I quite like Only Connect and have watched it since it was on BBC4.
It's nice to get the answers before the teams, though it's rare and I don't keep a tally.

I really don't see why everybody cannot watch it in the same spirit.

She guessed a possible connection. For 5 points, you need to be more certain to take the punt.

Can we PLEASE get back to lusting over the presenter?

I'll begin........................

.........drool..........................(you lucky man, Mitchell!)..................

Thanks for the link but it's a load of rubbish, stating times can be written 00.47 a.m.

24 hour terminology does not add a.m. or p.m.

Still waiting for Baz to back up his argument with some evidence.

I think her argument is that it is worth taking a chance with the possibility of 5 points (and risk of the other team picking up a point) rather than wait to be sure and only get 2 points or perhaps even 1 point. Not sure if anyone has stuck to that on the actual programme so perhaps never been fully tested.

She did...

It was not very nice wine to start with!

It's all a distant memory but we did have 30 points as our target at that point until that bloody wall...

Just a question about people giving their scores. When you play, do you only answer one team's questions, as per the studio version, or do you use both? And how do you filter out the teams mutterings, especially on the walls? MrsJ and I try to answer every question (though we've never got a music one yet) and can only come up with an average of 17 points altogether. But then, it's only a bit of fun. Isn't it?

Have we all had a go at the wall games on the website? Might be a laugh to choose a few at random and give our scores on here.
Would have to work on trust though, so no lying about your scores (cough)

You know that, I know that and I suspect the NPL, a respected scientific organisation. knows that too. The article just said "Times ... are sometimes given as". Maybe they are, somewhere. The article doesn't "state that times can be written" that way.

Semantics, dear boy.

It's looked a lot like that for quite some time now, it's turning this thread into an unpleasant place to be. And now one of the self-professed intelligent people on this thread have made a second account with a similar name just to take the mickey? Very poor form.


Agree with you there.


Yes, it has. She saw some irate pirates and then smelled a rat.

the ginger baker one was my peak OC moment , a 5 pointer.

but i'm old, and a fan of 60s blues rock, most people under 40 will think Cream is high butter fat milk.

Cream? That was a nightclub. Spacioussss!

I've only seen Gingers drum solos on the telly. Mind numbing self indulgent crap that seemed to go forever sums up how I felt about it.
Cream were good though.

Got the decimal coins one straight away but only cause a version of the question was on The Chase the other week.

I saw that Chase one as well so I knew what it was about but I didn't know the exact sequence.

So tonight's score was:

Part time Poets 21
Surrealists fish

I thought I had a 5 pointer when The Hives came up , skin problems ?

Walls seemed a lot easier this week.

Yes I thought so as I got a few quite quickly. The missing vowel round is often the decider. I really thought the part timers would win it tonight.

Agreed, lots of relatively easy connects.

A lot if easy ones this week. A number of 5 pointers and quite a lot off the second clue. 3rd week in a row I think I havent got a single one on the walls though.

There were several 5 pointers for me

Pink Pinky
Nicholas I
Edward scissor hands

I also thought I had the Liam Gallagher (Guitar): Roll with it question for 5 points, but Victoria needed the TOTP part, so no points there for me.

I found the first wall very difficult, but the second wall i had all answers quickly just like the team.

A friend of mine actually got "jerk" for 5 points, but i was nowhere near that answer at all. I didn't even understand the validity of the maths equation to it - super vague!

Can someone explain why that equation means "jerk"?

In mathematical terms a jerk is a sudden acceleration.

The equation shown was a differential equation showing the relationship between acceleration over time.

The larger the acceleration and the smaller the time, the bigger the jerk.

From physics.

It's the third derivative of position.

The first derivative of position is known as velocity, or the rate of change of position.

The second derivative of position is known as acceleration, the rate of change of velocity.

The third derivative of position is known as jerk (or jolt) and is the rate of change of acceleration.

The equation shown was the first derivative of acceleration da/dt.

It's called jerk because it's the rate of change of acceleration that causes you to be thrown about, if you have constant velocity or constant acceleration it feels a lot more comfortable, but when you change the acceleration you get thrown about - it's what rollercoaster designers rely on a lot.