c4countdown

So, after his least straightforward match of his run to date, Edward is safely through to show #7, now just 2 days away from octochampdom.

In terms of points, however, the #1 spot might be starting to elude him, not through a fault of his own, but by the rubbish rounds of letters picked this week.

At this moment, he needs 240 points to become #1 seed, so 120 a show, but in the 3 shows this week, each of the maxes have been sub-120, so unless plenty of 9's are around the corner, Adam might start to breathe a sigh of relief at the top of the leaderboard.

I'll be back later with the 3rd and final Robinson Recap of the week.

DE-CA-LEEE-TRAIJJJJJJ

# Player Points Langs 100s
1 Lalitha Thyagarajan 1428 6 6
2 Anglo Italian 948 10 6
3 Nathan Stone 920 11 5
4 Miriam Nussbaum 918 11 2

What actually was the point of Martin's piece? 50% off is obviously the same as BOGOF, and 75% extra is obviously less than 100% extra. I just couldn't see the catch.

Are a lot of people tempted by the 75% extra over the 50% off because 75 is the greater number? I have trouble believing there are that many people who are as naive as that.

Stewart Gordon wrote:Are a lot of people tempted by the 75% extra over the 50% off because 75 is the greater number? I have trouble believing there are that many people who are as naive as that.

Ooh ooh, gimme the 75!

Stewart Gordon wrote:Are a lot of people tempted by the 75% extra over the 50% off because 75 is the greater number? I have trouble believing there are that many people who are as naive as that.

£9.99?

Stewart Gordon wrote:What actually was the point of Martin's piece? 50% off is obviously the same as BOGOF, and 75% extra is obviously less than 100% extra. I just couldn't see the catch.

Are a lot of people tempted by the 75% extra over the 50% off because 75 is the greater number? I have trouble believing there are that many people who are as naive as that.

Believe me, people are stupid. My mum once brought home a different type of bread because it had ten times less salt than our regular bread.. 0.3g instead of 0.30g.

I didn't watch the piece but I wouldn't be surprised to hear that the wording of offers like these makes a lot of difference to how well received they are. We are mathematically-minded people Stewart, so we know that five 83p cans of soup for £2 is loads better than four for £3, but people just think DEAL and grab it. This works to our advantage sometimes, as we know what value we're getting. But it also has it's disadvantages, such as my drawers at work being full to the top with cans of soup.

A lot of people just have an aversion to working it out.

Phew, bet Ed was biting his nails before he got LUNULES.

But dow-er has 2 syllables - unless you pronounce it with a very posh vowel smoothing (daar)!

Stewart Gordon wrote:What actually was the point of Martin's piece? 50% off is obviously the same as BOGOF, and 75% extra is obviously less than 100% extra. I just couldn't see the catch.

I missed the piece so I'm probably repeating something somebody said, but for me 50% off has a couple of advantages over BOGOF, for example I would rather buy a loaf bread at 50% off than two loaves as part of a bogof because the second loaf will probably go off before I eat it. And when items are discounted as opposed to bogoffed it gives you more power over your spending, since if you're on a tight budget you can save more money while getting your usual amount of shopping in.

Going halvesies with someone on a BOGOF feels like a sweet victory. I do it all the time to help people, even if I don't want the thing.

Jon O'Neill wrote:Going halvesies with someone on a BOGOF feels like a sweet victory. I do it all the time to help people, even if I don't want the thing.

Best feeling ever.

The gist of Martin's piece was that supermarket's in particular exploit people by making offers seem more attractive than they really are and I can believe that lots of shoppers are drawn into these catches. His example was easy to spot but for people who aren't good with maths they're going to be fooled by some offers.

I was offended by Lally's repeated use of the word 'turd'. I thought Channel 4 might have bleeped it out but no.

ANIMATO in the ATONAL round

James Robinson wrote:At this moment, he needs 240 points to become #1 seed, so 120 a show, but in the 3 shows this week, each of the maxes have been sub-120, so unless plenty of 9's are around the corner, Adam might start to breathe a sigh of relief at the top of the leaderboard.

121 - ahead of target then... it's going to be mighty close

2nd Numbers Alt.: ((100 - (5 x 3)) x 10) - 9 = 841

TONEPAD in round 12.

Adam Gillard wrote:

James Robinson wrote:At this moment, he needs 240 points to become #1 seed, so 120 a show, but in the 3 shows this week, each of the maxes have been sub-120, so unless plenty of 9's are around the corner, Adam might start to breathe a sigh of relief at the top of the leaderboard.

121 - ahead of target then... it's going to be mighty close

Indeed, make sure you don't bite your fingernails down to your LUNULES.

Ed has to be one of the best contestants that's ever been on the show, he's the complete package. Both the octochamps in this series (well, Ed possibly an octochamp) have been fantastic to watch.

Aye

Yep, definitely one of my favourite contestants, along with Peter Godwin, Jack Hurst, Kirk and Mike Lear.

Well done Ed, excellent performance. I was in the studio for Wed Thurs Fri (recorded December 15th - an age ago) and it was a pleasure to watch, great atmosphere.