Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
Moderator: James Robinson
- Mark Kudlowski
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 473
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 3:15 pm
Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
1st numbers alt:
((50 x (5 - 1) - 7 ) x 3
((50 x (5 - 1) - 7 ) x 3
- Mike Brailsford
- Acolyte
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 4:41 pm
- Location: Blackpool, England
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
3rd Numbers Game
(9 + 1) x 10 = 100
100 + 2 = 102
102 x 8 = 816
816 - 1 - 815
(9 + 1) x 10 = 100
100 + 2 = 102
102 x 8 = 816
816 - 1 - 815
- Richard Priest
- Devotee
- Posts: 678
- Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:30 pm
- Location: Newcastle-under-Lyme
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
Beat me to itMike Brailsford wrote:3rd Numbers Game
(9 + 1) x 10 = 100
100 + 2 = 102
102 x 8 = 816
816 - 1 - 815
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1955
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:02 am
- Location: UK
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
Likewise.Rich Priest wrote:Beat me to itMike Brailsford wrote:3rd Numbers Game
(9 + 1) x 10 = 100
100 + 2 = 102
102 x 8 = 816
816 - 1 - 815
Well done, Jimmy. By my reckoning, that's exactly the score you needed to make number 2 seed. (subject to anyone else coming along, of course)
Looking forward to seeing you in the finals now.
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 825
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:29 am
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
Well done Jimmy on becoming an Octochamp and number 3 seed. Gonna be some classic quarter finals I reckon.
- Mike Brailsford
- Acolyte
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 4:41 pm
- Location: Blackpool, England
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
I bet Jimmy won't risk buzzing in the event of a crucial Conundrum with the hope of it coming to him in the 3 seconds until Jeff asks for the answer. A habit that could cost him !
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1955
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:02 am
- Location: UK
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
I've now just watched the end of the programme, and see that Jeff says you're number 3 seed, Jimmy. I've checked, and still think you're number 2. Same eight programme total as Cate - 782. But you come above her as your highest, 116, beats hers, 113.
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
I think it's conundrum spots that are the first tie-breaker.Howard Somerset wrote:I've now just watched the end of the programme, and see that Jeff says you're number 3 seed, Jimmy. I've checked, and still think you're number 2. Same eight programme total as Cate - 782. But you come above her as your highest, 116, beats hers, 113.
Edit: Although countdownwiki says otherwise, so I'm not sure where I got that idea from...
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1955
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:02 am
- Location: UK
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
Mike Brown's Coundown Page also says otherwise, which is where I got it from.Michael Wallace wrote:I think it's conundrum spots that are the first tie-breaker.Howard Somerset wrote:I've now just watched the end of the programme, and see that Jeff says you're number 3 seed, Jimmy. I've checked, and still think you're number 2. Same eight programme total as Cate - 782. But you come above her as your highest, 116, beats hers, 113.
Edit: Although countdownwiki says otherwise, so I'm not sure where I got that idea from...
But if you're right, and it's conundrum spots, then Cate is 6 - 2 ahead of Jimmy.
- Kirk Bevins
- God
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
- Location: York, UK
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
It's definitely conundrum spots that decided it - Damian told us at the finals. Jimmy only got 2 conundrums so dropped into number 3 seed.
A nice equaller in round 2 in PORTIERE and in round 3 CORONAE. I was surprised Rachel missed the 102x8-1 for the last numbers game too.
I also find it funny when a contestant has 28 seconds to themselves to get the conundrum but buzz in really quickly only to realise they've made an error. One of my opponents did this in my heats.
Well done Jimmy for becoming an octochamp - roll on the finals!
A nice equaller in round 2 in PORTIERE and in round 3 CORONAE. I was surprised Rachel missed the 102x8-1 for the last numbers game too.
I also find it funny when a contestant has 28 seconds to themselves to get the conundrum but buzz in really quickly only to realise they've made an error. One of my opponents did this in my heats.
Well done Jimmy for becoming an octochamp - roll on the finals!
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1955
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:02 am
- Location: UK
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
Thanks Kirk. Wiki leaderboard changedKirk Bevins wrote:It's definitely conundrum spots that decided it - Damian told us at the finals. Jimmy only got 2 conundrums so dropped into number 3 seed.
- Derek Hazell
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1535
- Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:52 am
- Location: Swindon
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
Yes, that is interesting. What would you say the balance is between the kudos of getting the conundrum as quickly as possible, or sitting back and relaxing for the remaining time, but at least more probably getting it right?Kirk Bevins wrote:I also find it funny when a contestant has 28 seconds to themselves to get the conundrum but buzz in really quickly only to realise they've made an error. One of my opponents did this in my heat.
Living life in a gyratory circus kind of way.
-
- Rookie
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 11:14 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
MiNGIEST in R8
2nd numbers (50+4)*(9+2)-1=593
3rd numbers as already mentioned above
2nd numbers (50+4)*(9+2)-1=593
3rd numbers as already mentioned above
- Kai Laddiman
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2314
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:37 pm
- Location: My bedroom
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
I must admit, I would have buzzed in immediately and said ARBITRARY.
16/10/2007 - Episode 4460
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.
Dinos Sfyris 76 - 78 Dorian Lidell
Proof that even idiots can get well and truly mainwheeled.
- Innis Carson
- Devotee
- Posts: 898
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 3:24 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
Same here.Kai Laddiman wrote:I must admit, I would have buzzed in immediately and said ARBITRARY.
- Martin Gardner
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1492
- Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:57 pm
- Location: Leeds, UK
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
And me (I did, mentally I mean)Innis Carson wrote:Same here.Kai Laddiman wrote:I must admit, I would have buzzed in immediately and said ARBITRARY.
The 'conundrum spots' is new to this series as far as I know. Or Mike Brown's just been wrong for a long time, which is really really unlikely.
There was a rumour from one of the contestants that Chris Rogers beat that the only conundrum he got right was against her (1) but I can't verify it. There's certainly no concrete evidence that I know of of anyone getting less than two conundrums in eight heat games.
If you cut a gandiseeg in half, do you get two gandiseegs or two halves of a gandiseeg?
- Richard Priest
- Devotee
- Posts: 678
- Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:30 pm
- Location: Newcastle-under-Lyme
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
When I was involved in series 58 the leaderboard listed the seeds by wins, points and number of conundrums spotted so I assume the rule's applied at least since then.Martin Gardner wrote: The 'conundrum spots' is new to this series as far as I know. Or Mike Brown's just been wrong for a long time, which is really really unlikely.
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
Having just read the recap - me too.Innis Carson wrote:Same here.Kai Laddiman wrote:I must admit, I would have buzzed in immediately and said ARBITRARY.
-
- Series 80 Champion
- Posts: 2707
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:07 am
- Location: Sheffield
- Mike Brown
- Legend
- Posts: 1413
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:16 pm
- Location: King's Lynn
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 20 May
Just been looking into this and have established the following: I'm sure it was highest scores that were the deciding factor in Series 16, 32 and 34 (even if conundrum results coincide, which I haven't checked). In the next series containing a tie (Series 46), our very own Ben Wilson was number one seed by virtue of a highest score, although he spotted the same number of conundrums as Phil Wass (5) so perhaps we can't be 100% sure. Damian was co-producer by then and I suspect he may have been responsible for the change. We haven't had another tie until now, so as to when the change happened, I'm not sure, but I seem to recall Mr Eadie mentioning it in the past. Care to comment, Damian?Martin Gardner wrote: The 'conundrum spots' is new to this series as far as I know. Or Mike Brown's just been wrong for a long time, which is really really unlikely.