Spoilers for Friday 15th June 2018 (Series 78, QF2)
Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:11 pm
Toby McDonald vs Philip Aston, I have a feeling this will be close - very excited for this game.
BOOFHEAD in R8
BOOFHEAD in R8
A group for contestants and lovers of the Channel 4 game show 'Countdown'.
http://www.c4countdown.co.uk/
Yeah, that was a shame, but that's just the way the cookie crumbles sometimes. I think Philip deserved the win more than me though.Joyce Phillips wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 3:49 pm A truly great game. Just a shame someone had to lose. Well done Philip.
Thanks Owen! Philip did brilliantly.Owen Carroll wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 5:34 pm Well done Philip. I didn't think you'd choose 3l in the final selection though. And well done to Toby for getting this far Andy for making this a brilliant game to watch.
Cheers Tom!
Cheers Elliott! It was a shame, but I am very proud. About CoC, I guess I just need to keep my fingers crossed.Elliott Mellor wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 7:29 pm Thoroughly enjoyable game to watch, one of the best I've ever seen so very well done chaps. It's a great shame anyone had to lose that.
Firstly, congratulations to Philip - that was excellent play by you, you'd have been a very tough opponent to anyone playing like that (ARONIA under pressure was super, 11 maxes too).
Many congratulations due to Toby though - you've been a great ambassador for countdown (the first octochamp born in the 21st century nonetheless). It's a shame you had to be the one to play Philip in the quarters but you played a great game and should be very proud of how you did. Perhaps a COC invite isn't even out of the question...
I'm not convinced. It's pretty clunky, and you've used an extra number. If there's a "standard method", it's what Owen put - 100*4-2*10=380.
Ok to clarify, my definition of "simpler" is a method that an average person can think of without being too complex. You're not wrong, Owen's method is even simpler than mine, but surely it's simpler than thinking of a 95 x 4 straightaway right? The point is, there's loads of easy methods out there in that round, I'm just only sharing what I thought of when I watched the show.Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 4:50 pmI'm not convinced. It's pretty clunky, and you've used an extra number. If there's a "standard method", it's what Owen put - 100*4-2*10=380.
Nothing wrong with that mate! Sharing what you thoughtRyan Lam wrote: ↑Mon Jun 18, 2018 12:10 amOk to clarify, my definition of "simpler" is a method that an average person can think of without being too complex. You're not wrong, Owen's method is even simpler than mine, but surely it's simpler than thinking of a 95 x 4 straightaway right? The point is, there's loads of easy methods out there in that round, I'm just only sharing what I thought of when I watched the show.Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 4:50 pmI'm not convinced. It's pretty clunky, and you've used an extra number. If there's a "standard method", it's what Owen put - 100*4-2*10=380.
Toby this reminds me, in round 7, when you chose a vowel as the final letter, were you hoping for an e for aileron?Toby McDonald wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 12:34 pm There are actually a couple of things I want to say about this show:
1) In R5, when we both had ALUNITE (you may not have noticed this, but I took a while looking at Philip's paper), I couldn't see where he'd written it. I didn't want to say he didn't have it though because I've never heard of that happening before.
2) In R7, I did actually have a 6 written down which was NARIAL (which is actually valid), but I wasn't sure enough. It wouldn't have affected the outcome of the match though. The score would have been 103-104.
3) In one of my business lessons recently at school, I came across the word DEBENTURE, so I could probably blame my teacher for losing.