Page 1 of 1

Spoilers for Thursday October 4th 2012 (Series 67 Prelim 43)

Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:09 pm
by Jordan F
Tia Corkish won her game yesterday for both apterous and Canada. Can she get a second win today?

Join James for the recap later.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday October 4th 2012 (Series 67 Prelim

Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:23 pm
by Bob De Caux
BAREFOOT in Round 4, PETIOLES in Round 13

Re: Spoilers for Thursday October 4th 2012 (Series 67 Prelim

Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:57 pm
by John Garcia
R12 - LARDIEST

Plus did anyone see that they missed / skipped the declarations in I think it was Round 6?

Re: Spoilers for Thursday October 4th 2012 (Series 67 Prelim

Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 3:29 pm
by Jack Worsley
John Garcia wrote: Plus did anyone see that they missed / skipped the declarations in I think it was Round 6?
Yes, they just said their words rather than saying how many letters first, round 7 I think it was. It must be an editing error.

Last numbers: (75+(6x2))x8-8 = 688

Re: Spoilers for Thursday October 4th 2012 (Series 67 Prelim

Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:29 pm
by Grant Waters
Yes i noticed that too. It was round 7.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday October 4th 2012 (Series 67 Prelim

Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:04 pm
by Tony Atkins
DRAGONET as alt to DRAGOMEN in R7. (8x75)+100-(2x6) as alt last numbers.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday October 4th 2012 (Series 67 Prelim

Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:50 pm
by Mike Brown
Grant Waters wrote:Yes i noticed that too. It was round 7.
Crossed my mind too, but I'm not convinced, as it seemed to flow pretty smoothly from the end of the clock to Tia offering her word. Maybe she said her word prematurely and David just followed suit.

Re: Spoilers for Thursday October 4th 2012 (Series 67 Prelim

Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 7:49 am
by John Bosley
John Garcia wrote:R12 - LARDIEST

Plus did anyone see that they missed / skipped the declarations in I think it was Round 6?
Yes could it be to catch up timewise with more time needed for Ran; or don't they do that sort of thing? Or could the declarations have had a fault in them?