Spoilers For Wednesday June 30th 2010
Moderator: James Robinson
- James Robinson
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 10580
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:38 pm
- Location: Mirfield, West Yorkshire
Spoilers For Wednesday June 30th 2010
The halfway point of the year is upon, and with no football for a couple of days, us English can enjoy the cricket, while the Brits can enjoy the tennis.
And for those of you not interested in sport, there's Countdown to keep you entertained.
The champions' chair merry-go-round seems to be in full spin again, as we have our 4th different person in as many days sitting on it, Ben Cooke, an Apterite no less. How long will he stay before he's toast (Rubbish cook pun, I know. )
So, to make up for that, there'll be the brilliant Robinson Recap later on.
And for those of you not interested in sport, there's Countdown to keep you entertained.
The champions' chair merry-go-round seems to be in full spin again, as we have our 4th different person in as many days sitting on it, Ben Cooke, an Apterite no less. How long will he stay before he's toast (Rubbish cook pun, I know. )
So, to make up for that, there'll be the brilliant Robinson Recap later on.
- Kirk Bevins
- God
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
- Location: York, UK
Re: Spoilers For Wednesday June 30th 2010
Ohh Ryan Loughborough is an apterite too. So today and tomorrow will be battle of apterites. Good to see.
- Ray Folwell
- Acolyte
- Posts: 153
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:46 pm
Re: Spoilers For Wednesday June 30th 2010
(75-9-8) x 6 -1 = 347
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 327
- Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:59 pm
Re: Spoilers For Wednesday June 30th 2010
SWEDGES was a nice alternative in round 4. I say nice, but I don't know what it means. Could easily be something about rape...
Re: Spoilers For Wednesday June 30th 2010
gaberfuckingdeeeen
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 799
- Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:12 pm
- Location: Kildare, Rep. of Ireland
Re: Spoilers For Wednesday June 30th 2010
It means leaving without paying your bill, so I suppose in some circumstances you could be right.Josh Hurst wrote:SWEDGES was a nice alternative in round 4. I say nice, but I don't know what it means. Could easily be something about rape...
- Kirk Bevins
- God
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
- Location: York, UK
Re: Spoilers For Wednesday June 30th 2010
I had this too. It means a fight or a brawl and can be a verb too.Josh Hurst wrote:SWEDGES was a nice alternative in round 4. I say nice, but I don't know what it means. Could easily be something about rape...
- James Robinson
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 10580
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:38 pm
- Location: Mirfield, West Yorkshire
Re: Spoilers For Wednesday June 30th 2010
IODISED in Round 3. MARTINET in Round 6, another E would've brought up TERMINATE of course. LOOFAH in Round 11 too.
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1955
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:02 am
- Location: UK
Re: Spoilers For Wednesday June 30th 2010
I went a completely different way to 347, but only just before the 30 secs was up reaslied that I'd illegally gone via a fraction.Ray Folwell wrote:(75-9-8) x 6 -1 = 347
My method was 75 x 4 = 300, using 8/2 to make the 4.
Then splitting the multiplication by using 8 x 6, leaving the 1 to subtract.
Unfortunately that meant having an intermediate result of 37½.
Shame they have that restriction.
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 799
- Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:12 pm
- Location: Kildare, Rep. of Ireland
Re: Spoilers For Wednesday June 30th 2010
So what you're saying, basically, is that you used the 8 twice?Howard Somerset wrote:I went a completely different way to 347, but only just before the 30 secs was up reaslied that I'd illegally gone via a fraction.Ray Folwell wrote:(75-9-8) x 6 -1 = 347
My method was 75 x 4 = 300, using 8/2 to make the 4.
Then splitting the multiplication by using 8 x 6, leaving the 1 to subtract.
Unfortunately that meant having an intermediate result of 37½.
Shame they have that restriction.
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: Spoilers For Wednesday June 30th 2010
No, he's saying he did ((75/2)+6)*8 - 1.Liam Tiernan wrote:So what you're saying, basically, is that you used the 8 twice?Howard Somerset wrote:I went a completely different way to 347, but only just before the 30 secs was up reaslied that I'd illegally gone via a fraction.Ray Folwell wrote:(75-9-8) x 6 -1 = 347
My method was 75 x 4 = 300, using 8/2 to make the 4.
Then splitting the multiplication by using 8 x 6, leaving the 1 to subtract.
Unfortunately that meant having an intermediate result of 37½.
Shame they have that restriction.
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1955
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:02 am
- Location: UK
Re: Spoilers For Wednesday June 30th 2010
Thanks MichaelMichael Wallace wrote:No, he's saying he did ((75/2)+6)*8 - 1.
That's exactly what I did.
(Had I used the 8 twice, Liam, I'd not have needed a fraction as an intermediate result)