c4countdown

CORDOVAN

Great spot, Peter!

Surprised DC didn't mention MICRON in Round 9, a very easy spot IMO.

Charlie Reams wrote:Great spot, Peter!

Surprised DC didn't mention MICRON in Round 9, a very easy spot IMO.

You can also put an O in front of it, when there is one.

Alternative to last numbers :- 25 x 4 - 1 = 99 x 8 = 792 + 2.

Just been catching up on the spoilers for the last couple of days, and see that Charlie is due to air in October. I expect he'll be getting reams of posts after his appearance(s)!

Hiyo,

Bit surprised our new champion didn't seem anything like as strong today as yesterday. I was a bit surprised to find myself miles ahead after the first 6 rounds, he beat me yesterday.

See what tomorrow brings. Three equallers from me this time.

R1: ARBITERS
R3: SURNAME
R12: JENNETS

DC

RARITIES in the first round?

PeterMabey wrote:CORDOVAN

Have you been on the show, Peter because that's awesome.

DaveC wrote:Hiyo,

Bit surprised our new champion didn't seem anything like as strong today as yesterday. I was a bit surprised to find myself miles ahead after the first 6 rounds, he beat me yesterday.


DC

I was the same, I was looking forward to him posting another good score today.

Alternative for 2nd numbers game:-

(9 * (75-6-5)) - 3

Another here for RARITIES. Also my auntie spotted PATIENCE in the CREATINE round which she was pleased about cause she beat me. I missed PALINODE and declared nothing in round 10 which really upset me

Yes, poor-quality game today... and I continue to have a mare on the numbers; I've watched 3 shows so far on my return, got only 2 out of the 9 numbers games And I'm up against two numbers specialists in Martin's competition... oh well. I also missed LIGATED and OBLIGED / BEDLOAD today, so not great all in all.

Julian Fell wrote:Yes, poor-quality game today... and I continue to have a mare on the numbers; I've watched 3 shows so far on my return, got only 2 out of the 9 numbers games And I'm up against two numbers specialists in Martin's competition... oh well. I also missed LIGATED and OBLIGED / BEDLOAD today, so not great all in all.

I missed OBLIGED too which caused me to utter profanities at the television before self-harming (forcing myself to watch Deal or No Deal afterwards).

David O'Donnell wrote:I missed OBLIGED too which caused me to utter profanities at the television before self-harming (forcing myself to watch Deal or No Deal afterwards).

I watched it too. What a load of old toss that show is. I thought I was going to puke when yesterday's contestant started to trot out all his sob stories. Noel Edmonds can fuck right off as well, the small-bearded twat.

You're not a fan of Noel's then?!

I watched it too. What a load of old toss that show is. I thought I was going to puke when yesterday's contestant started to trot out all his sob stories. Noel Edmonds can fuck right off as well, the small-bearded twat.

[/quote]

Chuckles - I must agree - And I also despise the greedy contestants who get on with their dodgy 'sob-stories' and don't have the nerve to go for a serious gamble. It is now a must miss for me.

DebbiF wrote:You're not a fan of Noel's then?!

What on earth gave you that idea

I think it's a terrible, terrible show, but have a grudging admiration for how Edmonds has managed to exploit the concept and understand what to do to make it successful. He can be either cloyingly sympathetic or mildly sarcastic as the situation demands, and is very keen on stressing the importance of "having a system", even though there is no possible system BECAUSE THEY'RE JUST CHOOSING RANDOM NUMBERS, YOU BEARDY DOLT.

jimbentley wrote:

DebbiF wrote:You're not a fan of Noel's then?!

What on earth gave you that idea

I think it's a terrible, terrible show, but have a grudging admiration for how Edmonds has managed to exploit the concept and understand what to do to make it successful. He can be either cloyingly sympathetic or mildly sarcastic as the situation demands, and is very keen on stressing the importance of "having a system", even though there is no possible system BECAUSE THEY'RE JUST CHOOSING RANDOM NUMBERS, YOU BEARDY DOLT.

So does that mean then, you hate the lottery as well (picking random numbers to win money )

I do agree with you though, that DOND is not a great show and it goes OTT. It could do with being replaced by another gameshow (nothing GK-based though).

Joseph Bolas wrote:So does that mean then, you hate the lottery as well (picking random numbers to win money )

Indeed its a tax for dreamers and the mathematically challenged, who when I tell them this, utter such tripe as "You've got to be in it to win it!" (wankers) I consider my winnings to be money not spent on the lottery all these years, thousands by now.

Dinos Sfyris wrote: Indeed its a tax for dreamers and the mathematically challenged, who when I tell them this, utter such tripe as "You've got to be in it to win it!" (wankers) I consider my winnings to be money not spent on the lottery all these years, thousands by now.

Well put. The only time I've ever bought a ticket was on my 16th birthday because I legally could. I won a tenner, so I've beaten the system. Up yours probability! Sadly this wasn't enough to finance more interesting newly legal activities that didn't want to happen to me.

You guys have no idea.

Really.

On the lottery subject I know Dave Ashcroft about as well as anyone outside his family does.. (which isn't saying very much)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -coat.html

... it goes to show that even people who do end up in that highly improbable place have to be the right kind of person to do much useful with it. Though I very much doubt any of his nieces and nephews know what public schooling is.

I don't think we can argue against "lottery funding" for various things, so at least a portion of the idiot tax is going into something useful there... I would have thought.

Paul Howe wrote:Sadly this wasn't enough to finance more interesting newly legal activities that didn't want to happen to me.

Even the ones in Southend aren't as desperate as all that.... not that I'd know anything about that from personal experience of course. 16 is a very strange age I think, when you are legally old enough to do all manner of things you're still too young to watch other people do on television!!

DC