You're mostly wrong - quite a lot of stuff to deal with in this thread so I'll try to do so in a logical order. I don't think I said "only an 8" at any point in my run so far - lots of "only a 6", which I said because I was expecting my opponent to better me in that round. Also, something that often doesn't make it to the final cut - when you say "I'll stick with a 7", Susie will ask you if you were thinking of a longer word, and she will look it up, which can be quite useful, as you will then know to declare it (or not) if it comes up again (which has happened in my run, see AROUSES and now AROUSE today). As for me declaring 'odd' words, I really am declaring what I see first. I learnt quite a lot of words in preparation, mainly odd ones, so it's only natural that I see these before anything else, as I've spent a lot of time studying them.
Bart4858 is correct when he says my comment about sleep was an in-joke, though I accept it came across as being disrespectful watching it back. The sighing that Fran Blakes heard isn't actually sighing, I am just breathing too close to the microphone.
It might surprise you to know that I don't have any kind of syndrome - I am fully aware of how to behave (I have held down part time tutoring jobs, I have normal relations with friends and even have a girlfriend), I just think it's funny to subvert these norms sometimes (and I'm not the only one, as my comments did get a few laughs - obviously this kind of humour isn't everyone's cup of tea). I find your comment that I should be screened out based on some kind of arbitrary suitability check to be highly offensive.
As stewartuu correctly states, I was indeed highly nervous (this is where the vomiting comment came from - I threw up due to nerves before recording).
Fran Blakes asks "what about the other five?" - it's widely understood (at least for regular viewers) that "one from the top" implies the other five numbers are small. I'm not 'on the spectrum', either.
I couldn't believe it when my friends showed me this - do you guys really just sit around at home watching TV all day with a notepad waiting for something to p*** you off so you can rant about it on here? Monday will be my last game, whatever happens, so I'm sorry to have troubled you so much with my presence on screen. Maybe you can use the time that I will be off the show to go outside in the real world and do something, before it is too late!
Hi Dan!
No, people on here generally don't sit around watching TV all day so that they can rant on here. Speaking for myself, I pop in occasionally to comment on something that has interested/annoyed/amused me. That's what the forums are here for. Like it or not, we make comments about people we watch on screen. It must be strange finding that people have not all perceived you in the way you thought they would, but you can't please everyone.
She's definitely sexier in person. She is a really genuine person as well, she stays behind after recordings and signs autographs, and smiles while doing it. She really makes the effort to please her fans.
They outdid themselves with the innuendo today. First off we had Nick talking about playing with strapons as a kid (he meant rollerskates) and then one of the words to come up later was 'todgers' !
They outdid themselves with the innuendo today. First off we had Nick talking about playing with strapons as a kid (he meant rollerskates) and then one of the words to come up later was 'todgers' !
It seemed to me that he didn't know what it meant.:D
They outdid themselves with the innuendo today. First off we had Nick talking about playing with strapons as a kid (he meant rollerskates) and then one of the words to come up later was 'todgers' !
Clip > http://youtu.be/hmqiaPhJops
Susie & Rachel didn't know where to look.
I can envisage Nick getting moved off the program in a similar way Bill Oddie had to leave BBC Springwatch if he gets any worse.
What do other viewers think of the current champion, particularly his occasionally 'bizarre' (to put it mildly) way of doing the numbers. I actually think he's great and its very amusing, loved the one today where he was going "blah, blah, blah, x whatever = 97,500, divided by....etc etc. It was so complicated I'm not sure if he's showing off or whether that was in fact the only feasible route to the correct answer.
What do other viewers think of the current champion, particularly his occasionally 'bizarre' (to put it mildly) way of doing the numbers. I actually think he's great and its very amusing, loved the one today where he was going "blah, blah, blah, x whatever = 97,500, divided by....etc etc. It was so complicated I'm not sure if he's showing off or whether that was in fact the only feasible route to the correct answer.
It was basically just doing 39 x 25 to get to 975, just doing all the multiplication first before the division. He could have rearranged it to say:
I am new to this thread, but I have been a avid viewer of Countdown since 2000. I wonder if Nick will be coming back in January? Do we know yet whether his contract will be renewed or not, or am I just forgetting something? Anyway, back on topic, I am looking forward to seeing the current champion again today, he was really good on Friday and always finds a complicated way of working out the numbers (the round which I'm not really good at).
I am new to this thread, but I have been a avid viewer of Countdown since 2000. I wonder if Nick will be coming back in January? Do we know yet whether his contract will be renewed or not, or am I just forgetting something? Anyway, back on topic, I am looking forward to seeing the current champion again today, he was really good on Friday and always finds a complicated way of working out the numbers (the round which I'm not really good at).
Yes, Nick is with the show for at least another year I believe.
I enjoy the left-field numbers solutions too. High standard of play lately, particularly in the numbers games; nice to have a bit of variation from endless 1 large selections also.
So he was showing off a bit then, or showing what he can do depending on your view point. Still totally flummoxed me that one even with the more straight forward solution and I'm usually way better at the numbers than the words.
Yes, at it again today wasn't he! How the f___ do you know, (amongst working the rest of it out also), within the time frame allowed that 1876 x 50 = 93,800!! Mightily impressive though.
How the f___ do you know, (amongst working the rest of it out also), within the time frame allowed that 1876 x 50 = 93,800!! Mightily impressive though.
Multiplying by 5 is the same as dividing by 2 (give or take a few decimal places).
Half of 1876 is easily worked out as 938. Just add a couple of zeros for the right magnitude.
Multiplying by 5 is the same as dividing by 2 (give or take a few decimal places).
Half of 1876 is easily worked out as 938. Just add a couple of zeros for the right magnitude.
I'm still baffled. I did see Rachel on another show once, I forget what it was, showing how 'easy' doing the numbers is once you follow a certain formula for working them out. I should have paid more attention at the time!
That's a bit of standard bookwork for any student of the Countdown numbers game. He would have seen it instantly.
Because 25x75/2 = 937½, it follows that if you add or subtract an odd number before dividing by 2 you get a whole number just above or below 937½. Going up to 93800 was just being flash. He knows without thinking about it that (25x75+1)/2 is 938, so the number he's going to divide by 100 can only be 93800 - he doesn't need to work out 1876x50.
Many of these hyper-impressive 4 large solutions come from learning the theory, whereas solving 6 small is more likely to involve thinking on your feet.
Multiplying by 5 is the same as dividing by 2 (give or take a few decimal places).
Half of 1876 is easily worked out as 938. Just add a couple of zeros for the right magnitude.
I've just seen the show now. Possibly, fractions played a part in it: if 25, 50 and 75 are thought of as .25, .50 and .75, or as 1/4, 1/2 and 3/4.
So to multiply 25x75, you just do 1/4 x 3/4, or 3/16. If you know your 16ths (as I happen to...), then that's 0.1875, or 1875 with the decimal point adjusted.
But maybe he saw immediately that 1/4 x 1/2 x 3/4 was 3/32 which is .09375 (or 93750), and close to the target (ignoring decimals), and was able to somehow work from that.
So he was showing off a bit then, or showing what he can do depending on your view point. Still totally flummoxed me that one even with the more straight forward solution and I'm usually way better at the numbers than the words.
Yes, at it again today wasn't he! How the f___ do you know, (amongst working the rest of it out also), within the time frame allowed that 1876 x 50 = 93,800!! Mightily impressive though.
If you rewatch the clip, he actually finished the puzzle in about 10 seconds
Youtube clip here > http://youtu.be/KzQSl6CjAoQ
Yeah, I think it's easy to lose sight of the fact that at the end of the day, Countdown is just a game show, but to serious players it can seem like a lot more than that. I put a lot of pressure on myself to win 8 shows (and you'll see whether I did so on Monday) and maybe even win the series, so when I was only finding six letter words, I was disappointed, and unfortunately that came across in my demeanour, which I regret. I apologised to my opponent after my second show (the show where I made the comment about needing sleep), as I realise this might have offended him. Also, in the game where I scored 137, you might have seen me chatting to my opponent as the final credits were rolling - I was consoling him, as he was obviously gutted to lose so heavily, so I'm not sure how these would be the actions of someone ignorant, irritable and 'on the spectrum', as I have been described in this thread. Taking flak wasn't so much of a surprise, as anyone who puts themself in the public eye is bound to attract some kind of negative feedback, but I just thought I'd like to put a few things straight that were said in here.
EDIT: I wasn't trying to appeal to teenagers at all (I am not a teenager myself), I was just trying to ease my nerves a bit by ad libbing a bit. Some of it was funny (my comment about parental guidance in my first show had people crying with laughter in the audience) and some was cringeworthy (my comment about needing sleep). Thanks for the good wishes. I'm hoping to pursue a PhD in Linguistics at Edinburgh next year.
I enjoyed your run on Countdown and watched it for the game, rather than the show. Which, unfortunately is missed by many on here.
This exchange kind of reminds of The IT Crowd episode, where far too many people take this far too seriously and have forgotten about how diverse and varied the contestants are. But, most importantly, the question you have to ask every single one of those who have had negative things to say about you, is, "what happened when they applied to be on the show?" Did they even pass the auditions?
Congratulations on your well deserved achievement of becoming an Octochamp (a score 137 is absolutely phenomenal) and I wish you all the best for the upcoming finals.
The standard of play has been pretty good the last week or so. There have been some high scoring losers, which is a shame, as on another day they would probably had won.
The standard of play has been pretty good the last week or so. There have been some high scoring losers, which is a shame, as on another day they would probably had won.
Not today though! I wonder if some sort of record was set by the loser who scored only 5 points in 10 letters games.
Comments
Hi Dan!
No, people on here generally don't sit around watching TV all day so that they can rant on here. Speaking for myself, I pop in occasionally to comment on something that has interested/annoyed/amused me. That's what the forums are here for. Like it or not, we make comments about people we watch on screen. It must be strange finding that people have not all perceived you in the way you thought they would, but you can't please everyone.
Thanks for letting us know.
Apparently some men are gay, some women are straight and some people are blind.
It seemed to me that he didn't know what it meant.:D
Susie & Rachel didn't know where to look.
I can envisage Nick getting moved off the program in a similar way Bill Oddie had to leave BBC Springwatch if he gets any worse.
& Susie's Special Spot!
It was basically just doing 39 x 25 to get to 975, just doing all the multiplication first before the division. He could have rearranged it to say:
75 + 3 = 78
100 / 50 = 2
78 / 2 = 39
39 x 25 = 975
975 - 1 = 974
But that wouldn't look quite so cool
Yes, Nick is with the show for at least another year I believe.
I enjoy the left-field numbers solutions too. High standard of play lately, particularly in the numbers games; nice to have a bit of variation from endless 1 large selections also.
4 large numbers, 2 small numbers (2, 1)
75 x 25 = 1875
1875 + 1 = 1876
1876 x 50 = 93,800
93,800 / 100 = 938
938 + 2 = 940
How do you get that in 30 SECONDS?!!:o
So he was showing off a bit then, or showing what he can do depending on your view point. Still totally flummoxed me that one even with the more straight forward solution and I'm usually way better at the numbers than the words.
Yes, at it again today wasn't he! How the f___ do you know, (amongst working the rest of it out also), within the time frame allowed that 1876 x 50 = 93,800!!
Multiplying by 5 is the same as dividing by 2 (give or take a few decimal places).
Half of 1876 is easily worked out as 938. Just add a couple of zeros for the right magnitude.
Because 25x75/2 = 937½, it follows that if you add or subtract an odd number before dividing by 2 you get a whole number just above or below 937½. Going up to 93800 was just being flash. He knows without thinking about it that (25x75+1)/2 is 938, so the number he's going to divide by 100 can only be 93800 - he doesn't need to work out 1876x50.
Many of these hyper-impressive 4 large solutions come from learning the theory, whereas solving 6 small is more likely to involve thinking on your feet.
I've just seen the show now. Possibly, fractions played a part in it: if 25, 50 and 75 are thought of as .25, .50 and .75, or as 1/4, 1/2 and 3/4.
So to multiply 25x75, you just do 1/4 x 3/4, or 3/16. If you know your 16ths (as I happen to...), then that's 0.1875, or 1875 with the decimal point adjusted.
But maybe he saw immediately that 1/4 x 1/2 x 3/4 was 3/32 which is .09375 (or 93750), and close to the target (ignoring decimals), and was able to somehow work from that.
(BTW I only managed to get 948 on that game.)
Youtube clip here > http://youtu.be/KzQSl6CjAoQ
I enjoyed your run on Countdown and watched it for the game, rather than the show. Which, unfortunately is missed by many on here.
This exchange kind of reminds of The IT Crowd episode, where far too many people take this far too seriously and have forgotten about how diverse and varied the contestants are. But, most importantly, the question you have to ask every single one of those who have had negative things to say about you, is, "what happened when they applied to be on the show?" Did they even pass the auditions?
Congratulations on your well deserved achievement of becoming an Octochamp (a score 137 is absolutely phenomenal) and I wish you all the best for the upcoming finals.
Not today though! I wonder if some sort of record was set by the loser who scored only 5 points in 10 letters games.
I'm pretty sure you could have had GAYDAR in one of the later letters games.
I can't see David Cameron, I keep seeing Joe Pasquale!