![Image](http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f231/Andyfotos/CharlieBolton.jpg)
What about one of these guys?
Moderator: James Robinson
After this, would you still want him, but? http://www.c4countdown.co.uk/viewtopic. ... 813#p72813Charlie Reams wrote:They've wanted him for ages but unfortunately Lara didn't try hard enough. Maybe next series.Roxanne wrote:I think David Mitchell would be a really good guest, he's brilliantly funny and it would fit in perfectly with his public persona of being a bit geeky. There are plenty of comedians out there that I love, but Mitchell is probably the only one inoffensive enough that I'd feel happy to watch him with my nan.
There was an 8-episode Celebrity Countdown a bit over 10 years ago, although another bunch of those episodes would be quite nice.Simon Le Fort wrote:With all those celebrity tv shows, surely a little Celebrity Countdown series would be good - in the current DC member list there is a ready-made list of contestants. I seem to recall RW playing once many years ago, or was that a skit? Sure someone will tell us.
That Mark you're referring to will probably be Mark Nyman, who managed a fairly impressive feat of being contestant, DC guest, lexicographer and producer on the show. I think that Damian is the only other person to have done that feat.Simon Le Fort wrote:Finally, I am sure lots of viewers would love to have the CoC winners in DC, given that the majority of guests have "talents" that don't come across at all in that role. They'd be cheap and actually set a standard. I remember that happened after a few months of the show in 1982/83, didn't a winning Mark perform many roles? (sorry, can't recall the name in full)
Of course being the DC guest did give him quite an advantage over the other contestant. He even pretended he got the words himself, the cheeky git.James Robinson wrote: That Mark you're referring to will probably be Mark Nyman, who managed a fairly impressive feat of being contestant, DC guest, lexicographer and producer on the show.
LOL - so in order to avoid being labelled 'ageist', we should hire a DC guest on the sole basis that they are under 28 years of age.Simon Le Fort wrote: Given that 95% of the most successful players seem to be males aged under 28, it would be good to have a DC guest in that category. Otherwise it's like Strictly Come Dancing where they have token oldies who clearly won't get far, but they are 100% ageist in choosing the pro dancers and judges.
Would they be outgoing enough?Simon Le Fort wrote: Finally, I am sure lots of viewers would love to have the CoC winners in DC
I wonder whyEdwin Mead wrote:I'd like to see Keith Chegwin as a guest.
The ageism exists now by exclusion. Total, I believe.D Eadie wrote:LOL - so in order to avoid being labelled 'ageist', we should hire a DC guest on the sole basis that they are under 28 years of age.Simon Le Fort wrote: Given that 95% of the most successful players seem to be males aged under 28, it would be good to have a DC guest in that category. Otherwise it's like Strictly Come Dancing where they have token oldies who clearly won't get far, but they are 100% ageist in choosing the pro dancers and judges.![]()
Would they be outgoing enough?Simon Le Fort wrote: Finally, I am sure lots of viewers would love to have the CoC winners in DC
I don't think that's the afficial spelling.Marc Meakin wrote:I think the majority of countdown viewers (ie everyone who watches but do not subscribe to this forum) would prefer a celebrity rather than an officianodo.
But maybe it would be a good idea for the special shows coming up.
Now sorted.Gavin Chipper wrote:I don't think that's the afficial spelling.Marc Meakin wrote:I think the majority of countdown viewers (ie everyone who watches but do not subscribe to this forum) would prefer a celebrity rather than an officianodo.
But maybe it would be a good idea for the special shows coming up.
Fair comparisons to what? Give me a name of a male, under 28, who's a celebrity, who'll be right for Countdown. Then when you've got one, find another 20, because you'll need that many just to get 1 of them to agree to do it. DC guests aren't on the show because of their age or gender. Period.Simon Le Fort wrote: Including someone with an age and - yes - gender profile more similar to the profile of the majority of top players seems acceptable and would make for fair comparisons.
How many hours of coaching? 50.....100? Coaching under studio conditions to replicate the real deal is the only way. So thats lights, cameras and presenters all there to add realism. Ok - you're up to about £100k so far for this guest, I hope he's worth it.Simon Le Fort wrote: As to whether they would be outgoing enough, sure they may need coaching.
In most cases you're wrong. What's more ridiculous is that you make this argument (i use the word argument in the loosest possible way) for a CofC person to do DC, then after £100k on coaching, if they're crap, don't worry, Jeff can sort it all out. This is terrific stuff.Simon Le Fort wrote:
I am sure the CoCs have plenty to give personality-wise. Anyway, Jeff's got more than enough wit on his own to keep the whole show jollying along.
Yeah - so sitting in DC, with your reputation on the line as something of a wordsmith, with the responsibility of unearthing winner after winner isn't pressure? I wasn't aware C4 chose Chris Davies for BB, i thought it was me.Simon Le Fort wrote: Let's not forget that the contestants are in a stressful competitive situation. Freed up from that, I am sure everyone would become more outgoing. C4 chose Chris Davies for Big Brother
In Rachel's case, if you call 'plucked from obscurity' being given a job after an exhausting and highly stressful process that took 12 hours a day, every day for the best part of 3 months, then yes.Simon Le Fort wrote: Weren't the last two maths graduates doing the numbers plucked from obscurity without any track records of outgoingness?
Ghastly - my point exactly.David Williams wrote:Remember that day when Carol Barnes didn't show up, and they got some unknown to stand in? How did you think that went?
And in the other case she wasn't a maths graduate anyway.D Eadie wrote:In Rachel's case, if you call 'plucked from obscurity' being given a job after an exhausting and highly stressful process that took 12 hours a day, every day for the best part of 3 months, then yes.Simon Le Fort wrote: Weren't the last two maths graduates doing the numbers plucked from obscurity without any track records of outgoingness?
Damian, I think you have the makings of a whole new Reality show there: start with 100 male celebrities in Simon's preferred age group and subject them to a Countdown-style competition. You might have to weed out the ones who cant read or formulate a sentence, or don't understand the rules; perhaps use shorter sets of letters (four letters springs to mind) and think up a new numbers game that doesn't go above double figures. Or maybe single figures.D Eadie wrote:Give me a name of a male, under 28, who's a celebrity, who'll be right for Countdown.Simon Le Fort wrote: Including someone with an age and - yes - gender profile more similar to the profile of the majority of top players seems acceptable and would make for fair comparisons.