Page 1 of 1

Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 8:57 am
by Philip Jarvis
Has everyone got their breath back after yesterday? Let's hope the excitement will be maintained in the 2nd semi final.
***********************************

Hamish slowly reclined into his chair, at a 45 degree angle,
His wild and pure white hair, was all in a tangle,
Young Jimmy tried to remain cool,
As he waited for the duel,
Just who will win the wrangle, in the final sector of this quadrangle?



(p.s. My font colours have reappeared) :D

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:02 pm
by Andy Wilson
What's the Reams Index showing today?

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:25 pm
by Charlie Reams
I think it was about 120%. I really, really wanted Jimmy to win (because Jimmy vs Kirk had been my dream final from the first day of the series) and I knew that, although Jimmy was much stronger, Hamish was capable of moments of absolute brilliance that could really turn the game on its head. But it was slightly tempered by the come-down from the previous game which had ruined about four pairs of my best underpants.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:28 pm
by Matt Morrison
Charlie Reams wrote:I think it was about 120%. I really, really wanted Jimmy to win (because Jimmy vs Kirk had been my dream final from the first day of the series) and I knew that, although Jimmy was much stronger, Hamish was capable of moments of absolute brilliance that could really turn the game on its head. But it was slightly tempered by the come-down from the previous game which had ruined about four pairs of my best underpants.
Good forward thinking though to wear four pairs at once and save your trousers.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:29 pm
by Jon Corby
And how excited are you that Philip Jarvis can post his poems in colour again?

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:31 pm
by James Doohan
Spotted this one in studio, BENTONITE, if only I was in the chair :cry:

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:32 pm
by Matt Morrison
I like the way that Mad Hamish McMad says cuntsonant quite a lot. And his eyes at the start of the show.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:32 pm
by Andy Wilson
james doohan wrote:Spotted this one in studio, BENTONITE, if only I was in the chair :cry:
Bravo! Forgot you mentioned there was a 9 there...

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:33 pm
by Matt Morrison
I'm looking forward to Corby posting a screencap of Rachel standing next to LABIRE (sic).

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:39 pm
by Matt Morrison
That was the best bit of Dr. Phil yet.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:41 pm
by Jimmy Gough
Matt Morrison wrote:That was the best bit of Dr. Phil yet.
Totally.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:43 pm
by Andy Wilson
'The paraphysical healing is coming out of my third eye' - :lol:

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:43 pm
by Simon Myers
Matt Morrison wrote:That was the best bit of Dr. Phil yet.
I'm actually massively disappointed with the editing at the end of that segment; the look of absolute revulsion on Susie's face (in the studio) when he said it had come from Hamish's pocket was priceless. It looked as though she was about to cough it straight back up.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:45 pm
by Liam Tiernan
Charlie Reams wrote:I think it was about 120%. I really, really wanted Jimmy to win (because Jimmy vs Kirk had been my dream final from the first day of the series) and I knew that, although Jimmy was much stronger, Hamish was capable of moments of absolute brilliance that could really turn the game on its head. But it was slightly tempered by the come-down from the previous game which had ruined about four pairs of my best underpants.
Pretty high on the sphincter scale then?

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:46 pm
by Jimmy Gough
Simon Myers wrote:
Matt Morrison wrote:That was the best bit of Dr. Phil yet.
I'm actually massively disappointed with the editing at the end of that segment; the look of absolute revulsion on Susie's face (in the studio) when he said it had come from Hamish's pocket was priceless. It looked as though she was about to cough it straight back up.
Oh what! Yeah, it was brilliant :lol:

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:49 pm
by Peter Mabey
RETICLES

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:50 pm
by Charlie Reams
PROPANOLS in round 1. (C) Craig Beevers 2009.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:52 pm
by Andrew Hulme
Was surprised to find APELIKE is invalid in the round where Hamish got in a pickle.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:52 pm
by Derek Hazell
Matt Morrison wrote:I like the way that Mad Hamish McMad says cuntsonant quite a lot.
You should hear him when he says "country"!

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:53 pm
by Simon Myers
Charlie Reams wrote:PROPANOLS in round 1. (C) Craig Beevers 2009.
Chemistry related mass noun, think Susie would allow it? I see it's valid on Apterous, though it's not in my version of Jimdic (which I thought was up to date). If valid then the max for this game must be very high indeed.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:54 pm
by James Doohan
Charlie Reams wrote:PROPANOLS in round 1. (C) Craig Beevers 2009.
Nice one, a lot of nines in this show

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:56 pm
by Matt Morrison
alternate 2nd numbers:

50 x 10 = 500
8 + 7 + 4 = 19
500 + ( 19 x 5 ) = 595

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:58 pm
by Chris Davies
Wouldn't have chanced PROPANOLS myself (I had PROPOSAL).

SERICITE as a beater in addition to the aforementioned RETICLES.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:00 pm
by Peter Mabey
Another alternative (small only): (10x8+5)x7 :)

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:04 pm
by Stuart Arnot
ENORMITY

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:07 pm
by Mark Kudlowski
3rd numbers alt:

(100 - 6) x 9 = 846; 846 + (2 x 10) = 866

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:09 pm
by Ralph Gillions
Well done Jimmy!
Another smashing display, done in a pleasing manner.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:09 pm
by Andy Wilson
Good game, well done Jimmy. Hamish gave it a go and was so nice at the end. The audience reaction to his best wishes to Jimmy was audible. Did he hang around for a beer afterwards?

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:09 pm
by James Doohan
Well done Jimmy, you seemed much more relaxed in this game, awesome again, good luck for the final, can't wait

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:11 pm
by James Doohan
Andy Wilson wrote:Good game, well done Jimmy. Hamish gave it a go and was so nice at the end. The audience reaction to his best wishes to Jimmy was audible. Did he hang around for a beer afterwards?

He sure did, Hamish is brilliant, give him his own TV show

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:14 pm
by Ben Hunter
I seem to remember Hamish's final words lasting longer than that, though there was a big edit so maybe it got lost.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:16 pm
by Andrew Hulme
Does Hamish not get anything for making the semi-finals? Finalists always used to get some sort of special memento, (a pen or something IIRC), but Jeff never mentioned anything. Seems a bit harsh that someone making the semis of a series gets nothing more than any random person that won 1 show, even if the prestige is far more important?

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:17 pm
by Jojo Apollo
Congrats on making the final, Jimmy, well deserved. Also commiserations to Hamish, who was very sporting in defeat.

Can't wait for the big final tomorrow, could be an absolute classic. :D

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:22 pm
by Jimmy Gough
Thanks guys :D

Hamish is just brilliant. A Countdown legend.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:25 pm
by Philip Jarvis
Matt Morrison wrote:That was the best bit of Dr. Phil yet.
What until you see what he has in store tomorrow with his surprise guest Annie. He gets really quite intense and Susie seemed a bit taken aback by it all.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:27 pm
by Philip Jarvis
Well done Jimmy - great game and excellent spot for REEDLINGS (I missed that but Ben Hunter who was sat next to me got it). I'm sure you'll give your best against Kirk.

Well done also to Hamish - what a great character. I was talking to him afterwards with a group of people in the beer garden area. Part of the conversation went like this:

PJ - "Don't take this the wrong way Hamish ............ but when was the last time you had your hair cut?

HW (In a deep Scottish brogue and with a stare that could kill) - "When was the last time YOU had your hair cut?"

PJ (Stroking the bristles) - "I had the clippers out this morning actually".

A great bloke and it's not often you get a contestant who's as laid back as Hamish. He made great viewing.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 4:11 pm
by Dinos Sfyris
Simon Myers wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:PROPANOLS in round 1. (C) Craig Beevers 2009.
Chemistry related mass noun, think Susie would allow it? I see it's valid on Apterous, though it's not in my version of Jimdic (which I thought was up to date). If valid then the max for this game must be very high indeed.
Well you can have two types of propanol:

Propan-1-ol CH3CH2CH2OH

and

Propan-2-ol CH3CHOHCH3

Still not entirely convinced though, but if it were valid that means a 5 niner game with a 164 Max! :o

Also congrats Jimmy. In the final! What will you do with the grand? :)

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 4:51 pm
by Kai Laddiman
TIERCELS

Also, my mom got REEDLINGS while I got ENGIRDLES. Hi fives were exchanged.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:07 pm
by Charlie Reams
Simon Myers wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:PROPANOLS in round 1. (C) Craig Beevers 2009.
Chemistry related mass noun, think Susie would allow it? I see it's valid on Apterous, though it's not in my version of Jimdic (which I thought was up to date). If valid then the max for this game must be very high indeed.
Straight from the horse's mouth:
Susie Dent (by email) wrote:So yes, I'd allow propanols given the definition. If it ever comes up I will be amazed but hopefully not forgetful.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:23 pm
by JimBentley
Simon Myers wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:PROPANOLS in round 1. (C) Craig Beevers 2009.
Chemistry related mass noun, think Susie would allow it? I see it's valid on Apterous, though it's not in my version of Jimdic (which I thought was up to date).
It's not in my version either :?

Edit: Just seen Charlie's latest post, so I'll add it. How about METHANOLS and BUTANOLS (ETHANOLS is already in) and, thinking on, what about ETHANALS and METHANALS?

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:25 pm
by Oliver Garner
Dinos Sfyris wrote:
Simon Myers wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:PROPANOLS in round 1. (C) Craig Beevers 2009.
Chemistry related mass noun, think Susie would allow it? I see it's valid on Apterous, though it's not in my version of Jimdic (which I thought was up to date). If valid then the max for this game must be very high indeed.
Well you can have two types of propanol:

Propan-1-ol CH3CH2CH2OH

and

Propan-2-ol CH3CHOHCH3

Still not entirely convinced though, but if it were valid that means a 5 niner game with a 164 Max! :o

Also congrats Jimmy. In the final! What will you do with the grand? :)
ZOMGSPOILERZ!!

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:57 pm
by Charlie Reams
JimBentley wrote:Edit: Just seen Charlie's latest post, so I'll add it. How about METHANOLS and BUTANOLS (ETHANOLS is already in) and, thinking on, what about ETHANALS and METHANALS?
I can refer that question upwards but I think Susie's decision was influenced by my drawing attention to the definition which begins "Each of two...", to me strongly suggesting that talking of the two propanols is perfectly sensible. BUTANOLS might then be allowed on the same basis, whereas METHANOLS not so much. This seems like a pretty reasonable, and consistent, basis for making these decisions.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 9:20 pm
by James Robinson
Another alternative for 3rd numbers:

9 x 100 = 900

(10 + 1 + 6) x 2 = 34

900 - 34 = 866

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 10:02 pm
by Craig Beevers
Glad PROPANOLS is okay, didn't hold out much hope for that one.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 10:40 pm
by Neil Zussman
Congrats on the win Jimmy. You seemed pretty nervous, and no wonder when your opponent is prone to moments of brilliancy. But you spotted some nice words when it mattered. Good luck in the final, am looking forward to it. :)
Andrew Hulme wrote:Does Hamish not get anything for making the semi-finals? Finalists always used to get some sort of special memento, (a pen or something IIRC), but Jeff never mentioned anything. Seems a bit harsh that someone making the semis of a series gets nothing more than any random person that won 1 show, even if the prestige is far more important?
Losing quarter-finalists and semi-finalists get a glass trophy saying 'Series 61 Finalist' (unless they're in a different series of course). So there is a difference between winning one game and winning enough to make the quarters, but no difference between losing in the quarters and the semis (or at least I don't think there is).

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 11:22 pm
by Kirk Bevins
Neil Zussman wrote: Losing quarter-finalists and semi-finalists get a glass trophy saying 'Series 61 Finalist' (unless they're in a different series of course). So there is a difference between winning one game and winning enough to make the quarters, but no difference between losing in the quarters and the semis (or at least I don't think there is).
Why choose Series 61 when you should say Series 60 really.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd

Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 11:33 pm
by Michael Wallace
Kirk Bevins wrote:
Neil Zussman wrote: Losing quarter-finalists and semi-finalists get a glass trophy saying 'Series 61 Finalist' (unless they're in a different series of course). So there is a difference between winning one game and winning enough to make the quarters, but no difference between losing in the quarters and the semis (or at least I don't think there is).
Why choose Series 61 when you should say Series 60 really.
Although he was replying to Andrew who is going to be in Series 61, so either seems appropriate.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 8:48 am
by Phil Reynolds
Kai Laddiman wrote:my mom got REEDLINGS while I got ENGIRDLES. Hi fives were exchanged.
To be fair, Mrs Kai had the slight advantage of having seen the game already...

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 9:09 am
by Phil Reynolds
I was looking forward to seeing today's game again for several reasons...

Hamish had produced his bag of what appeared to be extra strong mints just before the game was due to start and plonked them on the desk in front of him, resulting in a stern message from the gallery (relayed via Jay the floor manager) to put them somewhere out of camera shot. Just as he was putting them in his pocket, Dr Phil asked if he could have one - and then seamlessly incorporated it into the punchline of his act. Sheer genius.

GAVOTTES was my best spot of the finals - I waved my piece of paper excitedly at Charlie, who pointed languidly at the same word written on his own pad.

The last numbers round caused a bit of a headache in the gallery, a long delay in recording (and to a much needed tea break - it was swelteringly hot in the studio) and a tricky retake. It was only after both players had given their solutions and the game had progressed to the conundrum (it may even have been after the conundrum - can anyone else remember?) that someone spotted that Hamish's solution was invalid as he'd used the 9 twice. It wasn't just the declarations that had to be reshot but also Jeff's subsequent comments about the scores, the incorrect shots of the score readouts etc. However, it's a tribute to the people in the gallery and to the editor that the whole thing looks seamless in the final cut.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 11:25 am
by Kevin Thurlow
BUTANOLS would be ok, as there's butan-1-ol and butan-2-ol; but there's only one isomer of each of methanol, methanal and ethanal so they should be mass nouns.

Re: Spoilers for Thur 18 June 2009 [Series 60- 2nd SF]

Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2009 12:07 pm
by Brian Moore
Phil Reynolds wrote:However, it's a tribute to the people in the gallery and to the editor that the whole thing looks seamless in the final cut.
A nice bit of acting from Hamish, too. Another shocking story for the tabloids.