c4countdown

I predict a battering...

Edit (after Round 1 and "Barb" asking for "a constanant"): Yep.

constanant... constanant... is it still going to be funny in 40 minutes time?

Charlie Reams wrote:I predict a battering...

Edit (after Round 1 and "Barb" asking for "a constanant"): Yep.

Yeah, 'constanant' ...I logged on just to get arsy about that!!!

50 -7 x (2+8) + 9

Andy Wilson wrote:constanant... constanant... is it still going to be funny in 40 minutes time?

Yes, yes it is. Have they considered reversing the boxes so that Rachel isn't in front of the one saying CONSONANT in big letters?

There seems to be a correlation with contestants who like sudoku and contestants who are not very good. I won't speculate on why that might be.

Also DIOECY was there in Round 4, which is quite nice.

ANNOITER...

Was that ANNOITER that got put on the board there?

was it just me or did Rachel have annoiter up on the letters board?

Obviously was! haha! Everyone's going potty...

Andy Wilson wrote:was it just me or did Rachel have annoiter up on the letters board?

Yeah, she did!

BRACONID, round 9.

Nice teaser clue though, I think they made up for the ANNOITER slip with that.

I know we shouldn't slag the contestants but I really have no idea how Barbara passed the audition.

Charlie Reams wrote:Nice teaser clue though, I think they made up for the ANNOITER slip with that.

I know we shouldn't slag the contestants but I really have no idea how Barbara passed the audition.

She's gone into total meltdown.

Charlie Reams wrote:There seems to be a correlation with contestants who like sudoku and contestants who are not very good.

There seems to be a correlation with working class dinner ladies and contestants who aren't very good. Hideous performance.

I'm off to the doctor. I have this constanant ringing in my ears...

it's 76 by 11 innit!

I think that was one of my best ever contestant-intro-based predictions. If only we could bet on things. Well done Andrew, one of your solidest performances and continuing the march to be only the second contestant to post 8 centuries in 8 games.

Probably the only 45 minutes of the whole experience that I didn't really enjoy.

Had BRACONID written down, but wasn't sure if I'd just made it up after apheous yesterday.

Also had SOAKER, but didn't know if it was in.

Just spotted GATEFOLD in rd13 or whatever it was, when watching it back. Guess it must be easier at home!

Pretty easy conundrum to miss with the whole 30 seconds as well. Especially as in the first take about half the audience put their hand up to solve it. Tiredness? I dunno...

Matthew Green wrote:

Charlie Reams wrote:There seems to be a correlation with contestants who like sudoku and contestants who are not very good.

There seems to be a correlation with working class dinner ladies and contestants who aren't very good. Hideous performance.

Matthew! You terrible cunt!

Andrew Hulme wrote:Probably the only 45 minutes of the whole experience that I didn't really enjoy.

Had BRACONID written down, but wasn't sure if I'd just made it up after apheous yesterday.

Also had SOAKER, but didn't know if it was in.

Just spotted GATEFOLD in rd13 or whatever it was, when watching it back. Guess it must be easier at home!

Pretty easy conundrum to miss with the whole 30 seconds as well. Especially as in the first take about half the audience put their hand up to solve it. Tiredness? I dunno...

Ennui. More enigmatic than tiredness.

Matthew Green wrote:

Charlie Reams wrote:There seems to be a correlation with contestants who like sudoku and contestants who are not very good.

There seems to be a correlation with working class dinner ladies and contestants who aren't very good. Hideous performance.

Twat

Davy Affleck wrote:

Matthew Green wrote:

Charlie Reams wrote:There seems to be a correlation with contestants who like sudoku and contestants who are not very good.

There seems to be a correlation with working class dinner ladies and contestants who aren't very good. Hideous performance.

Twat

Another superbly crafted argument.

Two points:

1) Charlie, why are you now using your 'Gaydar' photo as your avatar?
2) Andrew comes across on TV and on here as a top bloke.

I had BANDORA in round 9 as a beater (but was beaten by Chris' BRACONID) and in round 12 I had GATEFOLD as a DC beater (but Andrew mentioned it in passing).

I must admit I also failed on the conundrum - frustratingly difficult but I'm not sure why.

Kirk Bevins wrote:frustratingly difficult but I'm not sure why.

Agreed, it took me 20 - 25 seconds from my armchair. I spent a lot of time looking for -WARE and other stuff, and completely overlooked -ED. I think partly it was because I was expecting another SAILMAKEResque bastard, so I didn't check the obvious.

Chris Corby wrote:Charlie, why are you now using your 'Gaydar' photo as your avatar?

I like to be consistent (sometimes).

Charlie Reams wrote:Nice teaser clue though, I think they made up for the ANNOITER slip with that.

I know we shouldn't slag the contestants but I really have no idea how Barbara passed the audition.

OCARINA as a contestant beater in Round 9.

Also saw the ANNOITER mistake.

Did anyone also notice that upside-down "M"'s were used instead of "W"'s for the conundrum I'm amazed I didn't get the conundrum, but my mum did and she's only sort of a part-timer at watching the show.

Me and Barbara must be at opposite ends of the administration assistants on Countdown scale

CONSTINANT or CONSTANANT must be a Lancastrian accent for CONSONANT!

Charlie Reams wrote:I know we shouldn't slag the contestants but I really have no idea how Barbara passed the audition.

Hmmm. I hinted in a post a few weeks ago that I didn't think I should have passed the audition (I had the ROMANISE/ROMANIZES version which will be familiar to many). This may sound daft, but when I turned up at the studio I was more concerned with not letting the program down by being yet another crap contestant than with letting myself down.

Anyway, if standards are changing there should be evidence in the data, which gives me a perfect excuse to waste some more time preparing intriguing presentations of statistics. Appearing on this forum sometime soon after the usual checks are complete!

There does seem to have been a noticeable shift following Richard Whiteley's death - WTS.

Andrew Hulme wrote:Probably the only 45 minutes of the whole experience that I didn't really enjoy.

You could tell you didn't really enjoy it - were you embarrassed for her?

I actually got the conundrum, which is quite unusual.

One bit that did make me chuckle was when Suzie told Barb that EASED was only a 5, and she was like "Is it?" and counted each letter out one by one. Ok, maybe if it was an 8 or a 9 but you can just take a glance at a 5 letter word and know its a 5.

Charlie Reams wrote:I think that was one of my best ever contestant-intro-based predictions.

Hmm, I'm not sure how un-PC it is, but I do tend to try to work out how good contestants are going to be by their appearance and speech. Somehow I had a feeling about today's challenger...

James Robinson wrote:OCARINA as a contestant beater in Round 9.

You beat me to it, though I can trump you with a picture:

This one is played by blowing through its rear end, though I can't get the Countdown tune out of it. Too many bum notes.

Brian Moore wrote:Hmm, I'm not sure how un-PC it is, but I do tend to try to work out how good contestants are going to be by their appearance and speech. Somehow I had a feeling about today's challenger...

I'm glad I'm not the only person who does that.....

Darren Carter wrote:One bit that did make me chuckle was when Suzie told Barb that EASED was only a 5, and she was like "Is it?" and counted each letter out one by one. Ok, maybe if it was an 8 or a 9 but you can just take a glance at a 5 letter word and know its a 5.

Indeed. Misspelling a 5 would be totally embarrassing, especially if it were a word you saw regularly. Like a name or something.

Srsly though, this does mean that Barb would be outperformed at glance counting by most families of birds, including pigeons and crows.

Charlie Reams wrote:Srsly though, this does mean that Barb would be outperformed at glance counting by most families of birds, including pigeons and crows.

Feel a little bit sorry for Barbara, she was evidently nervous as her voice seemed to quiver at various points and during one numbers selection she looked to be shaking like a leaf- possibly Jeff didn't help by rolling off Andrew's dauntingly impressive statistics beforehand! Against a lesser player she probably would have at least attained a half respectable score. Many congrats to Andrew again though, another powerhouse performance.

Also, I think INBOARD is valid for a contestant beater in round 9- not on BRACONID's level admittedly, but 7 nonetheless.

She said at the end that she was just there to make the numbers up. She also made up a load of letters as well.

There seems to be a correlation with working class dinner ladies and contestants who aren't very good. Hideous performance.[/quote]


Twat[/quote]
Another superbly crafted argument.[/quote]


Thanks Charlie - The art of considered debate and eloquent put-downs is not dead

Pugh, Pugh, Barney McGrew, Cuthbert, Dibble, Grub.

Derek Hazell wrote:Pugh, Pugh, Barney McGrew, Cuthbert, Dibble, Grub.

I often wondered if it was Barney, McGrew

Brian Moore wrote: .

Anyone else wish they were playing Touchdown this round? I couldn't get CARBONADO out of my head for the whole 30 seconds!

Matthew Green wrote:She said at the end that she was just there to make the numbers up. She also made up a load of letters as well.

Marc Meakin wrote:

Derek Hazell wrote:Pugh, Pugh, Barney McGrew, Cuthbert, Dibble, Grub.

I often wondered if it was Barney, McGrew

For forty years I've always assumed the latter, but a quick peak at youtube reveals that Barney McGrew is the driver of the fire engine, although very impolitely he's the only one who doesn't nod when his name's called. Really, the terrible manners they were teaching back then. It's only a short step from there to the explosion in crime we've had since then.

Sue Sanders wrote:50 -7 x (2+8) + 9

-11

alternative second numbers

100+(10*6) + (5*3+1) = 176