Spoilers for Thursday 31st January 2008
Moderator: James Robinson
-
- Series 80 Champion
- Posts: 2707
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:07 am
- Location: Sheffield
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 31st January 2008
And a ooh-ga boo-ga to you tooConor wrote:NAMASTE.
-
- Series 58 Champion
- Posts: 2010
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: Cardiff
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 31st January 2008
Nice spot Conor. I have heard of it (hadn't heard of DETENUE) but I was really gutted about SOLENOIDS as I can remember Kirk showing me this word. I didn't even spot EIDOLON which I tend to never miss: had I spotted EIDOLON I would have spotted EIDOLONS and had I spotted EIDOLONS I would have got SOLENOIDS. It didn't cost me in the game but if I reach the quarters that type of miss might hurt more. Also, a bit gutted about the first numbers.
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 31st January 2008
I thought with the order you were selecting the letters that you going for SOLENOID(S), so I was expecting you to declare 9. Oh well, you'll get one eventually. I was impressed with TEDIUM, that beat me.
-
- Acolyte
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:14 pm
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 31st January 2008
Well done again - can you get 6 centuries?? All the best people get 6 I would have nicked it off you on the conundrum again. Didn't see TEDIUM - good spot and missed out on DEMENT with a sluggish start. Also missed ADIPOSE and would have risked NOSTEMA^ which, given that it is none of the recaps, must be a word I just invented. Saw SOLENOIDS out of time so had to stick with NOODLES. I managed to make up points with the same numbers solution Carol gave and then POLLUTER and the conundrum gave me the win 93-90.
Already looking forward to tomorrow!
Already looking forward to tomorrow!
- Charlie Reams
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9494
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
- Location: Cambridge
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 31st January 2008
Maybe you were thinking of NOSEMA?
-
- Series 48 Champion
- Posts: 481
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:08 pm
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 31st January 2008
Whilst I don't want to get all Stewart Holden on your ass, and whilst I would say that, broadly, scoring yourself at home against the contestant on TV is legitimate, it does seem very dubious to me to bring the conundrum into it... how can it have any relevance when it wasn't crucial in the game on TV, but would have been crucial in a hypothetical game between you and David? Surely the best you can say is "I would have forced a crucial conundrum" or at the very most "I would have been x points ahead / y points behind going into the conundrum", and leave it at that. I know that's always been my approach when playing along at home against the likes of Wills, Cummins, Welsby et al. Not against Paul Gallen though because I could never even force a crucial conundrum against him!James Hurrell wrote:I would have nicked it off you on the conundrum again... the conundrum gave me the win 93-90.
-
- Series 48 Champion
- Posts: 481
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:08 pm
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 31st January 2008
Anyway really well done again David, you missed almost nothing today, until part 3 (when the game was over as a contest anyway). The way things are going, you look to be on course for an octochamp score around the 850 mark, which would give you a good chance of being no.1 seed come finals week... I have a feeling though that there may be a really strong challenger around the corner, since you haven't really had one yet... looking forward to seeing your last two games.
Btw, re DETENUE - first time in a long time that there's been a beater which nobody posted! Did nobody get it? (I certainly didn't, though I got NAMASTE...) Craig?
David I was a touch surprised to hear that you were in fact telling Hazel about WIELDERS in that round - though I have to say I would have been tempted to do the same... in the eighth game of my octochamp run, there was a round where my opponent declared first and said "a risky 8", and I had a nine and when Richard passed to me, I couldn't resist saying "a safe 9". Luckily, apart from the audience collectively going "oooooooh!", I wasn't pulled up for it...
Btw, re DETENUE - first time in a long time that there's been a beater which nobody posted! Did nobody get it? (I certainly didn't, though I got NAMASTE...) Craig?
David I was a touch surprised to hear that you were in fact telling Hazel about WIELDERS in that round - though I have to say I would have been tempted to do the same... in the eighth game of my octochamp run, there was a round where my opponent declared first and said "a risky 8", and I had a nine and when Richard passed to me, I couldn't resist saying "a safe 9". Luckily, apart from the audience collectively going "oooooooh!", I wasn't pulled up for it...
- Charlie Reams
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9494
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
- Location: Cambridge
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 31st January 2008
Are you planning to do recaps for your own games, Julian? At least then Jono might get over his crush.
- Jon O'Neill
- Ginger Ninja
- Posts: 4554
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:45 am
- Location: London, UK
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 31st January 2008
If he turns out to be shit, my dreams will be shattered.
Only kidding. Anyway, as for "a safe 9", there's that story where Chris Cummins's opponent said "I'll stick with a 5" and he said "I'll stick with a 9". Bahahaha!
Only kidding. Anyway, as for "a safe 9", there's that story where Chris Cummins's opponent said "I'll stick with a 5" and he said "I'll stick with a 9". Bahahaha!
- Craig Beevers
- Series 57 Champion
- Posts: 653
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 am
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 31st January 2008
Julian wrote:Anyway really well done again David, you missed almost nothing today, until part 3 (when the game was over as a contest anyway). The way things are going, you look to be on course for an octochamp score around the 850 mark, which would give you a good chance of being no.1 seed come finals week... I have a feeling though that there may be a really strong challenger around the corner, since you haven't really had one yet... looking forward to seeing your last two games.
Btw, re DETENUE - first time in a long time that there's been a beater which nobody posted! Did nobody get it? (I certainly didn't, though I got NAMASTE...) Craig?
David I was a touch surprised to hear that you were in fact telling Hazel about WIELDERS in that round - though I have to say I would have been tempted to do the same... in the eighth game of my octochamp run, there was a round where my opponent declared first and said "a risky 8", and I had a nine and when Richard passed to me, I couldn't resist saying "a safe 9". Luckily, apart from the audience collectively going "oooooooh!", I wasn't pulled up for it...
I saw DETENU and DETENUE, was reasonably sure of the former but had no idea whether the latter was in. I saw NAMASTE, was a bit worried with that one because I had a feeling there was an ODE-only anagram and that it might have been the only one allowed - program says there's SMETANA^. I see NAMASTE most days tho on Scrabulous and knew it what it was roughly, would have gone for it in most circumstances.