c4countdown

Sean Fletcher's at win number 6. If he can score at least 47 points today, he will also definitely be in the finals. Can he do it? I know apterite Samir Pilica is supposed to be coming soon, and for some reason I think it could be today (he mentioned a date to me but I only have a vague recollection of it). So maybe it'll be today, I don't remember. Whether it's him or not, enjoy Sean.

Join James for the recap later.

It is indeed Samir - rated currently in the 1300s on Apterous - shame he missed the first numbers.

Did Sean knowingly fish for the E in R7? No he has 6 obviously not.

Managed 24x20 to make 480, but the computer can make 486 (1 away).

JUVIES+S gives an obscure 7 In R12.

Sean's final losing sigh makes me think he must be a Julia Bradbury fan and sad to be missing her on the next show!

Looking forward to seeing more of Samir though.

Well done to Samir, solid start and we'll see how he goes.

Shame for Sean, I think he would have won had he got the 9, so close game, and we'll see him again in the finals.

Tony Atkins wrote:JUVIES+S gives an obscure 7 In R12.

I got that in the round. JUSSIVE for 7.

Tony Atkins wrote:Managed 24x20 to make 480, but the computer can make 486 (1 away).

If I've remembered the selection correctly it was 2+1

then ((7x4)-1)x6x3

Tony Atkins wrote:Managed 24x20 to make 480, but the computer can make 486 (1 away).

I just snook to 490 in that one.

A very good début by Samir there, again knew he was coming on soon, but couldn't remember when...........

LOAMIER/LOATHER in round 8.

1st Numbers Alt.: (((75 x 4) - 6) x 3) + 7 = 889
2nd Numbers Alt.: (75 + 5 + 5 - 1) x 4 = 336

Jordan F wrote:Shame for Sean, I think he would have won had he got the 9, so close game, and we'll see him again in the finals.

I missed today's game, but I thought his standard had slipped over the last couple of days. Had he lost his first game, he's definitely someone who people would have said "He would have been an octochamp but was unlucky" about, and I might have agreed, but it's difficult to tell someone's standard from a single game. Quite a few people have lost their only game in a close contest against a future octochamp and people say that about them, but I think in man cases they would not have performed at that level thereafter.

Surprised Rachel didn't declare or show a method within 10 for the 487 round - I got 480 pretty easily within the time.

Despite what Nick said, I'd be surprised if we see Sean back for the finals in June.

If somebody's got his number I think they should go check on him...

James Robinson wrote:

Tony Atkins wrote:Managed 24x20 to make 480, but the computer can make 486 (1 away).

I just snook to 490 in that one.

Yup, 480 here first, then found 490 out of time after realising that (6+1)x7 is one more than (7+1)x6