Only Connect (BBC2)

17273757778543

Comments

  • LordBobbinLordBobbin Posts: 359
    Forum Member
    1, 2, 3,...14!


    Actually, I think you'll find the correct sequence is:

    1, 2, 3, 619647894338928540916306535


    I think there may be a decimal point in there too. But don't quote me...
  • ennui 57ennui 57 Posts: 1,176
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Well, all these 1, 2, 3,......answers are too numerical!

    Obviously the answer is 'GO'

    ;-)
  • Heston VestonHeston Veston Posts: 6,495
    Forum Member
    LordBobbin wrote: »
    Actually, I think you'll find the correct sequence is:

    1, 2, 3, 619647894338928540916306535


    I think there may be a decimal point in there too. But don't quote me...

    Mine is actually a valid connection, I didn't just pull the '14' out of my arse y'know!
  • lundavralundavra Posts: 31,790
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    ennui 57 wrote: »
    Well, all these 1, 2, 3,......answers are too numerical!

    Obviously the answer is 'GO'

    ;-)

    Wouldn't that need to be 3, 2, 1 ....
  • lundavralundavra Posts: 31,790
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Mine is actually a valid connection, I didn't just pull the '14' out of my arse y'know!

    Perhaps there should be a competition every week for the most obscure alternative correct answer to the sequence.
  • The_BonoboThe_Bonobo Posts: 5,648
    Forum Member
    lundavra wrote: »
    Perhaps there should be a competition every week for the most obscure alternative correct answer to the sequence.

    See if you can work why this is a valid last answer...

    1, 2, 3, ... "nothing".

    It's not actually that obscure and certainly not complicated. ;-)
  • Heston VestonHeston Veston Posts: 6,495
    Forum Member
    The_Bonobo wrote: »
    See if you can work why this is a valid last answer...

    1, 2, 3, ... "nothing".

    It's not actually that obscure and certainly not complicated. ;-)

    Longest possible sequence of prime numbers?
  • Paul_DNAPPaul_DNAP Posts: 25,978
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Mine is actually a valid connection, I didn't just pull the '14' out of my arse y'know!

    Is it a U2 reference?
  • Heston VestonHeston Veston Posts: 6,495
    Forum Member
    Paul_DNAP wrote: »
    Is it a U2 reference?

    Well done.
  • The_BonoboThe_Bonobo Posts: 5,648
    Forum Member
    Mine is actually a valid connection, I didn't just pull the '14' out of my arse y'know!
    Paul_DNAP wrote: »
    Is it a U2 reference?
    Well done.

    I still can't work out how this is the sequence even knowing it is related to U2. :confused:

    The_Bonobo wrote: »
    See if you can work why this is a valid last answer...

    1, 2, 3, ... "nothing".

    It's not actually that obscure and certainly not complicated. ;-)
    Longest possible sequence of prime numbers?

    No, it's nothing like as slick as that. You're example above is closer in fact. ;-)
  • Paul_DNAPPaul_DNAP Posts: 25,978
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The_Bonobo wrote: »
    I still can't work out how this is the sequence even knowing it is related to U2. :confused:
    It's about the Song "Vertigo"

    At the beginning of the song Bono counts the beat off in Spanish "Uno, dos, tres, catorce!" - which isn't "1,2,3,4" but actually "1,2,3,14"
  • The_BonoboThe_Bonobo Posts: 5,648
    Forum Member
    Paul_DNAP wrote: »
    It's about the Song "Vertigo"

    At the beginning of the song Bono counts the beat off in Spanish "Uno, dos, tres, catorce!" - which isn't "1,2,3,4" but actually "1,2,3,14"

    Aha! Cool cheers. :)
  • cedricthedogcedricthedog Posts: 2,932
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Paul_DNAP wrote: »
    It's about the Song "Vertigo"

    At the beginning of the song Bono counts the beat off in Spanish "Uno, dos, tres, catorce!" - which isn't "1,2,3,4" but actually "1,2,3,14"

    I was hoping that you were going to say that there is a U2 song with a lyric including

    "# I didn't just pull the '14' out of my arse y'know! #"

    :D
  • doe_a_deerdoe_a_deer Posts: 2,132
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It's only when watching Only Connect being viewed on Gogglebox this week that you see some neutral opinions on the show and begin to realise how bad it really is. I say this as an Only Connect fan who watches every episode.

    The concept of Only Connect is fine to an extent but there are so many flaws in the execution of it that it really is a bit laughable. I don't suppose they are going to drastically overhaul the program at such a late date but it's what's needed to make this show in any way reasonable.
  • SimonK01SimonK01 Posts: 136
    Forum Member
    doe_a_deer wrote: »
    It's only when watching Only Connect being viewed on Gogglebox this week that you see some neutral opinions on the show and begin to realise how bad it really is. I say this as an Only Connect fan who watches every episode.

    The concept of Only Connect is fine to an extent but there are so many flaws in the execution of it that it really is a bit laughable. I don't suppose they are going to drastically overhaul the program at such a late date but it's what's needed to make this show in any way reasonable.

    I'm going to regret saying this, but what flaws, and how do you think they should be fixed?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 232
    Forum Member
    ennui 57 wrote: »
    Well, all these 1, 2, 3,......answers are too numerical!

    Obviously the answer is 'GO'

    ;-)

    The answer is 6.

    These are the first four integers that when spelt out in full contain an odd number of letters.

    ONE
    TWO
    THREE
    four
    five
    SIX

    Simple when you think about it, really.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 232
    Forum Member
    SimonK01 wrote: »
    I'm going to regret saying this, but what flaws, and how do you think they should be fixed?

    Nothing. Nothing needs to be fixed. The format and difficulty of the questions don't need dumbing down just to appeal to a wider audience.
  • Heston VestonHeston Veston Posts: 6,495
    Forum Member
    The_Bonobo wrote: »
    I still can't work out how this is the sequence even knowing it is related to U2. :confused:






    No, it's nothing like as slick as that. You're example above is closer in fact. ;-)

    OK, cough up...
  • atgatg Posts: 4,260
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    ennui 57 wrote: »
    Well, all these 1, 2, 3,......answers are too numerical!

    Obviously the answer is 'GO'

    ;-)
    Shirley that would be 3, 2, 1...

    How about 3, 5, 7, 13? Genuine one.



    P.S. Seems I was beaten to it by another great mind. :D
  • atgatg Posts: 4,260
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Longest possible sequence of prime numbers?
    That is wrong on so many different levels.
  • atgatg Posts: 4,260
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    doe_a_deer wrote: »

    The concept of Only Connect is fine to an extent but there are so many flaws in the execution of it that it really is a bit laughable. .
    Get your tin hat on.
  • Heston VestonHeston Veston Posts: 6,495
    Forum Member
    atg wrote: »
    That is wrong on so many different levels.

    What I should have said is longest consecutive sequence of prime numbers if you consider 1 as a prime.
  • atgatg Posts: 4,260
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    What I should have said is longest consecutive sequence of prime numbers if you consider 1 as a prime.
    But why would you do that when it isn't? And if anybody thinks that's pedantic then tough.


    I watched that Gogglebox programme and wonder where they get some of them from. Liked the guy and his family celebrating recognising the tomato aphorism. But the guy at the end saying OC is for intellectuals was wrong. It's for quiz enthusiasts as most of the clues are based on obscure knowledge even if you need a bit of lateral thinking to work it out sometimes.
  • The_BonoboThe_Bonobo Posts: 5,648
    Forum Member
    OK, cough up...

    OK fair deuce.

    It was... 1, 2, 3, ... "nothing".

    Led Zep albums. The first 3 were just the band name with the number.
    The 4th album has many names (e.g. The Fourth Album ;-)) but is officially untitled.
  • atgatg Posts: 4,260
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The_Bonobo wrote: »
    OK fair deuce.

    It was... 1, 2, 3, ... "nothing".

    Led Zep albums. The first 3 were just the band name with the number.
    The 4th album has many names (e.g. The Fourth Album ;-)) but is officially untitled.
    Yeah well then it should at the very least be <blank>, II, III, ...? But you'd have to account for the lack of band name on the fourth one.
Sign In or Register to comment.