c4countdown

Anyone struggling to solve today's pull-off conundrum will find that the answer is spelled incorrectly....... Change the letters to SRUDEPEES and it is a bit easier!

Kevin

I don't have the calendar, but if you're talking about what I think you're talking about, both are (alas) now accepted spellings and indeed valid in Countdown

If so, that's outrageous! We already have dictionaries saying that "infer" means "imply" (instead of deduce) and "prestigious" means "with prestige" (instead of tricky). Where will it all end?

It is a bit ironic for a word game to allow incorrect spellings! Unbelievable.

It's the way the presenters of Countdown are so obviously disinterested that really bugs me.

Rachel's 9s

Jon O'Neill wrote:Rachel's 9s

Is that a bit like 'the dog's bollocks' ?

That's nice!

Gifts like that are so common now!

David Williams wrote:It's the way the presenters of Countdown are so obviously disinterested that really bugs me.

That's quite funny.

Then, what would be the point of creating a Countdown calendar?

Most of these comments don't make any sense to me.

Ian Volante wrote:Most of these comments don't make any sense to me.

ditto

Exactly!

In the spirit of making no sense... WATERMELONS!

Now, seriously, where can one get hold of this Calendar? Is it exclusive to Countdown contestants only (did it arrive in their goody bag), or can the general public buy it too?

Hannah O wrote:In the spirit of making no sense... WATERMELONS!

Now, seriously, where can one get hold of this Calendar? Is it exclusive to Countdown contestants only (did it arrive in their goody bag), or can the general public buy it too?

You can get them from any good calendar shop. Although they might be a bit more hard to find now, seeing as though we are mid way through February.

I see! Thank you very much for the information, I know what my next purchase will be when out shopping...

Thank you, Jack!

Hannah O wrote:Now, seriously, where can one get hold of this Calendar? Is it exclusive to Countdown contestants only (did it arrive in their goody bag), or can the general public buy it too?

You could buy it from Amazon in late 2008, but I've no idea whether they still have them in stock.

"It's the way the presenters of Countdown are so obviously disinterested that really bugs me."

Brilliant!

I have noticed a lamentable lack of understanding of irony on the forum in general. I dislike explaining such things, but, for the benefit of the unitiated, what David is doing here is pretending not to know the difference between uninterested and disinterested. Excellent.

As I said, what would be the point of getting one of those?

To alleviate any lingering confusion....

The Calendar has a daily pull-off sheet with a "conundrum" and either a letters or numbers game. Answers appear on the next day, so it's easy to cheat. Numbers or letters games may have more answers, e.g. 14th Feb has EWIFIDRES as letters game and answers given are "fireside, weirdies and defiers", and it may be there are other 7 or 8 letter words (although none spring to mind - I assume deifiers is not allowed). Some of the puzzles are easy; others are difficult - though that is subjective of course.

Kevin Thurlow wrote:Anyone struggling to solve today's pull-off conundrum will find that the answer is spelled incorrectly....... Change the letters to SRUDEPEES and it is a bit easier!

Kevin

Also while we're on the general topic, words like "spelled" annoy me. I know it's in the dictionary but what's wrong with "spelt", "learnt" "smelt" and the like?

Kevin Thurlow wrote:To alleviate any lingering confusion....

I imagine there is still confusion. To continue:

There was a brief discussion of whether a word was spelt (yes, that's right!) correctly in the calendar, and it was decided that some spelling was now allowed (and seen as a bad thing) which then moved on to a discussion about meanings of words (e.g. infer/imply). Then David Williams made the dis/uninterested joke. Jon O'Neill then kept the Countdown presenter theme present in David's joke to make the running joke about Rachel's 9s. Someone suggested that perhaps "Rachel's 9s" was a saying like "dog's bollocks". And I think that should explain it all!

What was the "wrongly" spelt solution to the conundrum though?

Gavin Chipper wrote:
What was the "wrongly" spelt solution to the conundrum though?

I imagine SUPERSEDE rather than SUPERCEDE but both are fine. (Highlight both gaps to see the answer).

Kirk Bevins wrote:

Gavin Chipper wrote: What was the "wrongly" spelt solution to the conundrum though?

I imagine SUPERSEDE rather than SUPERCEDE but both are fine. (Highlight both gaps to see the answer).

Other way round - your first spelling is the correct one.

Phil Reynolds wrote: Other way round - your first spelling is the correct one.

They are both correct.

Kirk Bevins wrote:

Phil Reynolds wrote: Other way round - your first spelling is the correct one.

They are both correct.

I think he means correct rather than correct.

Kirk Bevins wrote:

Phil Reynolds wrote: Other way round - your first spelling is the correct one.

They are both correct.

They're both listed in some dictionaries, which isn't the same thing.

I have to confess that I thought it was spelled/spelt SUPERCEDE when I included in the calendar and so the revelation that both are somehow 'allowable' only marginally lets me off the hook.

The content for the 2010 edition has just been finalised, but I'll try to learn how to spell by 2011 to avoid further embaras... embarass... oh fuck it.

Stewart Holden wrote:I have to confess that I thought it was spelled/spelt SUPERCEDE when I included in the calendar and so the revelation that both are somehow 'allowable' only marginally lets me off the hook.

The content for the 2010 edition has just been finalised, but I'll try to learn how to spell by 2011 to avoid further embaras... embarass... oh fuck it.

Excellent.

Well I still think the calendar is great! You should all buy one and look for mistakes to keep Stewart happy.

But SUPERSEDE is correct as it comes from the Latin sedere (to sit - hence "sit above" = replace), not from cedere (to yield, which would provide the opposite meaning). I know the dictionary reflects common use, but even so....... "Text" language will foul it up even more.

I use spelled/spelt interchangeably, but it doesn't work for everything. There is a big difference between being "felled by someone" and being "felt by someone".

Kevin

Kevin Thurlow wrote:I use spelled/spelt interchangeably, but it doesn't work for everything. There is a big difference between being "felled by someone" and being "felt by someone".

I'm reminded of the joke about the three fish - two herrings and one smelt.

Out of pure interest, how many people own this year's Countdown calendar?

I own it.

It's actually quite a nice way to start the day, by looking at those 2 games you have to do, whether it be a conundrum/letters or conundrum/numbers.

James Robinson wrote:Out of pure interest, how many people own this year's Countdown calendar?

I own it.

It's actually quite a nice way to start the day, by looking at those 2 games you have to do, whether it be a conundrum/letters or conundrum/numbers.

Thought about getting it, but saw it for £10 which I thought was pretty pointless considering I could start the day with a quick game on Apterous.

Darren Carter wrote:

James Robinson wrote:Out of pure interest, how many people own this year's Countdown calendar?

I own it.

It's actually quite a nice way to start the day, by looking at those 2 games you have to do, whether it be a conundrum/letters or conundrum/numbers.

Thought about getting it, but saw it for £10 which I thought was pretty pointless considering I could start the day with a quick game on Apterous.

I waited for the discount, hence I only got it for £5.99.

James Robinson wrote:

Darren Carter wrote:

James Robinson wrote:Out of pure interest, how many people own this year's Countdown calendar?

I own it.

It's actually quite a nice way to start the day, by looking at those 2 games you have to do, whether it be a conundrum/letters or conundrum/numbers.

Thought about getting it, but saw it for £10 which I thought was pretty pointless considering I could start the day with a quick game on Apterous.

I waited for the discount, hence I only got it for £5.99.

I got it for Christmas

I got bought a Scrabble one this year.

I got bought a 15 to 1 one (I didn't).

I bought it for £10 from Borders in November. Typically last month Borders shut and its calendars had a 30% discount, whereas the rest of the stock had a 90% reduction. Was insane. 10% of RRP of pretty much everything - it was mayhem. Queues massive.

I have not one, not two but three of the things! My father bought me two so that I could have one at home and one away, and then my sister decided to surprise me with another! I've heard of acting surprised but that rather takes the biscuit.

Haha - today's conundrum: THATSTOOP.

I think Damo's scramble was better.

Kirk Bevins wrote:Haha - today's conundrum: THATSTOOP.

I think Damo's scramble was better.

In the intro it said that all the conundrums are every day words. I'm either really ignorant, or Stewart Holden (the puzzle setter for the calendar) has a warped perception of what are and are not everyday words.

I also agree that the shuffle that Innis solved was much nicer.

Kirk Bevins wrote:Haha - today's conundrum: THATSTOOP.

I think Damo's scramble was better.

TOOTHPAST and OOTHPASTE

Kirk Bevins wrote:Haha - today's conundrum: THATSTOOP.

I think Damo's scramble was better.

I completely agree.

Today's conundrum

Jon Corby wrote:Today's conundrum

I've done one specifically for you for next Monday.

D Eadie wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:Today's conundrum

I've done one specifically for you for next Monday.

I hope that a) it's not crucial and b) neither contestant buzzes in with the 'obvious' 'answer' (as they did last time). I thought you said you were going to avoid them last time this came up?

Jon Corby wrote:

D Eadie wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:Today's conundrum

I've done one specifically for you for next Monday.

I hope that a) it's not crucial and b) neither contestant buzzes in with the 'obvious' 'answer' (as they did last time). I thought you said you were going to avoid them last time this came up?

I wasn't referring to those type of conundrums, you'll see on Monday, but now that you mention it, i'm doing those again at some point soon yeah. I only stopped because some of you peeps grizzled about it on here, but i've decided not to take notice any longer (hence my refusal to get drawn into the whinge by Gavin that the Chris V Kirk game is a 'silly episode').

I just keep on swimming by and the bait stays on the hook.

D Eadie wrote:I wasn't referring to those type of conundrums, you'll see on Monday

Ooh, okay, look forward to it

Jon Corby wrote:

D Eadie wrote:I wasn't referring to those type of conundrums, you'll see on Monday

Ooh, okay, look forward to it

We'll see

D Eadie wrote:(hence my refusal to get drawn into the whinge by Gavin that the Chris V Kirk game is a 'silly episode').

Mine was one of many opinions expressed in that thread. And just by chance you picked on mine. (It wasn't even addressed to you in particular if that's what you're thinking.)

Gavin Chipper wrote: Mine was one of many opinions expressed in that thread. And just by chance you picked on mine. (It wasn't even addressed to you in particular if that's what you're thinking.)

Since when was it a pre-requisite of any posts that they need to be aimed at somebody specifically before others can respond?
True, there were lots of opinions in the thread about series length, all of which i ignored because basically, i don't have any desire to get involved in all that guff, but the Kirk v Chris thing only cropped up at the end of the thread and you dismissively suggested it was silly.
It must be pretty satisfying for you to know that bordering on 2 million people will whole-heartedly enjoy the contest, while you're lighting fires in the silly camp all by yourself.

Keep warm.

D Eadie wrote:

Gavin Chipper wrote: Mine was one of many opinions expressed in that thread. And just by chance you picked on mine. (It wasn't even addressed to you in particular if that's what you're thinking.)

Since when was it a pre-requisite of any posts that they need to be aimed at somebody specifically before others can respond?

You mentioned something about bait which I thought might have been referring to me.

True, there were lots of opinions in the thread about series length, all of which i ignored because basically, i don't have any desire to get involved in all that guff, but the Kirk v Chris thing only cropped up at the end of the thread and you dismissively suggested it was silly.
It must be pretty satisfying for you to know that bordering on 2 million people will whole-heartedly enjoy the contest, while you're lighting fires in the silly camp all by yourself.

Keep warm.

Howard explicitly mentioned it quite early in the thread. Of course I would watch such a match but this is the first time I've seen anyone say that it's actually going to happen.

I also think most people would understand my point about it taking the edge off the CofC. Sometimes it's better for the show to keep the big guns apart beforehand. A few years ago I think a lot of people were hoping for a Julian Fell v Chris Wills final in the CofC. It didn't happen but regardless I don't think it would have been an ideal move to have them play each other before the CofC to find a champion of 2002.

D Eadie wrote:... while you're lighting fires in the silly camp all by yourself.
Keep warm.

lol. Who says sarcasm is the lowest form of wit‽

D Eadie wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:Today's conundrum

I've done one specifically for you for next Monday.

Hang on, what was this about? CRETINPIE? I don't understand. Are you calling me some kind of cretin pie?

Jon Corby wrote: Hang on, what was this about? CRETINPIE? I don't understand. Are you calling me some kind of cretin pie?

I was totally expecting it to be AUSTERING.

Jon Corby wrote:

D Eadie wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:Today's conundrum

I've done one specifically for you for next Monday.

Hang on, what was this about? CRETINPIE? I don't understand. Are you calling me some kind of cretin pie?

Now you are being a dumb tart.

Charlie Reams wrote:

Jon Corby wrote: Hang on, what was this about? CRETINPIE? I don't understand. Are you calling me some kind of cretin pie?

I was totally expecting it to be AUSTERING.

The answer to today's conundrum is clearly MOTELIEST.

SPLOIERS for conundrum on 31st March
:::::::::
:::::::::
:::::::::
:::::::::
:::::::::
:::::::::
:::::::::
:::::::::
:::::::::
:::::::::
Its not OED valid, so you've got an excuse if you didn't get it.

JackHurst wrote:SPLOIERS for conundrum on 31st March
:::::::::
:::::::::
:::::::::
:::::::::
:::::::::
:::::::::
:::::::::
:::::::::
:::::::::
:::::::::
Its not OED valid, so you've got an excuse if you didn't get it.

What about ODE(2r) though?