Spoilers for Friday 1st October 2021 (Series 84, Prelim 69)

Discuss anything that happened in recent games. This is the place to post any words you got that beat Dictionary Corner, or numbers games that evaded Rachel.

Moderator: James Robinson

Post Reply
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Spoilers for Friday 1st October 2021 (Series 84, Prelim 69)

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Rachel disallowed Ahmed's numbers solution because he said 100-8 and then wanted to change it to 100-9 but hadn't written it down. No consistency there. On another day that would have been perfectly acceptable.

Another silent buzz on the conundrum. Anyone else getting that? I don't know if it's anything to do with that power cut thing. About accidentally showing the wrong episode of a programme, here it says:
The channel blamed it on "ongoing tech issues" after technical problems at a broadcast centre resulted in several channels going off air on Saturday.

Channel 4 said its services were also having sound and subtitle problems.
Philip A
Kiloposter
Posts: 1081
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2021 2:56 pm

Re: Spoilers for Friday 1st October 2021 (Series 84, Prelim 69)

Post by Philip A »

Zero silent buzzers on my television in all editions I’ve seen, on Channel 4 HD, and on All4 on my iPad. When I wear headphones it’s louder on my left speaker and this this normal.

Also, consistentcy cannot and should not be expected in a programme that’s made over 7,700 shows. But I think they were right to disallow Ahmed’s solution on this occasion, as he hadn’t declared NWD before beginning to give his solution. It makes sense for refereeing to be stricter when you forget to say NWD.
Series 78 Runner-up
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Spoilers for Friday 1st October 2021 (Series 84, Prelim 69)

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Philip A wrote: Fri Oct 01, 2021 3:44 pm Also, consistentcy cannot and should not be expected in a programme that’s made over 7,700 shows. But I think they were right to disallow Ahmed’s solution on this occasion, as he hadn’t declared NWD before beginning to give his solution. It makes sense for refereeing to be stricter when you forget to say NWD.
I wonder if he had just written it down the wrong way.

I don't mean that they shouldn't be allowed to change how things are done at all over about 40 years, but they should at some point settle on a way of doing things.

By the way, I'm pretty sure his method was (100-9)×8-50=678. It's what I did anyway.
User avatar
L'oisleatch McGraw
Devotee
Posts: 930
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 am
Location: Waterford
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Friday 1st October 2021 (Series 84, Prelim 69)

Post by L'oisleatch McGraw »

Philip A wrote: Fri Oct 01, 2021 3:44 pm It makes sense for refereeing to be stricter when you forget to say NWD.
100% this.
I also had a solution disallowed over a very similar slip. So it is consistent, but just so rare that that precise situation pops up, to a casual fan it might seem as though the are making it up as they go along.
:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: S:778-ochamp
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Spoilers for Friday 1st October 2021 (Series 84, Prelim 69)

Post by Gavin Chipper »

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote: Tue Oct 05, 2021 10:05 pm
Philip A wrote: Fri Oct 01, 2021 3:44 pm It makes sense for refereeing to be stricter when you forget to say NWD.
100% this.
I also had a solution disallowed over a very similar slip. So it is consistent, but just so rare that that precise situation pops up, to a casual fan it might seem as though the are making it up as they go along.
I don't know. Just because it happened on two occasions it doesn't mean it happened on all the occasions. See this discussion. And this. So Coral Heath and James Martin got away with it. I make that 2-2.
User avatar
L'oisleatch McGraw
Devotee
Posts: 930
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 am
Location: Waterford
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Friday 1st October 2021 (Series 84, Prelim 69)

Post by L'oisleatch McGraw »

Maybe those episodes would be worth a rewatch just to compare properly.
I have noticed Rachel giving the tiniest bit of leeway with nums... but not much. It's pretty consistent.
:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: S:778-ochamp
Post Reply