Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Moderator: James Robinson
- Darren Carter
- What a lot of bling
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:58 pm
- Location: Shrewsbury
Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Time for two new contestants - could we have another Apterite on our hands?
Like Bob de Caux for example.......
Like Bob de Caux for example.......
- Derek Hazell
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1535
- Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:52 am
- Location: Swindon
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Whoever appears, apparently this is a very special date. Because it's 9/9/9 there has been a big rush on people wanting to get married today for example. So, if you believe in luck/fate/omens etc. I am sure you can put some kind of spin on today's game, however it turns out.
Living life in a gyratory circus kind of way.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 6393
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
I wonder if this date will be mentioned today or do they not know the airdate in advance?
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
- Derek Hazell
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1535
- Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:52 am
- Location: Swindon
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Well actually I heard they are abandoning the usual theme tune today and replacing it with http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VRZq3J0uz4.Marc Meakin wrote:I wonder if this date will be mentioned today or do they not know the airdate in advance?
Living life in a gyratory circus kind of way.
- Darren Carter
- What a lot of bling
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:58 pm
- Location: Shrewsbury
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
They do know the airdate in advance.Marc Meakin wrote:I wonder if this date will be mentioned today or do they not know the airdate in advance?
- Derek Hazell
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1535
- Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:52 am
- Location: Swindon
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Yeah Medallion Man, I'd already made that clear in my reply. Anyway, if you want to give a sobre answer, virtually every day Jeff mentions some kind of anniversary which occurs on the transmission day of the programme, so Marc obviously doesn't pay as much attention to Jeff's every word as many of this site's members.Darren Carter wrote:They do know the airdate in advance.Marc Meakin wrote:I wonder if this date will be mentioned today or do they not know the airdate in advance?
I am impressed with Marc's knowledge of the word "airdate" though, considering both Jeff Stelling and Des O'Connor denied all knowledge of the word, despite working in television for about 70 years.
Living life in a gyratory circus kind of way.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 6393
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
I suppose they could have an appropriate teatime teaser like EMERGENCY or AMBULANCE
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Teatime teasers are eight lettersMarc Meakin wrote:I suppose they could have an appropriate teatime teaser like EMERGENCY or AMBULANCE
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 6393
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Oh yeah, must pay more attentionJon Corby wrote:Teatime teasers are eight lettersMarc Meakin wrote:I suppose they could have an appropriate teatime teaser like EMERGENCY or AMBULANCE
athough as it is 09/09/09 they might make an exception
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
I doubt they will tbh, but in answer to your original question they do love anything nine-based so I'd expect a mention today.Marc Meakin wrote:Oh yeah, must pay more attentionJon Corby wrote:Teatime teasers are eight lettersMarc Meakin wrote:I suppose they could have an appropriate teatime teaser like EMERGENCY or AMBULANCE
athough as it is 09/09/09 they might make an exception
- Phil Reynolds
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3329
- Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
- Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
OPENLY round 2
-
- Acolyte
- Posts: 248
- Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 9:20 am
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
APNOEA round 2 as well.
Anyone think today's 'banter' was a little X-rated as well?
Anyone think today's 'banter' was a little X-rated as well?
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 6393
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
HOKIEST in round 3?
Oops not in da book
Oops not in da book
Last edited by Marc Meakin on Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 876
- Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 4:08 pm
- Location: Eastbourne
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
SUDARIA as an equaller
- Phil Reynolds
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3329
- Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
- Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
HOKIEST is fine.Marc Meakin wrote:HOKIEST in round 3?
Oops not in da book
- Innis Carson
- Devotee
- Posts: 898
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 3:24 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
PEONAGES for Round 9(?)
-
- Acolyte
- Posts: 248
- Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 9:20 am
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
2nd numbers alternative:
9*2*10=180.
8-5=3.
3*9=27.
180+27=207.
I'm shit at numbers, I need this.
9*2*10=180.
8-5=3.
3*9=27.
180+27=207.
I'm shit at numbers, I need this.
- Phil Reynolds
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3329
- Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
- Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Whoops - Bob obviously doesn't know the divisibility by 9 rule.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 6393
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
ELITISM in the MILLETS round
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 6393
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
So it isPhil Reynolds wrote:HOKIEST is fine.Marc Meakin wrote:HOKIEST in round 3?
Oops not in da book
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
- Davy Affleck
- Acolyte
- Posts: 232
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:24 am
- Location: Lesmahagow
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
It's good to see 2 normal people playing against each other.
The continual stream of "apterous superstars" is a bit wearing.
The continual stream of "apterous superstars" is a bit wearing.
-
- Acolyte
- Posts: 248
- Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 9:20 am
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Bob interestingly is actually ranked 39th in the Apterous rankings, although I don't know how long ago he stopped playing.Davy Affleck wrote:It's good to see 2 normal people playing against each other.
The continual stream of "apterous superstars" is a bit wearing.
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
PAEONY also round 2 - surprised Suzy only found 5's that round
- Davy Affleck
- Acolyte
- Posts: 232
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:24 am
- Location: Lesmahagow
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Jeffrey Burgin wrote:Bob interestingly is actually ranked 39th in the Apterous rankings, although I don't know how long ago he stopped playing.Davy Affleck wrote:It's good to see 2 normal people playing against each other.
The continual stream of "apterous superstars" is a bit wearing.
OK don't split hairs
- Ken MacKenzie
- Newbie
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 6:05 pm
- Location: Ireland
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Who are you calling "normal"?Davy Affleck wrote:It's good to see 2 normal people playing against each other.
The continual stream of "apterous superstars" is a bit wearing.
In the "HORNIEST" round, I kept seeing THORNIEST (which I had on my audition) and I couldn't get that out of my head. I was a bit miffed that they did a re-take on MILLETS but it wouldn't have affected the outcome.
Now, I wonder if I'm allowed to re-apply.
- Kirk Bevins
- God
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
- Location: York, UK
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Really? He might know it but didn't spot to use it - there's a difference.Phil Reynolds wrote:Whoops - Bob obviously doesn't know the divisibility by 9 rule.
-
- Acolyte
- Posts: 144
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:59 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Nor do I. Can you explain please Phil?Phil Reynolds wrote:Whoops - Bob obviously doesn't know the divisibility by 9 rule.
- Phil Reynolds
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3329
- Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
- Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
A number is always divisible by 9 if the sum of its digits is divisible by 9. The target in this case was 207 which, provided you remember the rule, takes a split second to recognise as being divisible by 9 - and there were two 9s in the selection. 207/9 = 23, so the problem is then reduced to making 23 from 5 small numbers - there were loads of ways of doing this.Kathleen Batlle wrote:Nor do I. Can you explain please Phil?Phil Reynolds wrote:Whoops - Bob obviously doesn't know the divisibility by 9 rule.
- Philip Jarvis
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 399
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 11:32 am
- Location: Cleckheaton, West Yorkshire
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Unlucky Ken - you gave it a good go. Re Millets, this is a valid word on Apterous.Ken MacKenzie wrote:Who are you calling "normal"?Davy Affleck wrote:It's good to see 2 normal people playing against each other.
The continual stream of "apterous superstars" is a bit wearing.
In the "HORNIEST" round, I kept seeing THORNIEST (which I had on my audition) and I couldn't get that out of my head. I was a bit miffed that they did a re-take on MILLETS but it wouldn't have affected the outcome.
Now, I wonder if I'm allowed to re-apply.
With regard to reapplying, I suggest you look at this link.
http://www.c4countdown.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2423
"It's KNACKERED Nick!"
-
- Acolyte
- Posts: 144
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:59 pm
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Thanks Phil. I've jotted the rule down for future reference.Phil Reynolds wrote:A number is always divisible by 9 if the sum of its digits is divisible by 9. The target in this case was 207 which, provided you remember the rule, takes a split second to recognise as being divisible by 9 - and there were two 9s in the selection. 207/9 = 23, so the problem is then reduced to making 23 from 5 small numbers - there were loads of ways of doing this.Kathleen Batlle wrote:Nor do I. Can you explain please Phil?Phil Reynolds wrote:Whoops - Bob obviously doesn't know the divisibility by 9 rule.
- John Bosley
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 380
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 3:52 pm
- Location: Huddersfield
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Did Suzie say 'zenith' as opposite to 'apogee' when possibly she meant 'nadir'?
Depends where you are in the universe I suppose!
Depends where you are in the universe I suppose!
- Ben Hunter
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1770
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:54 pm
- Location: S Yorks
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
I thought the 'opposite' of an apogee was a perigee, I'm no expert though.
- John Bosley
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 380
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 3:52 pm
- Location: Huddersfield
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
You are right, Ben, but Suzie said 'zenith'Ben Hunter wrote:I thought the 'opposite' of an apogee was a perigee, I'm no expert though.
- Ken MacKenzie
- Newbie
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 6:05 pm
- Location: Ireland
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Bummer! I would have thought that people who missed the win by only a few points would have been considered worthy opponents and allowed back.Philip Jarvis wrote:With regard to reapplying, I suggest you look at this link.
http://www.c4countdown.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2423
The shame is that in Bob's next game, I was in the audience and beat him hands down!
Ah well, Eggheads next, I suppose.
- Darren Carter
- What a lot of bling
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:58 pm
- Location: Shrewsbury
Re: Spoilers for Wednesday 9th September 2009
Well done Ken, was a close game. It was you I saw in the bar late on the Tuesday night!Ken MacKenzie wrote:Bummer! I would have thought that people who missed the win by only a few points would have been considered worthy opponents and allowed back.Philip Jarvis wrote:With regard to reapplying, I suggest you look at this link.
http://www.c4countdown.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2423
The shame is that in Bob's next game, I was in the audience and beat him hands down!
Ah well, Eggheads next, I suppose.