm
- Location: Tadworth, Surrey
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
That sense of toothcomb hasn't made it into the ODE. My copy has the fine toothcomb definition only, with the fine-tooth comb derivation explained beneath.David Williams wrote:I really should do my research before I make pronouncements! Not sure how to use one for searching, and why only a fine one will do, but there you go.Michael Wallace wrote:OR MAYBE THERE IS?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!!David Williams wrote:The point is that you would look meticulously with a comb with fine teeth - a fine-tooth comb. For some reason most people just get this wrong, and it's become a fine toothcomb. The word has found its way into common usage and even into the dictionary even though there's no such thing.
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
Yeah, I noticed that too. Still, thought it was pretty cool.Martin Bishop wrote:That sense of toothcomb hasn't made it into the ODE. My copy has the fine toothcomb definition only, with the fine-tooth comb derivation explained beneath.
- Charlie Reams
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9494
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
- Location: Cambridge
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
Seems we've captured the zeitgeist once again; from the current Private Eye:
C. J. Rose wrote:Mr Brian Leedham says that "fine tooth comb" should be a "fine-toothed comb". Not so. The word "toothcomb" has a long and respectable history. The word presumably indicates the difference between a comb with teeth and other sorts of comb, such as a currycomb or possibly a cock's-comb. "Fine toothcomb" is therefore perfectly acceptable.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13382
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
And that's a mighty fine toothcomb you've got yourself there sir, if you don't mind my saying so.
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1272
- Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:57 pm
Re: Spoilers For Tuesday January 19th 2010
We?Charlie Reams wrote:Seems we've captured the zeitgeist once again; from the current Private Eye:
C. J. Rose wrote:Mr Brian Leedham says that "fine tooth comb" should be a "fine-toothed comb". Not so. The word "toothcomb" has a long and respectable history. The word presumably indicates the difference between a comb with teeth and other sorts of comb, such as a currycomb or possibly a cock's-comb. "Fine toothcomb" is therefore perfectly acceptable.