Spoilerizers for Thursday 16 July 2009

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:29 pm

I predict a battering...

Edit (after Round 1 and "Barb" asking for "a constanant"): Yep.

Andy Wilson · Post by **Andy Wilson** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:33 pm

constanant... constanant... is it still going to be funny in 40 minutes time?

Sue Sanders · Post by **Sue Sanders** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:36 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:I predict a battering...

Edit (after Round 1 and "Barb" asking for "a constanant"): Yep.

Yeah, 'constanant' ...I logged on just to get arsy about that!!!

Sue Sanders · Post by **Sue Sanders** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:38 pm

50 -7 x (2+8) + 9

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:38 pm

Andy Wilson wrote:constanant... constanant... is it still going to be funny in 40 minutes time?

Yes, yes it is. Have they considered reversing the boxes so that Rachel isn't in front of the one saying CONSONANT in big letters?

There seems to be a correlation with contestants who like sudoku and contestants who are not very good. I won't speculate on why that might be.

Also DIOECY was there in Round 4, which is quite nice.

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:49 pm

ANNOITER...

Innis Carson · Post by **Innis Carson** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:49 pm

Was that ANNOITER that got put on the board there?

Andy Wilson · Post by **Andy Wilson** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:50 pm

was it just me or did Rachel have annoiter up on the letters board?

Andy Wilson · Post by **Andy Wilson** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:51 pm

Obviously was! haha! Everyone's going potty...

Chris Davies · Post by **Chris Davies** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:51 pm

Andy Wilson wrote:was it just me or did Rachel have annoiter up on the letters board?

Yeah, she did!

BRACONID, round 9.

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:55 pm

Nice teaser clue though, I think they made up for the ANNOITER slip with that.

I know we shouldn't slag the contestants but I really have no idea how Barbara passed the audition.

Sue Sanders · Post by **Sue Sanders** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:58 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:Nice teaser clue though, I think they made up for the ANNOITER slip with that.

I know we shouldn't slag the contestants but I really have no idea how Barbara passed the audition.

She's gone into total meltdown.

Matthew Green · Post by **Matthew Green** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:59 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:There seems to be a correlation with contestants who like sudoku and contestants who are not very good.

There seems to be a correlation with working class dinner ladies and contestants who aren't very good. Hideous performance.

Andy Wilson · Post by **Andy Wilson** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 3:01 pm

I'm off to the doctor. I have this constanant ringing in my ears...

Andy Wilson · Post by **Andy Wilson** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 3:05 pm

it's 76 by 11 innit!

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 3:09 pm

I think that was one of my best ever contestant-intro-based predictions. If only we could bet on things. Well done Andrew, one of your solidest performances and continuing the march to be only the second contestant to post 8 centuries in 8 games.

Andrew Hulme · Post by **Andrew Hulme** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 3:15 pm

Probably the only 45 minutes of the whole experience that I didn't really enjoy.

Had BRACONID written down, but wasn't sure if I'd just made it up after apheous yesterday.

Also had SOAKER, but didn't know if it was in.

Just spotted GATEFOLD in rd13 or whatever it was, when watching it back. Guess it must be easier at home!

Pretty easy conundrum to miss with the whole 30 seconds as well. Especially as in the first take about half the audience put their hand up to solve it. Tiredness? I dunno...

Sue Sanders · Post by **Sue Sanders** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 3:18 pm

Matthew Green wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:There seems to be a correlation with contestants who like sudoku and contestants who are not very good.
There seems to be a correlation with working class dinner ladies and contestants who aren't very good. Hideous performance.

Matthew! You terrible cunt!

Sue Sanders · Post by **Sue Sanders** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 3:20 pm

Andrew Hulme wrote:Probably the only 45 minutes of the whole experience that I didn't really enjoy.

Had BRACONID written down, but wasn't sure if I'd just made it up after apheous yesterday.

Also had SOAKER, but didn't know if it was in.

Just spotted GATEFOLD in rd13 or whatever it was, when watching it back. Guess it must be easier at home!

Pretty easy conundrum to miss with the whole 30 seconds as well. Especially as in the first take about half the audience put their hand up to solve it. Tiredness? I dunno...

Ennui. More enigmatic than tiredness.

Davy Affleck · Post by **Davy Affleck** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 3:37 pm

Matthew Green wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:There seems to be a correlation with contestants who like sudoku and contestants who are not very good.
There seems to be a correlation with working class dinner ladies and contestants who aren't very good. Hideous performance.

Twat

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 3:53 pm

Davy Affleck wrote:
Matthew Green wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:There seems to be a correlation with contestants who like sudoku and contestants who are not very good.
There seems to be a correlation with working class dinner ladies and contestants who aren't very good. Hideous performance.

Twat

Another superbly crafted argument.

Chris Corby · Post by **Chris Corby** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:33 pm

Two points:

1) Charlie, why are you now using your 'Gaydar' photo as your avatar?
2) Andrew comes across on TV and on here as a top bloke.

Kirk Bevins · Post by **Kirk Bevins** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:04 pm

I had BANDORA in round 9 as a beater (but was beaten by Chris' BRACONID) and in round 12 I had GATEFOLD as a DC beater (but Andrew mentioned it in passing).

I must admit I also failed on the conundrum - frustratingly difficult but I'm not sure why.

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:09 pm

Kirk Bevins wrote:frustratingly difficult but I'm not sure why.

Agreed, it took me 20 - 25 seconds from my armchair. I spent a lot of time looking for -WARE and other stuff, and completely overlooked -ED. I think partly it was because I was expecting another SAILMAKEResque bastard, so I didn't check the obvious.

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:10 pm

Chris Corby wrote:Charlie, why are you now using your 'Gaydar' photo as your avatar?

I like to be consistent (sometimes).

James Robinson · Post by **James Robinson** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 8:48 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:Nice teaser clue though, I think they made up for the ANNOITER slip with that.

I know we shouldn't slag the contestants but I really have no idea how Barbara passed the audition.

OCARINA as a contestant beater in Round 9.

Also saw the ANNOITER mistake.

Did anyone also notice that upside-down "M"'s were used instead of "W"'s for the conundrum

I'm amazed I didn't get the conundrum, but my mum did and she's only sort of a part-timer at watching the show.

Me and Barbara must be at opposite ends of the administration assistants on Countdown scale

CONSTINANT or CONSTANANT must be a Lancastrian accent for CONSONANT!

Clive Brooker · Post by **Clive Brooker** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:25 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:I know we shouldn't slag the contestants but I really have no idea how Barbara passed the audition.

Hmmm. I hinted in a post a few weeks ago that I didn't think I should have passed the audition (I had the ROMANISE/ROMANIZES version which will be familiar to many). This may sound daft, but when I turned up at the studio I was more concerned with not letting the program down by being yet another crap contestant than with letting myself down.

Anyway, if standards are changing there should be evidence in the data, which gives me a perfect excuse to waste some more time preparing intriguing presentations of statistics. Appearing on this forum sometime soon after the usual checks are complete!

There does seem to have been a noticeable shift following Richard Whiteley's death - WTS.

Darren Carter · Post by **Darren Carter** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 11:12 pm

Andrew Hulme wrote:Probably the only 45 minutes of the whole experience that I didn't really enjoy.

You could tell you didn't really enjoy it - were you embarrassed for her?

I actually got the conundrum, which is quite unusual.

Darren Carter · Post by **Darren Carter** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 11:19 pm

One bit that did make me chuckle was when Suzie told Barb that EASED was only a 5, and she was like "Is it?" and counted each letter out one by one. Ok, maybe if it was an 8 or a 9 but you can just take a glance at a 5 letter word and know its a 5.

Brian Moore · Post by **Brian Moore** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 11:32 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:I think that was one of my best ever contestant-intro-based predictions.

Hmm, I'm not sure how un-PC it is, but I do tend to try to work out how good contestants are going to be by their appearance and speech. Somehow I had a feeling about today's challenger...

James Robinson wrote:OCARINA as a contestant beater in Round 9.

You beat me to it, though I can trump you with a picture:

This one is played by blowing through its rear end, though I can't get the Countdown tune out of it. Too many bum notes.

Darren Carter · Post by **Darren Carter** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 11:44 pm

Brian Moore wrote:Hmm, I'm not sure how un-PC it is, but I do tend to try to work out how good contestants are going to be by their appearance and speech. Somehow I had a feeling about today's challenger...

I'm glad I'm not the only person who does that.....

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 12:31 am

Darren Carter wrote:One bit that did make me chuckle was when Suzie told Barb that EASED was only a 5, and she was like "Is it?" and counted each letter out one by one. Ok, maybe if it was an 8 or a 9 but you can just take a glance at a 5 letter word and know its a 5.

Indeed. Misspelling a 5 would be totally embarrassing, especially if it were a word you saw regularly. Like a name or something.

Srsly though, this does mean that Barb would be outperformed at glance counting by most families of birds, including pigeons and crows.

Jon Corby · Post by **Jon Corby** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 7:29 am

Charlie Reams wrote:Srsly though, this does mean that Barb would be outperformed at glance counting by most families of birds, including pigeons and crows.

Jeffrey Burgin · Post by **Jeffrey Burgin** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 9:19 am

Feel a little bit sorry for Barbara, she was evidently nervous as her voice seemed to quiver at various points and during one numbers selection she looked to be shaking like a leaf- possibly Jeff didn't help by rolling off Andrew's dauntingly impressive statistics beforehand! Against a lesser player she probably would have at least attained a half respectable score. Many congrats to Andrew again though, another powerhouse performance.

Also, I think INBOARD is valid for a contestant beater in round 9- not on BRACONID's level admittedly, but 7 nonetheless.

Matthew Green · Post by **Matthew Green** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 9:31 am

She said at the end that she was just there to make the numbers up. She also made up a load of letters as well.

Davy Affleck · Post by **Davy Affleck** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 10:41 am

There seems to be a correlation with working class dinner ladies and contestants who aren't very good. Hideous performance.[/quote]

Twat[/quote]
Another superbly crafted argument.[/quote]

Thanks Charlie - The art of considered debate and eloquent put-downs is not dead

Derek Hazell · Post by **Derek Hazell** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:07 am

Pugh, Pugh, Barney McGrew, Cuthbert, Dibble, Grub.

Marc Meakin · Post by **Marc Meakin** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:40 am

Derek Hazell wrote:Pugh, Pugh, Barney McGrew, Cuthbert, Dibble, Grub.

I often wondered if it was Barney, McGrew

Dinos Sfyris · Post by **Dinos Sfyris** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:44 am

Brian Moore wrote: .

Anyone else wish they were playing Touchdown this round? I couldn't get CARBONADO out of my head for the whole 30 seconds!

Darren Carter · Post by **Darren Carter** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 12:34 pm

Matthew Green wrote:She said at the end that she was just there to make the numbers up. She also made up a load of letters as well.

Brian Moore · Post by **Brian Moore** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:46 pm

Marc Meakin wrote:
Derek Hazell wrote:Pugh, Pugh, Barney McGrew, Cuthbert, Dibble, Grub.
I often wondered if it was Barney, McGrew

For forty years I've always assumed the latter, but a quick peak at youtube reveals that Barney McGrew is the driver of the fire engine, although very impolitely he's the only one who doesn't nod when his name's called. Really, the terrible manners they were teaching back then. It's only a short step from there to the explosion in crime we've had since then.

Kai Laddiman · Post by **Kai Laddiman** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 5:00 pm

Sue Sanders wrote:50 -7 x (2+8) + 9

-11

Tracey Lilly · Post by **Tracey Lilly** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 5:34 pm

alternative second numbers

100+(10*6) + (5*3+1) = 176