Page 1 of 1

Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:26 pm
by Ben Hunter
We've already had gracious, moody and comical, but in which way will today's challenger decide to deal with their defeat?

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:28 pm
by Ian Dent
Who was moody?

Anne?

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:30 pm
by Matt Morrison
Kirk would have loved those first 3 letters, HST :D

EDIT: High Speed Train, if you were wondering.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:36 pm
by Matt Morrison
Surprised no one in the studio had seen or read Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas - based on not having heard of peyote.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:37 pm
by Innis Carson
((25x4)-7)x5-(9/9)

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:38 pm
by Lesley Jeavons
5 x 25
-9
x 4

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:38 pm
by Ben Hunter
I'd heard of Peyote before that film came out, but that's because of my dodgy upbringing.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:39 pm
by Ben Wilson
R5 alt: (25+4)*(9+7)

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:40 pm
by Matt Morrison
Ben Hunter wrote:I'd heard of Peyote before that film came out, but that's because of my dodgy upbringing.
Same here, I just thought I'd reference the most mainstream peyote-mentioning thing I could think of to prove a point!

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:40 pm
by Mark Kudlowski
Ist numbers: (25 + 4) x (9 + 7). Ben beat me to it as I was typing

Also, when was the last time we had THREE penalty letters like Q, X and Z in the same round ?

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:46 pm
by Matt Morrison
Mark Kudlowski wrote:when was the last time we had THREE penalty letters like Q, X and Z in the same round ?
Too many times this series!
Had Q X K in round 9 on Tuesday.
Think there was a J Z W F yesterday.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:55 pm
by Lesley Jeavons
2 x (75+9)+8+6

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:01 pm
by Kai Laddiman
A J instead of a Q in Rd QXZ would have given FEIJOA :P

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:04 pm
by Ben Wilson
JAPONICA! Come on Bevins...

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:05 pm
by Kai Laddiman
Did anyone else lose satellite signal?

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:07 pm
by Matt Morrison
Kai Laddiman wrote:Did anyone else lose satellite signal?
Not me, on Sky.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:17 pm
by Kai Laddiman
Final score?

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:18 pm
by Charlie Reams
Kirk lost 94-92 on a crucial.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:19 pm
by Kai Laddiman
Charlie Reams wrote:Kirk lost 94-92 on a crucial.
Oh well. Unlucky Kirk.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:21 pm
by Ben Hunter
Kai Laddiman wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:Kirk lost 94-92 on a crucial.
Oh well. Unlucky Kirk.
Alas, all good things must come to an end. Hopefully Kirk will have gotten enough points to reach the final.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:28 pm
by Kirk Bevins
Ben Hunter wrote:
Kai Laddiman wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:Kirk lost 94-92 on a crucial.
Oh well. Unlucky Kirk.
Alas, all good things must come to an end. Hopefully Kirk will have gotten enough points to reach the final.
I'm not sure if you realised Charlie was joking because I can't detect stuff like that. I won 111-39 Kai.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:29 pm
by Kai Laddiman
Kirk Bevins wrote:I won 111-39 Kai.
On a crucial I assume?

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:35 pm
by tomrowell
i cant believe im only getting one dose of the bevatron next week due to irish people and their fascination with horses

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:42 pm
by Jojo Apollo
tomrowell wrote:i cant believe im only getting one dose of the bevatron next week due to irish people and their fascination with horses
Oh no not the horse racing again. It's funny how DOND never seems to be affected by it's coverage. :x

ps. well played again Kirk. Keep up the good work.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 5:04 pm
by Dinos Sfyris
Awesome stuff Kirk. I make that an 11 max game for you today which is pretty good when the ones you missed were the first numbers, GARPIKE, JAPONICA and GENOTYPE (Peugeot was there in that round as well :))

Bloody racing next week :x Although it will make Monday's game sweet as sugar ;)

Also I had MOSHAV in one round which IMO is super sexy.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 5:07 pm
by Jimmy Gough
Kirk, did it ever get annoying that Dr Phil kept asking what words meant even though he knows you haven't got a clue? I mean, nobody else has been asked what words mean that often. He comes across as a total arse to me, but I guess I'd be in the minority there.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 5:09 pm
by Martin Gardner
Haha yes I decided to risk GENOTYPE because of the quality of the opposition, and got JAPONICA, but then fcked up on the first numbers by using a number twice, and went for FEUDING in the DEFAMING round. A little numbers alternative while we're here

(8+2) * (9+6/3) = 110
110 + 75

And fo the last one I did 99 * 8, having missed that once during my own heat games (see the Wiki for details)

Nice conundrum spot too, although the LA- as the first two letters doesn't exactly make it harder. Excellent stuff, so which day is Countdown broadcast next week, is it only one?

Edit: Just read Jimmy's post, they always used to ask Julian what the words meant, but he actually knew. I also get pissed off online when people ask me what the words mean, as very often, I don't know!

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 5:22 pm
by Dinos Sfyris
Martin Gardner wrote:Nice conundrum spot too
Yes, although after he buzzed, Jeff seemed to chuckle at how quick Kirk had buzzed for about 5-10 secs before asking him what it was. Although Kirk hobviously wouldn't do it, thats the biggest opportunity for potential Hansfords I've ever seen!

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 5:31 pm
by Eoin Monaghan
tomrowell wrote:i cant believe im only getting one dose of the bevatron next week due to irish people and their fascination with horses
Not our fault- never the Irishs' fault

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 5:41 pm
by Martin Gardner
HOARSEST in the first round (see John Davies vs. Jerry Humphreys for confirmation that this is ok).

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 5:44 pm
by Kirk Bevins
Dinos Sfyris wrote:
Martin Gardner wrote:Nice conundrum spot too
Yes, although after he buzzed, Jeff seemed to chuckle at how quick Kirk had buzzed for about 5-10 secs before asking him what it was. Although Kirk hobviously wouldn't do it, thats the biggest opportunity for potential Hansfords I've ever seen!
Yeah, was annoying really but you can see me looking straight at Jeff hinting I wasn't directly Hansfording it.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 5:44 pm
by Kirk Bevins
Jimmy Gough wrote:Kirk, did it ever get annoying that Dr Phil kept asking what words meant even though he knows you haven't got a clue? I mean, nobody else has been asked what words mean that often. He comes across as a total arse to me, but I guess I'd be in the minority there.
Phil is great. I don't care if they ask me what they mean - I think it's good I don't know. It shows that you don't have to know the definitions to offer the words. I particularly liked this in Conor when he was on the show.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 6:19 pm
by Ben Hunter
Kirk Bevins wrote:
Ben Hunter wrote:
Kai Laddiman wrote:Oh well. Unlucky Kirk.
Alas, all good things must come to an end. Hopefully Kirk will have gotten enough points to reach the final.
I'm not sure if you realised Charlie was joking because I can't detect stuff like that. I won 111-39 Kai.
I was just continuing the gag.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 6:20 pm
by Matthew Green
Lesley Jeavons wrote:5 x 25
-9
x 4
Surely this doesn't need putting when Rachel got it?

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 6:23 pm
by Neil Zussman
Surprised nobody's mentioned ADJOIN in the last letters round (though obviously it's still not as good as DC's word). Possibly the first letters game I've beaten Kirk on (but hopefully not the last...).

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 6:37 pm
by Phil Reynolds
Ben Hunter wrote:I'd heard of Peyote before that film came out, but that's because of my dodgy upbringing.
Is there some hallucinogenic connection? I ask because, when Susie had the pencam on it, I noticed that its alternative name is "mescal".

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 6:40 pm
by Phil Reynolds
Ben Hunter wrote:We've already had gracious, moody and comical, but in which way will today's challenger decide to deal with their defeat?
The word "soporific" springs to mind. Don't think he cracked a smile or became even vaguely animated once. His selection of CVCVCVCVC also became laughably predictable after he'd done it the first couple of times.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 6:44 pm
by Ben Wilson
Jimmy Gough wrote:Kirk, did it ever get annoying that Dr Phil kept asking what words meant even though he knows you haven't got a clue? I mean, nobody else has been asked what words mean that often. He comes across as a total arse to me, but I guess I'd be in the minority there.
Julian Fell was constantly asked for definitions during his octo run. The difference is, Julian actually knew all the definitions as well as the words!

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 6:46 pm
by Phil Reynolds
Kirk Bevins wrote:
Jimmy Gough wrote:Kirk, did it ever get annoying that Dr Phil kept asking what words meant even though he knows you haven't got a clue? I mean, nobody else has been asked what words mean that often. He comes across as a total arse to me, but I guess I'd be in the minority there.
Phil is great. I don't care if they ask me what they mean - I think it's good I don't know. It shows that you don't have to know the definitions to offer the words.
It came across to me as Phil sharing a joke with you. I'm astonished that there are people who don't like him; none of the other regular guests can touch him for entertainment value in my opinion, and he has a brilliant knack for sending up the NHS while at the same time making it plain that he cares about it deeply. He was off form for some reason in Monday's show but has made up for it since.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 6:47 pm
by Matt Morrison
Phil Reynolds wrote:
Ben Hunter wrote:I'd heard of Peyote before that film came out, but that's because of my dodgy upbringing.
Is there some hallucinogenic connection? I ask because, when Susie had the pencam on it, I noticed that its alternative name is "mescal".
Yup, mescaline is one of the psychoactive substances you can get from the cactus.
Rather than post the usual Wikipedia link, here's a forum article about how the cactus is becoming endangered in Mexico due to drug tourism as a response to Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.
Though there is an interesting fact on the Wikipedia article - the writing of One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest was inspired by a peyote high.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 6:53 pm
by Phil Reynolds
Matt Morrison wrote:Yup, mescaline is one of the psychoactive substances you can get from the cactus.
Is that what you were under the influence of when you bought the hat?

I was going to say I'm glad to see the tyre treadmark has finally worn off your face, but then it struck me that you're looking the other way in the new pic so maybe it's still there on the other side.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 7:03 pm
by Matt Morrison
Phil Reynolds wrote:
Matt Morrison wrote:Yup, mescaline is one of the psychoactive substances you can get from the cactus.
Is that what you were under the influence of when you bought the hat?
I make that hat work, dammit. If you think I need to be peyote'd up to buy that, I'll show you some of my hats one day that you'd think I'd have to be as good as braindead to purchase.
Phil Reynolds wrote:I was going to say I'm glad to see the tyre treadmark has finally worn off your face, but then it struck me that you're looking the other way in the new pic so maybe it's still there on the other side.
If there's one thing that you can say about my facial hair designs, it's that they are always symmetrical. Well, actually, other suitable 'one thing' comments include: excellent, cool, hip, happening, funky, fresh, etc.
But yes, always symmetrical, apart from one time, when I had MA on one cheek and TT on the other. But that's the only time.

I'll have to start changing my avatar more often, Dinos even gave me a PM about it! It's all good as long as I'm not just eye candy to you all ;)

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 8:24 pm
by Vikash Shah
Tsk. Just 111 points? I'm sorry, that's just crap. It's almost as bad as your 96. If you're not going to score AT LEAST 126, I don't know why you even bother turning up and wasting everyone's time.

... Now I'm remembering Dr Phil's balloon gag ;)

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 9:25 pm
by Keith Bevins
Round ? ARBORIST in the round when Kirk got ARBITERS. DC didn't mention it and my humble dictionary didn't have it in but Kirk tells me its ok.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 10:00 pm
by Paul Hammond
I had ORBITERS, but somehow failed to see ARBITERS.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 10:05 pm
by Dinos Sfyris
Paul Hammond wrote:I had ORBITERS, but somehow failed to see ARBITERS.
Ditto. But they're both good!

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 11:43 pm
by Ian Volante
Matt Morrison wrote:Surprised no one in the studio had seen or read Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas - based on not having heard of peyote.
Hated it. Know the word from playing Dope Wars however...

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 10:21 am
by Howard Somerset
Vikash Shah wrote:Tsk. Just 111 points? I'm sorry, that's just crap.
I reckon you're targeting 111 now, just to keep the suspense going, Kirk. Two more 111s, and then raise your game for 112 in the final heat to beat the current best by just one point.

My only contribution today was in the QXZ round when I saw AXIOM long before MAIZE.

I'm have different feeling from most others here about the Cheltenham racing break this year. Purely by chance, after watching Kirk on Monday, I'm off to Paris for a few days, and so will be able to watch DCDL instead, and then come back refreshed for Kirk's final two (assuming you don't cock it up in your sixth game, Kirk).

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 11:31 pm
by Martin Gardner
Dinos Sfyris wrote:
Paul Hammond wrote:I had ORBITERS, but somehow failed to see ARBITERS.
Ditto. But they're both good!
And ROTARIES?

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:25 am
by Rosemary Roberts
Jojo Apollo wrote:It's funny how DOND never seems to be affected by it's coverage. :x
That is funny, now you come to mention it. Something should be done about it.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 6:04 pm
by Martin Bishop
I beat Kirk!

I know, it's bad form to post solely to say you won at home, but I beat Kirk!

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 6:12 pm
by Kirk Bevins
Martin Bishop wrote:I beat Kirk!

I know, it's bad form to post solely to say you won at home, but I beat Kirk!
Really? Nice one. What was the score? I got 11/15 so you must have done quite well.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 6:24 pm
by Martin Bishop
Kirk Bevins wrote:
Martin Bishop wrote:I beat Kirk!

I know, it's bad form to post solely to say you won at home, but I beat Kirk!
Really? Nice one. What was the score? I got 11/15 so you must have done quite well.
I was leading 99-89 at the conundrum (thanks to JAPONICA and 464. I missed ARBITERS) and got it at the same time as you. Unfortunately, pressing the arm of my chair doesn't cut off your buzzer. So by my, admittedly flawed, reckoning I gave us both the ten points.

Still, after a week of being soundly thrashed, I'm claiming it.

Re: Spoilers for Fri 06/03/2009

Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:13 pm
by Lesley Jeavons
Matthew Green wrote:
Lesley Jeavons wrote:5 x 25
-9
x 4
Surely this doesn't need putting when Rachel got it?
You're right. But if I recall correctly Rachel didn't get it in the time, and I would have posted it before she put it up. I tend to post a number solution if she (or Carol) either doesn't get it, or gets it after the time. (I stand to be corrected, but as I posted another numbers solution in this thread I think it was a day I was surprised I got two that Rachel didn't.)
Edit: just glanced at the recap and as neither contestant got it, I prob submitted here before Rachel put it up.
Forgive me, but it's my few seconds of glory, which isn't harming anyone but makes me feel good about myself and my numeracy skills, seeing as how I don't have the word and grammar skills so many here have. ;)