Page 1 of 1

Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:19 pm
by Jon Corby
Post them all here!

There's bound to be loads, because David is rubbish.

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:30 pm
by Jon O'Neill
I'm going for the Dagenham bird. Sorry Dave-o.

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:34 pm
by Michael Wallace
round 2, DC mention OUTRACED but not OUTRAGED - Carol did put the G below the C though when she put it up ;)

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:38 pm
by Jon O'Neill
994 (two away)

((75+50)/25*100-3)*2

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:41 pm
by Craig Beevers
I got 994 going this way (this tends to be one of the first routes I try):

25*50 = 1250

2*(75+3) = 156 + 100 = 256

1250 - 256 = 994

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:54 pm
by Jon O'Neill
PROTEASE is a nice 8.

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:54 pm
by Conor
TOXOID was there as an equaller a few rounds ago.

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:56 pm
by Joseph Bolas
Ginger Jono wrote:PROTEASE is a nice 8.
SEPARATE too in the same round I believe.

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:04 pm
by Ben Pugh
DOGMATISE.

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:04 pm
by Conor
DOGMATISE.

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:09 pm
by Michael Wallace
wow, lowest score ever in 15 rounds, right? also, was it just me or was the countdown revealed suddenly in a cut? I looked up at the screen and it seemed to be visible before he started the clock

that said, I didn't sleep last night...

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:11 pm
by Jon O'Neill
No, you're right, a little bit of a fuckup. Probably didn't happen like that in the studio though.

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:12 pm
by Conor
I noticed the same thing Michael, it was there for quite a while before the clock started. Although considering there didn't seem to be a turning of the board and it's unlikely the conundrum operator was that far off in timing it was probably just an editing error.

What was the final score by the way?

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:13 pm
by Ben Pugh
Lowest score ever? 111 - 13 final score.

Des and Richard Digance didn't half enjoy sticking the boot in.

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:22 pm
by Michael Wallace
maybe they should raise the threshold for the 'teapot if you score zero' to something that's positive now we have these 15 round games? :P

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:40 pm
by Charlie Reams
Awesome. I love to see records get broken, and especially by such a great bloke as DO'D. I hope she joins the forum.

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 7:22 pm
by Kirk Bevins
No offence to the lady (who seemed lovely) but how did she miss so much? Now I know it's much harder up there than at home (as I'm a bottling git) but to get 4s out of meaty selections and miss 191 when 100x2 - 9 was there and miss 810 when she had 807 and a 75/25 was left was unbelievable. She passed the audition didn't she. Amazing viewing. Daniel looked almost apologetic when declaring 8s over her 4s and 5s. I'll admit to being beaten today missing BABIES and CENTAVO (even though I knew this word and have spotted it numerous times before including in Scrabulous on facebook). I did manage to beat you yesterday though on a crucial conundrum - only just (I missed CONVICTS and FACTURE). I was quite pleased with METHANOL and HEARKEN, which I learnt literally 2 days ago.

Kirk

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 7:48 pm
by Harry Whitehouse
After the first three rounds, I decided it must be David's Mum putting on a Wolverhampton accent. Were the tattoos authentic, or were they part of the disguise?

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 8:33 pm
by David O'Donnell
A few issues came up there. Firstly, the conundrum was a retake because I made a balls up. I buzzed in and said "CLOCKWISE" and then said "no, it isn't I have messed it up." The music then started and Des got a message in the earpiece to tell me I was right after all. When I said "is it CLOCKWISE?" I had had to keep an eye on the studio manager who was to give me a cue at about ten seconds. My opponent, who was indeed an absolutely lovely lady, thought it would have been rather funny had she buzzed in on the retake: I concur! Secondly, there was a second retake when I had REALISED. Richard, who was really funny, said there was an anagram and I said "Oh yeah, SIDEREAL." Unfortunately, I pronounced it side ---- real which meant a retake and hence Richard saying "no-one else got it" with the studio laugh being edited out.

It was the first game on a new day and unfortunately I had got rather tanked the night before with a few of the other contestants so I was hanging by a thread during this game. DOGMATISE was mentioned by another contestant. He, very generously, suggested that I had it and didn't risk it but had I have seen it I would have gone for it. Another nine missed: Corby's right, I suck. Hazel felt she should have had a crack and that's good enough for me. She wanted to get on TV after having been on 'The Weakest Link' and umm err getting voted off first. I apologised profusely after the game explaining that I may need the points and she was a really great sport about it.

994 was an awesome spot Jono, I was nowhere near it.

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 8:35 pm
by Conor
David O'Donnell wrote:A few issues came up there. Firstly, the conundrum was a retake because I made a balls up. I buzzed in and said "CLOCKWISE" and then said "no, it isn't I have messed it up." The music then started and Des got a message in the earpiece to tell me I was right after all. When I said "is it CLOCKWISE?" I had had to keep an eye on the studio manager who was to give me a cue at about ten seconds.
So that's why you had a grin on your face. And I was thinking it was because you'd seen COCK from those letters...

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 8:50 pm
by Julian Fell
Charlie Reams wrote:Awesome. I love to see records get broken, and especially by such a great bloke as DO'D.
Yes, especially when that record has stood for nearly 5 years (since 19 February 2003). I reckon it could be much longer than that till 13 gets beaten...

Today was also the second-highest winning margin ever I believe. Interesting, this series is only 21 episodes old and we've already had winning margins of 82, 97 and 98... it seems to be the season for thrashings! (sorry Stewart S, if you're there!)

Well done David, as ever - great performance, though it is difficult when your opponent is "not at the races" to that extent... you do become the villain of the piece a bit as you outscore them time and time again. When you leaned across to Hazel after she declared WIELDS, were you telling her she could have had WIELDERS? :)

Re Craig's post, I want to go and lie down in a darkened room (I was pleased with myself for getting 997 on that round) - so, so glad I don't have to face you in CofC. I did expect that Jono would have the closest possible though, and he didn't let me down!

And no, David, you don't suck. Although, from your comments, one thing I have noticed is that you do seem to have a lot of opponents who are very good at spotting brilliant words (including DC-beaters) when in the audience, but suddenly dry up when they're actually in the chair facing you. Maybe it's that amazing hypnotic power you have :)

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:44 pm
by Martin Gardner
I know sometimes given the difficulty of the audition it sometimes surprises people that some contestants are so bad. And the problem with comparing Octochamps scores likes 890, 875, 871 and stuff is that I think a lot of Octochamps just beat up on 8 weak players, and the victory is never in doubt it's just the size of the victory. I was incredibly surprised to win eight games as at home I'd say I won "more than half" the games so it was a bit of a shock to win 8 in a row without a crucial conundrum. I always say (although I haven't said it for a while so bear with me) that the only thing I regret about going on Countdown is that I didn't wait a year or more to do it. But still I suppose the end result really couldn't have been any better than what it was. Still I don't want to go on the French version until I've finished my degree.

What I'm saying is that effectively someone has to have the lowest score. If she hadn't scored 13 then it would still be Judy Smedley with 18, and if it wasn't here it would be (I think) Julie Cocker with 24, so it always has to be someone.

Martin

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:04 pm
by Kirk Bevins
Martin Gardner wrote:
What I'm saying is that effectively someone has to have the lowest score. If she hadn't scored 13 then it would still be Judy Smedley with 18, and if it wasn't here it would be (I think) Julie Cocker with 24, so it always has to be someone.

Martin
Does this win the prize for the most obvious statement - ever?

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:05 pm
by Joseph Bolas
Kirk Bevins wrote:No offence to the lady (who seemed lovely) but how did she miss so much? Now I know it's much harder up there than at home (as I'm a bottling git) but to get 4s out of meaty selections and miss 191 when 100x2 - 9 was there and miss 810 when she had 807 and a 75/25 was left was unbelievable.

Kirk
Maybe the contestant was trying to add 91 to the 100 instead of going up to 200 then coming down to 191.

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:46 pm
by Jon Corby
David O'Donnell wrote:Another nine missed: Corby's right, I suck.
:lol: That was meant to be your cue to mention the raping you gave me in our online game last night. Damn your modesty, you've made me look bad in all kinds of ways there. ;)

Awesome game again today mate, but I reckon you must feel kinda embarrassed when you're thrashing somebody as badly (well?) as that. I remember Paul Howe being particularly uncomfortable about his QF with Keith Maynard, but what can you do?

Also Julian's suggestion that you leant over to tell Hazel she could have had WIELDERS made me lol!
(You didn't, right?!)

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:03 pm
by Charlie Reams
Looks like this page might need an update...

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:09 pm
by James Hurrell
Well done again - you headed me by 1 going into the conundrum. I didn't see CENTAVO (never heard of it) but I had POTATO. Got the conundrum before you to win 105-96, but I did have a couple more seconds than you had with the editing error!! That makes it 3-2 to you I think. Oh, and I did exactly the same in that I had REALISED and then thought it has an anagram SIDEREAL and pronounced it just like you!! It was interesting to hear the proper pronunciation! That's what happens when you learn words with no idea of their meaning/usage!

Looking forward to game 6.

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:25 pm
by Conor
Being from Ireland, I'm surprised you didn't see potato... (I'm sorry, I couldn't resist :P )

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 2:07 pm
by David O'Donnell
Conor wrote:Being from Ireland, I'm surprised you didn't see potato... (I'm sorry, I couldn't resist :P )

There was a few of us watching this game and I gave them a hint that there was a word an Irish person should get: no-one got it and it was so bloody simple. Ah well, I was starting to tune out during this game. At a quiz last night the quiz-master said "Hazel was a tough nut to crack" --- cue groan ---

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:12 pm
by Ben Pugh
Corby wrote:Also Julian's suggestion that you leant over to tell Hazel she could have had WIELDERS made me lol!
(You didn't, right?!)
That's what I thought as well, looking at her reaction.

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 7:10 pm
by Matthew Green
Kirk Bevins wrote:Daniel looked almost apologetic when declaring 8s over her 4s and 5s.
Kirk
Was that a little joke or a Freudian slip from a closet Daniel O'Donnell fan?

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 7:29 pm
by David O'Donnell
I am afraid I did lean over to tell Hazel about adding the -er :oops: Does that officially make me a git? In today's game I gave CABINETS as opposed to BASCINET once I heard his word.In my defence though he did say to me "hey Paddy, what's your name?" So his card was marked after that!! :twisted:

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:33 pm
by Jon Corby
David O'Donnell wrote:I am afraid I did lean over to tell Hazel about adding the -er :oops: Does that officially make me a git? In today's game I gave CABINETS as opposed to BASCINET once I heard his word.In my defence though he did say to me "hey Paddy, what's your name?" So his card was marked after that!! :twisted:
:lol: All modest to the camera, snidey on the side. Love it! :lol:

Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 30th January 2008

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:11 am
by Matthew Green
I did feel a teeny bit sorry for her but, given the selection, DIME is one of the most appalling words Ive ever seen on the show.