Page 1 of 1

Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 4:07 pm
by Conor
Congrats Dave :) Very impressive today. 880 is a very good score.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 4:16 pm
by Craig Beevers
Yea 880 not bad, 11 more would have ideal really.

Think there was NOONERS in one of the rounds, not sure of such words these days tho.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 4:25 pm
by Charlie Reams
I disagree. You should've been better, particularly on the numbers and letters. Oh, and you were a bit slow on the conundrum.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 5:11 pm
by Jon Corby
I also thought he was shit. He missed several easy nines, plus he only got that conundrum today because his opponent virtually told him what it was.

While 880 is a fairly good score, it will surely haunt David that he could have got much higher just by being a bit better. I wouldn't be surprised if we don't actually see him at the finals, people have ended it all over far smaller disappointments than this.


Only joking, congratulations mate.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 5:14 pm
by Charlie Reams
Yes, well done mate. Your long-awaited entry onto the Octochamp Stats page will be made as soon as today's recap appears.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 5:20 pm
by Paul Howe
Heh, congratulations David. Only managed to see one of your shows but couldn't resist poking my nose in here to see how you'd done, and have to say that 880 is a ridiculously impressive score.

Congrats once more.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 5:38 pm
by David O'Donnell
NOONERS certainly is valid and means a lunchtime drink or a euphemism for lunchtime nookie. I had it but thought I was imagining it. Didn't risk untaken because un- words are bad. Definitely should have seen LATTICES. You are all right, I am ridiculously bad ... I don't know why I thought I could play this game in the first place ... GOODBYE CRUEL WORLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :(

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 6:15 pm
by Joseph Bolas
I missed your last few games but congratulations on becoming octochamp.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 6:31 pm
by JimBentley
Charlie Reams wrote:...Your long-awaited entry onto the Octochamp Stats page will be made as soon as today's recap appears.
Speaking of which, today's is going to be a bit later than usual, I'm afraid. Probably about eight o'clock-ish, if that's OK?

Brilliant stuff though, David! Tomorrow's contestants must be breathing a sigh of relief at having dodged the bullet! :)

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 7:08 pm
by Charlie Reams
Sorry Jim, that's totally unacceptable. I've drafted Amey Deshpande to replace you.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 7:31 pm
by Howard Somerset
Congrats, David. I've nearly seen all of your shows - expect to have seen them all by tomorrow - and have been impressed with everything. Hope you're enjoying the break before the finals.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 7:52 pm
by Ben Pugh
Corby wrote:I also thought he was shit. He missed several easy nines, plus he only got that conundrum today because his opponent virtually told him what it was.

While 880 is a fairly good score, it will surely haunt David that he could have got much higher just by being a bit better. I wouldn't be surprised if we don't actually see him at the finals, people have ended it all over far smaller disappointments than this.
Agreed. Today I beat David 149 - 3, having given him 3 sympathy points after the second section.

Aside from that, 880 is an amazing achievement, well done.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 8:51 pm
by David O'Donnell
Charlie Reams wrote:Yes, well done mate. Your long-awaited entry onto the Octochamp Stats page will be made as soon as today's recap appears.
Ahem, LIAR!

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 8:56 pm
by Charlie Reams
I'm not crediting you as an octochamp until I find out whether our armchair heroes did better than you.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 8:59 pm
by David O'Donnell
LMAO. Craig's dig really got to you didn't it?? You're not an armchair hero; I think it would be good if you did well in one of the next couple of series that entitles you to a shot at Craig in a C of C: he may discover that you are not to be under-estimated regardless of where you happen to be seated.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:25 pm
by Charlie Reams
Urp, I'm sure that phrase wasn't used in reference to me, but I do think it's a good one. I'll be out of my armchair this summer I think, depending on how my attempts to wise-up on the numbers go.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:28 pm
by David O'Donnell
Yes, I don't think he meant you but it'd be great to see you up next ... just not in this series :x

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:43 pm
by Julian Fell
Seriously, fantastic stuff David - I hope Conor was being tongue-in-cheek when he described 880 as "very good". I think Damian once said he didn't think 875 (by Chris Wills) would ever be beaten!

I think you're also the first-ever octochamp to score 110 or more in six different games of his octochamp run - is that right people?

So what was all that "I'm not a top player" stuff about? I don't know, what are you like :) You'll almost certainly be no.1 seed for the finals and it's all about how you cope with the pressure... but I'm sure you will. You say you were most nervous for your first game, well IMHO that was probably your best performance (not that the others were bad)... so watch out, other series 58-ers!

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:48 pm
by Julian Fell
David O'Donnell wrote:Yes, I don't think he meant you but it'd be great to see you up next ... just not in this series :x
Yes I'm really looking forward to seeing you on TV Charlie - though don't be rushed into it; I don't need to tell you that you only get one shot, and that you should wait till you're as good as you think you'll ever be, before taking the plunge.

Is there any chance at all that you could use your nickname when you go on the programme? I just think it would be legendary for a series of Countdown to be won by a man called Soo! :D

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 10:03 pm
by David O'Donnell
Actually, Julian's advice is spot on: you should wait until you feel you are ready. I should have waited longer but I just couldn't; besides I am not getting any younger.

PS Life ain't easy for a boy named ... Soo.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 10:16 pm
by Conor
Julian wrote:Seriously, fantastic stuff David - I hope Conor was being tongue-in-cheek when he described 880 as "very good". I think Damian once said he didn't think 875 (by Chris Wills) would ever be beaten!
Err, not really. :?
I think you're also the first-ever octochamp to score 110 or more in six different games of his octochamp run - is that right people?
I did that too. 2 scores in the nineties (99 and 99), and 6 scores in the one-hundred and tens.[/quote]

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 10:37 pm
by Charlie Reams
Right Mr O'D, I know you'll have been refreshing the page every couple of seconds until I updated it, so to put you out of your misery I've added you to the Hall of Greats. 4th on points, 2nd on percentage, and 2nd on winning margin - a performance that can only be described as "nang", and I don't use that word lightly. Fantastic stuff mate, you've exceeded my already high expectations when it really mattered. Can't wait for the finals (which are also during my Finals, unamusingly.) And to summarise, awesome.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:06 pm
by Jon O'Neill
Yeah well done mate. Maybe next you'll beat me online?

Probably not.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:18 pm
by David O'Donnell
Remind me: what happened in our last game? I can't really remember the result but I do remember that you were over my knee and I appeared to be spanking you with a great deal of force.

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:20 pm
by Julian Fell
Conor wrote: I did that too. 2 scores in the nineties (99 and 99), and 6 scores in the one-hundred and tens.
Ah fair enough, my mistake. It's still v rare though, so well done David.

Conor you would describe 880 as just "very good"? I'd describe it as fantastic, myself...

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 12:03 am
by Kirk Bevins
Well played David. INFRARED was particularly impressive today. I did pull ahead with NOONERS (I remembered it was a North American term) but then you hit back with INFRARED. I went into the conundrum 100-101 to you and you beat me to the conundrum. Quality stuff. Good job I wasn't sat in the challenger's chair!!!

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 11:49 am
by Michael Macdonald-Cooper
May I add my congratulations to David for a terrific performance!

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 10:22 pm
by Martin Smith
Well done David, I knew you'd do it. I feel good about only losing 92-62 to you

Re: Spoilers for 4th February 2008

Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 3:13 pm
by Julian Fell
So you should Martin - you were pretty much his closest challenger!