Page 1 of 1

Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 1:51 pm
by James Robinson
So, we have enter week 2, and already we have the possibility of crowning our first octochamp of the series by the end of the week. 8-)

That person in question is our very own Adam Gillard, on 3 wins so far, so will need to win all 5 shows this week to become the first octochamp of Series 64.

He likes his 3's does our Adam - 3 wins, 3 centuries, 3 solved conundrums, 333 points. Well, actually it's 337 points, so that's 333 + 3 to the power of 1 + 1 to the power of 3. 8-) :geek:

In DC this week, and having the honour of being the first DC debutant of 2011, is the broadcaster, Jonathan Maitland.

Join Ryan for the recap later. ;) :) :D

Re: Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 3:22 pm
by Joseph Krol
R4 ENCASED, INCASED

Re: Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 3:27 pm
by Joseph Krol
Anyone noticed that AG's games have often had selections with high numbers of T's in?

Re: Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 3:32 pm
by Stewart Gordon
GRUNDIES?

Re: Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 3:36 pm
by Joseph Krol
R9 has Stephen Balment's name in it.

Re: Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 3:40 pm
by Adam Gillard
Is it BANDMATE, Jeff? Interesting scramble, eh?

Re: Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 3:52 pm
by Ben Hunter
Nice conundrum solve there Adam.

Re: Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 3:53 pm
by Joseph Krol
Lol at the conundrum, definite candidate for the Charlies 2011.

Re: Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 3:53 pm
by Matt Morrison
When Jeff said he wanted to get his revenge on Rachel in his dreams, my mind wandered.

Re: Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 4:10 pm
by Ryan Taylor
Good stuff, just 3 points off the max I made it so a 12 max game. I think if Andy had played you 100 times he wouldn't have ever beat you. That's how comfortable it was.

Re: Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 4:27 pm
by Adam Gillard
Ben Hunter wrote:Nice conundrum solve there Adam.
Thanks. It was a bit distracting with the little skit beforehand; normally I don't even notice if the scramble contains a phrase or anything like that but was sort of looking out for it in the end. Anyway, another ODE3 one.
Ryan Taylor wrote:Good stuff, just 3 points off the max I made it so a 12 max game. I think if Andy had played you 100 times he wouldn't have ever beat you. That's how comfortable it was.
Thanks. I spotted SAPIENCE watching it back, but still missed DRUGGIES and MALONATE. As you noted yourself, Andy did manage to stick with me for quite a while towards the end and certainly wasn't a push-over, finishing with a very respectable score (much like Ray did on Friday).

Re: Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 5:09 pm
by Ralph Gillions
Smashing performances Adam

Re: Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 5:24 pm
by Joyce Phillips
In fairness to Andy, he was clearly very nervous at first, but played much better later in the game.

Re: Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 5:29 pm
by Gavin Chipper
Was UNRIGGED in the DRUGGIES round?

Re: Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 5:58 pm
by Joseph Krol
Gavin Chipper wrote:Was UNRIGGED in the DRUGGIES round?
Yep.

Re: Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:37 pm
by Graeme Cole
I managed to beat Adam, but only because I'd read that conundrum on Countdown's Twitter feed last month. Spoilers! :-)

Well done on another win, Adam. Hopefully there'll be another four like that.

Re: Spoilers For Monday January 17th 2011

Posted: Tue Jan 18, 2011 1:32 am
by Adam Gillard
Graeme Cole wrote:I managed to beat Adam, but only because I'd read that conundrum on Countdown's Twitter feed last month. Spoilers! :-)
Yes I noticed that too. Poor form.