Raccoon Boy on Pointless

Dinos Sfyris · Post by **Dinos Sfyris** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:15 am

Special new topic created for excitement overspill. ZOMG It's today!

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 11:47 am

omgwtfbbqlmaobsecjdrofl

By which I mean, raccoon boy?

Matt Morrison · Post by **Matt Morrison** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 12:34 pm

Michael Wallace wrote:omgwtfbbqlmaobsecjdrofl

What does this bit mean?
Other than that, well excited.

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 12:49 pm

Matt Morrison wrote:
Michael Wallace wrote:omgwtfbbqlmaobsecjdrofl
What does this bit mean?

It is either a carefully crafted Pointless spoiler. Or me picking TLAs at random (mad cows innit?).

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 12:59 pm

I AM EXCITED AND I DONE SAW IT ALREADY!

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 1:00 pm

Oh, and before anyone gets confused. They give CF a namebadge with his real (as in, on his passport and shiz) name (Jamie) on it, but don't let that confuse you, everyone (IRL) calls him CF.

Marc Meakin · Post by **Marc Meakin** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 1:30 pm

Will you be doing a Pointless recap?

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 1:31 pm

Marc Meakin wrote:Will you be doing a Pointless recap?

POINTLESS??? I WOULD HOPE IT WOULD BE A BIT BETTER THAN THAT?!!?!!!

(yes)

Jimmy Gough · Post by **Jimmy Gough** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 4:38 pm

GO RACCOON.

Matt Morrison · Post by **Matt Morrison** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 5:12 pm

It's crazy how your own little knowledge banks can be a surprise - the only swap shop host I didn't know was Maggie Filbin, as soon as they announced it I just assumed it was question over, I can't believe Craven beat it. Must suck knowing instantly you've lost, but also a relief that you're going to get another chance. Roll on Monday I say, looking forward to it.

A great show though, by far the most interesting couple on there and some decent chat. Well done!

Marc Meakin · Post by **Marc Meakin** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 5:14 pm

Shame they never got to name the other pointless Meryl Streep films.
Although as only 16 people said Kramer v's Kramer it was probably a big list.

Howard Somerset · Post by **Howard Somerset** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 5:17 pm

Great performance, Michael. Well done.

I could also think of one more Swap Shop presenter, but he wouldn't have been low enough to win that round.

Managed to win with Tony Blair's kids - would've gone for the girl. But that was the only round in the whole show when I could've done anything.

I agree with Matt about the good chat. You were by far the best couple on that score. Looking forward to Monday now.

JimBentley · Post by **JimBentley** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 5:19 pm

Really unlucky with those topics, Michael. On the Swap Shop one, even though I'm pretty much exactly the right age, I'd have only got Edmonds, Cheggers and Philbin as "presenters", totally forgot about John Craven (plus I wouldn't have classed him as a proper presenter anyway as he only ever did the news bits, which is maybe why he scored so low). I thought the winning couple did really well on the Meryl Streep films mind, totally deserved their seven grand or whatever it was.

Looking forward to seeing what transpires on Monday!

Matt Morrison · Post by **Matt Morrison** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 5:22 pm

Starting to wonder how I knew Craven was on Swap Shop now, considering Jim and Howard wouldn't have gone for him, and I can guarantee I've never seen an episode in my life other than perhaps maybe watching it with my mum when I was a baby. Spooky.

Blair's kids, I'd also only heard of Leo. I was tempted by Thomas.

Ryan Taylor · Post by **Ryan Taylor** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 5:30 pm

Don't watch Pointless (even though I applied for it) but made the exception tonight. Was quite good and well done Michael. I could have only done the Tony Blair children round as I had learnt them in order Euan, Nicky, Kathryn, Leo and would have gone for Nicky on the basis that Euan is oldest, Leo is youngest the other is a girl so Nicky would be less common. I would have been useless at everything else, and as for Swap Shop!? Only thing I know is (I think) a toy or mascot or something called Posh Paws on it which is an anagram of the show title. I thought the couple who won well deserved it too, as the only film I knew Meryl Streep was in was that Devil Wears Prada? But that seems to be quite popular I reckon. Although I heard a question on the Weakest Link the other day about a film called Julie & Julia (I think) which Meryl STreep was the answer too and so I could have gone for that with little hope. Anyway, I enjoyed watching and will watch it again on Monday if that is when you are on again?

Matt Morrison · Post by **Matt Morrison** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 5:38 pm

Haha, I was wondering for a moment why you guys kept talking about Meryl Streep, didn't remember that at all. I guess that's what happened after the show ended when MW & CF bowed out.

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 6:18 pm

Cheers for all the comments guys, I was quite worried about how this would look when they aired it. Turns out they cut out a lot of stuff (as you'd expect, I suppose). Unfortunately for me this meant they left in all of CF's funny stuff but none of mine

(I was funny, honest. Kinda.)

Particular highlights that they left out were Alexander asking CF what he thought Kenyans might be good at, and CF spluttering out "er, I think they're good at running...things?". Also, CF describing Tony Blair's children as the spawn of satan somehow didn't make the cut. Similarly on the sports front, they left in my "there's a billion of them" but left out that I went on to say "one of them must have done something, surely?".

As for some of the questions. As you might have guessed we hadn't revised any of them. At the time I thought India was a fairly safe answer! I'd worked out that we only needed 67 (or something quite high like that), so any big country who scored less than Germany would be fine. I thought the US, UK, France were all a bit too obvious, but that India would be a good, middle-of-the-road answer. As it turned out I was pretty lucky.

The head to head was an absolute nightmare though. They edited out a lot of the other couple's talk, and to start with it was looking good, they claimed not to know any, but then they picked out Digital Fortress from nowhere (rather like the Euan answer, come to think of it). I should have remembered Euan myself, but I guess that's the stress of TV or some other plausible excuse.

And yeah, to go out on Swap Shop is both frustrating because it's a completely hopeless subject, but also nice because you don't think "oooh I knew that!".

And yes, Monday, same time same channel for us part 2.

Edit: Oh, and I can now reveal without spoilering, that if you don't make it to the final, they usher you out of the studio so you don't see the jackpot questions. This is why they can have such obvious stuff like 'The Round Table' without people who are going to be on the next show quickly looking up things on wikipedia.

James Robinson · Post by **James Robinson** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 6:54 pm

That was a very good performance there, Michael.

Very unlucky there with those head-to-head questions. I'd have got Nicky & John Craven, but would've been clueless on Dan Brown, bar the 2 obviouses.

I was pretty happy with getting Panama in Round 1 as a Pointless, although that cheese one was a bit of a stinker.

Looking forward to seeing you again on Monday.

Kirk Bevins · Post by **Kirk Bevins** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:01 pm

Michael Wallace wrote: Edit: Oh, and I can now reveal without spoilering, that if you don't make it to the final, they usher you out of the studio so you don't see the jackpot questions. This is why they can have such obvious stuff like 'The Round Table' without people who are going to be on the next show quickly looking up things on wikipedia.

I don't understand - can you elaborate? Surely if Charlie is in the audience he could text you or stuff? I watched this show (never seen Pointless before) and this doesn't make sense?

Dinos Sfyris · Post by **Dinos Sfyris** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 8:42 pm

Awesome performance Michael. I didn't know you were dating Brian May! Shame you didn't make the final but that other couple were unstoppable! At least you get more Raccoon airtime on show#2. My awesum gevin policework deduced that you'd lose in the head-to-head

I reckon you'll go all the way on Monday though. Shame I won't be able to see it as I'm in Paris with Emma but will defo watch it on catch-up.

Re ushering non-finalists out of the studio before the final showdown: I agree it's retarded. An audience plant could easily tell you the categories and it seems unfriendly not letting you see what happens. They could easily sidestep the cheaty issue by having 3 fresh categories for the next show. FWIW I'dve offered Stuck On You for the Meryl Streep question where I think she had a small cameo. Was sure it'd be a pointless and was mightily pissed off when they didn't show you all the possible prize-winning answers

Ryan Taylor · Post by **Ryan Taylor** » Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:26 pm

Dinos Sfyris wrote:I didn't know you were dating Brian May!

See!

Jimmy Gough · Post by **Jimmy Gough** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:38 am

Agree with everyone else, great performance and a cool gameshow. I thought you two were the best, but everyone seemed very pleasant. Doesn't it kind of seem futile putting in specific preparation for the show because the questions are so wide and varied? Must be a bit frustrating if you've learnt things like the currency of Uzbekistan only to be screwed over by not knowing Tony Blair's children.

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:53 am

Jimmy Gough wrote:Agree with everyone else, great performance and a cool gameshow. I thought you two were the best, but everyone seemed very pleasant. Doesn't it kind of seem futile putting in specific preparation for the show because the questions are so wide and varied? Must be a bit frustrating if you've learnt things like the currency of Uzbekistan only to be screwed over by not knowing Tony Blair's children.

Yeah - the problem was that they made a few changes for this series, particularly the head to head. With the previous format they'd've never asked a question with only 4 answers, so there were surprisingly little types of question they could have asked. Indeed, having watched the previous 9 episodes to this one now, we were prepared for a surprisingly large number of questions, but very rarely those in the head to head.

Kirk Bevins · Post by **Kirk Bevins** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:13 am

Hmph, fine, don't answer my question then.

Ben Hunter · Post by **Ben Hunter** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 4:11 am

cool T shirt

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:34 am

Kirk Bevins wrote:Hmph, fine, don't answer my question then.

TBH I don't think Pointless is ready for the iPhone generation. In any case there's no signal inside Television Centre so it would be pretty complex to beat the system that way.

Matthew Green · Post by **Matthew Green** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:52 am

Excuse me if I sound naive here, but what's behind the 'Raccoon Boy' moniker?

Karen Pearson · Post by **Karen Pearson** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:59 am

Charlie Reams wrote:
Kirk Bevins wrote:Hmph, fine, don't answer my question then.
TBH I don't think Pointless is ready for the iPhone generation. In any case there's no signal inside Television Centre so it would be pretty complex to beat the system that way.

But, if you go outside with the smokers, you can use your mobile then. And you DO get reception in the studios so someone watching could send texts and the other person could pick them up periodically.

Kirk Bevins · Post by **Kirk Bevins** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 10:36 am

I mean I don't understand how you could cheat? Do they use the same questions or categories for the next recordings?

Helen Andrews · Post by **Helen Andrews** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 1:31 pm

Just caught up with this on iPlayer, I'm guessing the Michael on the show is the Michael on here with the raccoon(?) picture?

Well done both of you, really unlucky with Swap Shop I thought, but I agree with everyone else that you were the most engaging pair. You also had the best hair by some way too

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 2:05 pm

Helen Andrews wrote:Just caught up with this on iPlayer, I'm guessing the Michael on the show is the Michael on here with the raccoon(?) picture?

Well done both of you, really unlucky with Swap Shop I thought, but I agree with everyone else that you were the most engaging pair. You also had the best hair by some way too

That's me, yeah (it's a raccoon eating a coonish pasty, you see). Thanks for the comments, still waiting for that call to do a L'Oreal advert, though.

David O'Donnell · Post by **David O'Donnell** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 2:18 pm

Likewise I just watched this. Given the topics I don't think you guys stood a snowball's chance in hell but came across really well.

One for the lookalike thread: Michael Briers and Steven Wallace?

Gavin Chipper · Post by **Gavin Chipper** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:21 pm

Michael Wallace wrote:
Helen Andrews wrote:Just caught up with this on iPlayer, I'm guessing the Michael on the show is the Michael on here with the raccoon(?) picture?

Well done both of you, really unlucky with Swap Shop I thought, but I agree with everyone else that you were the most engaging pair. You also had the best hair by some way too
That's me, yeah (it's a raccoon eating a coonish pasty, you see). Thanks for the comments, still waiting for that call to do a L'Oreal advert, though.

Do you eat Coon cheese as well?

Jimmy Gough · Post by **Jimmy Gough** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 4:18 pm

Michael Wallace wrote:
Helen Andrews wrote:Just caught up with this on iPlayer, I'm guessing the Michael on the show is the Michael on here with the raccoon(?) picture?

Well done both of you, really unlucky with Swap Shop I thought, but I agree with everyone else that you were the most engaging pair. You also had the best hair by some way too
That's me, yeah (it's a raccoon eating a coonish pasty, you see). Thanks for the comments, still waiting for that call to do a L'Oreal testing, though.

fyp

Karen Pearson · Post by **Karen Pearson** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 4:22 pm

Kirk Bevins wrote:I mean I don't understand how you could cheat? Do they use the same questions or categories for the next recordings?

In the final round, you get to choose from 3 topics. The 2 unused topics then often appear on the next show (and for up to about 5 shows as far as I can tell). So, if the people who were appearing in the next few shows knew what the topics were, they could do some research to try to work out the most obscure answers.

Ryan Taylor · Post by **Ryan Taylor** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 4:27 pm

Karen Pearson wrote:
Kirk Bevins wrote:I mean I don't understand how you could cheat? Do they use the same questions or categories for the next recordings?

In the final round, you get to choose from 3 topics. The 2 unused topics then often appear on the next show (and for up to about 5 shows as far as I can tell). So, if the people who were appearing in the next few shows knew what the topics were, they could do some research to try to work out the most obscure answers.

Yeah but on Friday the topic was 'Hollywood' and the sub category was Meryl Streep films. Not exactly "revisable" in my opinion because the categories have too many possibilities.

Karen Pearson · Post by **Karen Pearson** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 4:29 pm

Ryan Taylor wrote:
Karen Pearson wrote:
Kirk Bevins wrote:I mean I don't understand how you could cheat? Do they use the same questions or categories for the next recordings?
In the final round, you get to choose from 3 topics. The 2 unused topics then often appear on the next show (and for up to about 5 shows as far as I can tell). So, if the people who were appearing in the next few shows knew what the topics were, they could do some research to try to work out the most obscure answers.
Yeah but on Friday the topic was 'Hollywood' and the sub category was Meryl Streep films. Not exactly "revisable" in my opinion because the categories have too many possibilities.

I agree. But Round Table was revisable and, for the Winter Olympics round I'd have revised sports and host cities (assuming I hadn't already done so). Plenty of them are fairly narrow - although I think the categories may be becoming more vague (perhaps deliberately so in order to avoid potential cheating?).

Ryan Taylor · Post by **Ryan Taylor** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 4:43 pm

Oh, I see now. Hollywood one was probably a bad example then as it was so vast. I don't remember other categories and don't watch it so I imagine their are some categories which are predictable what will be asked.

Kirk Bevins · Post by **Kirk Bevins** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:07 pm

Thanks for that guys, didn't know they reused the topics. Had you seen the topics, how long would you get to swot, i.e. how long until the next recording? Do they film like 5 a day like Countdown?

Peter Mabey · Post by **Peter Mabey** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:10 pm

I'd noticed they reused the topics, so I assumed that several shows were recorded in a day, so anyone coming back wouldn't have much chance of researching in the interim, unless they had the opportunity for an iPhone Google

With so few good answers available in the head-to-head, going first does give a huge advantage, as if that team finds the best one, there's nothing the others can do. BTW, my problem with "Swap Shop" was the opposite one: it was aimed at too low an age group for me to have watched it

- when the answers were shown, I remembered the people, but had no idea that anyone other than Noel had presented the show

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:18 pm

Peter Mabey wrote:With so few good answers available in the head-to-head, going first does give a huge advantage, as if that team finds the best one, there's nothing the others can do.

Yeah, the new head-to-head format basically causes a lot of volatility. On some questions people will know all of them (such as an earlier show where it was "what do the letters GNVQ stand for?"), which usually means whoever goes first wins, whilst on others they pick something that's specialised in just the right way (e.g. by age) that it's obvious from the start which pair will win the point, regardless of who goes first (such as Swap Shop for us, or on a previous episode where it was Play School toys).

Julie T · Post by **Julie T** » Sun Mar 21, 2010 8:56 pm

Watched this on 'catch-up' - great play, Michael!

You and your partner were unlucky in the topic areas, but played well, so hopefully you've got a chance to get to the final on the next show.
Pity that the couple who beat you scooped the rollover jackpot, but admittedly they were excellent.
I'm looking forward to watching tomorrow's game!

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Sun Mar 21, 2010 10:46 pm

Julie T wrote: You and your partner

Don't gallop over it!

Jon Corby · Post by **Jon Corby** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 8:38 am

Dinos Sfyris wrote:Was sure it'd be a pointless and was mightily pissed off when they didn't show you all the possible prize-winning answers

Never seen the show before Friday, but could this be to hide the disparity between the questions? (I'm not suggesting it's rigged on purpose...necessarily) It will seem a bit unfair if some questions have only one or two pointless answers but others have shitloads.

Is CF gonna be at Co:Lon? He seems like a good laugh. I might go if he's gonna be there.

Good luck for today!

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 12:57 pm

Jon Corby wrote:Never seen the show before Friday, but could this be to hide the disparity between the questions? (I'm not suggesting it's rigged on purpose...necessarily) It will seem a bit unfair if some questions have only one or two pointless answers but others have shitloads.

Is CF gonna be at Co:Lon? He seems like a good laugh. I might go if he's gonna be there.

CF will be at Co:Lon, yeah.

I think with the revealing the answers thing they just don't do it if a couple win, dunno why though (maybe they think it seems a bit 'boring' after the 'excitement' of someone winning?).

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:14 pm

Jon Corby wrote: Is CF gonna be at Co:Lon? He seems like a good laugh. I might go if he's gonna be there.

This. They cut out so much of the funniest stuff

Matthew Green · Post by **Matthew Green** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 2:03 pm

Matthew Green wrote:Excuse me if I sound naive here, but what's behind the 'Raccoon Boy' moniker?

Julie T · Post by **Julie T** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 2:07 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Julie T wrote: You and your partner
Don't gallop over it!

I couldn't remember his name, sorry Michael and CF(??), and frankly couldn't be arsed to look through the thread to check.
I hope you're not suggesting I'm homophobic, as my eldest son, Alex, is bi, which is just how he is, although I was surprised when he told me TBH.

Julie T · Post by **Julie T** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 2:10 pm

Matthew Green wrote:
Matthew Green wrote:Excuse me if I sound naive here, but what's behind the 'Raccoon Boy' moniker?

I think it's been mentioned before, and I may be wrong, but I think it was because someone thought that Michael resembled a raccoon and/or his favourite T shirt had a raccoon on it, and the moniker stuck.

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 2:13 pm

Julie T wrote:I hope you're not suggesting I'm homophobic, as my eldest son, Alex, is bi, which is just how he is, although I was surprised when he told me TBH.

Haha no, I was just alluding to this.

Jimmy Gough · Post by **Jimmy Gough** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 4:36 pm

Someone say jizz. Please.

Liam Tiernan · Post by **Liam Tiernan** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 4:38 pm

SCUZZ?

Matt Morrison · Post by **Matt Morrison** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 4:57 pm

Unbridled euphoria for me too knowing M/CF's unbridled euphoria, surely. Half expecting a pointless here boys.

Matt Morrison · Post by **Matt Morrison** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 5:01 pm

"Touched"? Nonsense, right? Through to the final.

Matt Morrison · Post by **Matt Morrison** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 5:11 pm

POSTINGWEAR. Cuntish. Very unlucky indeed, a great answer.

Jimmy Gough · Post by **Jimmy Gough** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 5:13 pm

gg, ul

Marc Meakin · Post by **Marc Meakin** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 5:23 pm

Unlucky on the final round shame you didn't go for Wallace.

Gavin Chipper · Post by **Gavin Chipper** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:03 pm

Michael Wallace wrote:
Jon Corby wrote:Never seen the show before Friday, but could this be to hide the disparity between the questions? (I'm not suggesting it's rigged on purpose...necessarily) It will seem a bit unfair if some questions have only one or two pointless answers but others have shitloads.

Is CF gonna be at Co:Lon? He seems like a good laugh. I might go if he's gonna be there.
CF will be at Co:Lon, yeah.

I think with the revealing the answers thing they just don't do it if a couple win, dunno why though (maybe they think it seems a bit 'boring' after the 'excitement' of someone winning?).

Co:Lon - pronounced "Cocolonlon".

JimBentley · Post by **JimBentley** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:14 pm

Ah, really really unlucky on Spiro Agnew (ARSEWIPING in Touchdown), but that was a totally excellent game and easily the most entertaining episode of Pointless I've seen, because of your and CF's awesomeness. I'm almost tempted to come to COLON now just for the privilege of meeting you both.

Ryan Taylor · Post by **Ryan Taylor** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:31 pm

Very entertaining and the categories seemed very kind today, they would be categories that I would have liked to play. And the US vice presidents at the end was just unlucky, my answer was Spiro Agnew. I had heard of Walter Mondale but never would have got it, pretty tough question if you've not looked down the list. But yeah it was good to watch, you did well, and you were both funny. Was Mr Reams in the audience, and if so, was it you who I saw eating a bogey you'd just picked?