DS Forums

 
 

Countdown - so much better these days!


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-02-2016, 23:16
Ex Pat
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Just passin' through
Posts: 3,371
She didn't miss the obvious, she just chose to ignore it. I've seen her do the exact same thing before - instead of doing a solution very similar to a contestant's one, she does another simple solution from a different angle. Either way, it's a simple solution.

It's a complete non-issue.
Sorted. She just chose to ignore it
Ex Pat is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 09-02-2016, 23:18
Boz_Lowdownl
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,590
I agree.

What are they trying to say; that Rachel isn't very good at arithmetic?
No, they're trying to say that Rachel isn't as tuned in as Carol was and, like Nick, doesn't always respond well to what's happening. Carol wouldn't have missed something so obvious like that which Rachel obviously did, despite the feeble attempts to claim that she didn't.
Boz_Lowdownl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2016, 23:18
Mudbox
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 4,125
of course, some men might feel intimidated by someone like Rachel, and HAVE to pick faults...
Mudbox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2016, 01:05
bobcar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 14,718
I find the decision whether to go to Susie to explain the teatime teaser very hit and miss. Sometimes they go to her for very easy words but today Nick completely glossed over "noonmeat" as if it was obvious - I had to go away and look it up as it completely baffled me, her indoors and the others I asked.
bobcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2016, 09:13
roger_50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,411
Of course she missed it! You're only trying to fool yourself, no-one else. And if it's a non issue why do you continue to debate it?
It's a forum? That's what we do. Surely I'm allowed to say I think it's a non-issue? Your logic isn't quite working there.

Also: 'Trying to fool myself'? What are you even talking about? Also, 'feeble attempt'.

All I'm saying is I disagree that she missed it and that I therefore think the whole thing is a non-issue. Jeez, some people need to accept that people can read things differently. It doesn't mean they 'don't get the point' or 'didn't even see it' or are 'fooling themselves' or are making 'feeble attempts' to defend her. Blimey.
roger_50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2016, 11:00
pjc229
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,202
No, they're trying to say that Rachel isn't as tuned in as Carol was and, like Nick, doesn't always respond well to what's happening. Carol wouldn't have missed something so obvious like that which Rachel obviously did, despite the feeble attempts to claim that she didn't.
Sometimes she does, sometimes she doesn't. Carol was phoning it in for about the last 5-10 years of her stint, she probably wouldn't have even solved it

It's probably only worth pointing out how the contestants could do it if they're going to understand and appreciate it. I don't think yesterday's contestants would.
pjc229 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2016, 11:07
i4u
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 30,205
Did anyone watch an episode last week where Rachel was wearing a tight dress with black seams that ran down each side of her back?

Every time she wrote on the wall her bum seemed to shimmy from side to side, mde me laugh.
i4u is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 16-02-2016, 15:30
Durham Viper
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 321
Can't believe Rachel didn't get that numbers round - it was easy

7 , 3 , 9 , 3 , 6 , 75 to get 829



6 / 3 = 2

9 + 2 = 11

11 × 75 = 825

7 - 3 = 4

825 + 4 = 829
Durham Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-02-2016, 15:53
Torch81
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,946
Can't believe Rachel didn't get that numbers round - it was easy

7 , 3 , 9 , 3 , 6 , 75 to get 829



6 / 3 = 2

9 + 2 = 11

11 × 75 = 825

7 - 3 = 4

825 + 4 = 829
Just came on to say the exact same thing! Your solution is how I did it also. How on earth did she miss that!
Torch81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-02-2016, 16:18
bobcar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 14,718
Just came on to say the exact same thing! Your solution is how I did it also. How on earth did she miss that!
I'm very good at the numbers - I often get ones that Rachel can't (sitting at home of course) - but I also failed to get it until after the time was up. That was the first doable numbers game that I haven't got in time this year I think and I've seen them all.

I'm much better at the numbers than my wife but she got this easily enough. I think if you are looking for the absolute easiest way to get there (i.e. not quite so good at the numbers) then you try the solution given above, presumably Rachel was trying different things as was I.

In the end I got it (75 +9*7)*6 + 3/3 but out of time.

For me that was the most difficult numbers game so far this year because the percentage ways of getting it didn't work.
bobcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-02-2016, 16:25
Brian Reynolds
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 778
Just came on to say the exact same thing! Your solution is how I did it also. How on earth did she miss that!
I certainly could not have got it. It would never have occurred to me to divide two numbers BEFORE multiplying by 75, - but Maths was never my strong point.
Brian Reynolds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-02-2016, 17:10
Torch81
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,946
I'm very good at the numbers - I often get ones that Rachel can't (sitting at home of course) - but I also failed to get it until after the time was up. That was the first doable numbers game that I haven't got in time this year I think and I've seen them all.

I'm much better at the numbers than my wife but she got this easily enough. I think if you are looking for the absolute easiest way to get there (i.e. not quite so good at the numbers) then you try the solution given above, presumably Rachel was trying different things as was I.

In the end I got it (75 +9*7)*6 + 3/3 but out of time.

For me that was the most difficult numbers game so far this year because the percentage ways of getting it didn't work.
Yes, I can understand that as my approach is always to look for the most simplistic way possible which is probably why I didn't find that one tricky at all. Whereas, should finding the solution involve something along the lines of, for example, having to multiple 9 x say 24, then I'm quickly lost!

My way of doing the numbers is always to look at the target (in this case 829) and see what the large number is, (in this case 75), then think, right, so I need an 11 and a 4 and it's done. Hence coming up with the solution above.

As you say, I can only assume Rachel looked for too complicated a solution to that one. The fact she didn't get it would suggest that she doesn't have additional help via an earpiece as has been suggested elsewhere as I'm sure someone else would have seen it and told her how to do if she did.
Torch81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-02-2016, 19:20
mark_beach
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 402
Did anyone watch an episode last week where Rachel was wearing a tight dress with black seams that ran down each side of her back?
Every time she wrote on the wall her bum seemed to shimmy from side to side, mde me laugh.
I noticed that too Clip > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YevCkFsDGcg
mark_beach is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 17-02-2016, 00:30
Mudbox
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 4,125
As you say, I can only assume Rachel looked for too complicated a solution to that one. The fact she didn't get it would suggest that she doesn't have additional help via an earpiece as has been suggested elsewhere as I'm sure someone else would have seen it and told her how to do if she did.

my guess is, someone 'upstairs' types the numbers in a program, and simply tells Rachel if it is possible or not. She often says confidently that it isn't possible, and sometimes she doesn't say that, and I think someone in her ear piece tells her it is possible....that's all the info she gets, I reckon.
Mudbox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-02-2016, 06:19
clm2071
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,275
Can't believe Rachel didn't get that numbers round - it was easy

7 , 3 , 9 , 3 , 6 , 75 to get 829



6 / 3 = 2

9 + 2 = 11

11 × 75 = 825

7 - 3 = 4

825 + 4 = 829
I'm watching the early morning repeat of this and cant believe she didn't get it. The solution (the same as yours) jumped out at me straight away, I had to check it several times to make sure id got it right! Cant believe she described it as tricky
clm2071 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-02-2016, 09:08
bobcar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 14,718
I'm watching the early morning repeat of this and cant believe she didn't get it. The solution (the same as yours) jumped out at me straight away, I had to check it several times to make sure id got it right! Cant believe she described it as tricky
Because sometimes you don't see them, there may be some numbers games you haven't got that she sees.

As I said above the better you are at numbers the harder this round was. If you jump in trying to get the closest multiplier and then see what is left to add/subtract then this was easy however that is not the percentage method to get an answer it just worked in this case. The mistake Rachel (and I) made was to not try an easy method when the usual ones failed - actually in my case I was also too slow as I got it slightly out of time by the method I posted above not by the method so many have seen.
bobcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-02-2016, 10:33
Zebb
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 652
Rachel's cleverer than that. Nobody likes a clever ****. By not showing an easy answer she has avoided embarrassing the contestants and made armchair warriors fell better about themselves. Win-win.
Zebb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-02-2016, 11:39
furtivecat
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: South West
Posts: 122
I'm watching the early morning repeat of this and cant believe she didn't get it. The solution (the same as yours) jumped out at me straight away, I had to check it several times to make sure id got it right! Cant believe she described it as tricky
I did it the same way too and also checked several times to make sure! So chuffed.
furtivecat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-02-2016, 14:35
steelbock
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 220
When you have 3,6 and 9 to make 11 it doesn't necessarily jump out. She obviously didn't think 11 was possible and moved on to other methods.
steelbock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-02-2016, 15:12
Gulftastic
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: In the southstand
Posts: 87,656
Hello Natalie!
Gulftastic is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 18-02-2016, 23:49
Boz_Lowdownl
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,590
No, they're trying to say that Rachel isn't as tuned in as Carol was and, like Nick, doesn't always respond well to what's happening. Carol wouldn't have missed something so obvious like that which Rachel obviously did, despite the feeble attempts to claim that she didn't.
She did the same again today in the last numbers round!! Just had to do one correction to what the contestant did to get the answer, instead she totally ignored it (even when the contestant himself had spotted his error) and went off on her own complicated way. She may be good at sums but she's not great as a TV presenter.
Boz_Lowdownl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-02-2016, 23:51
Boz_Lowdownl
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,590
When you have 3,6 and 9 to make 11 it doesn't necessarily jump out. She obviously didn't think 11 was possible and moved on to other methods.
9 plus 6 over 3 isn't obvious?
Boz_Lowdownl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-02-2016, 00:38
Mudbox
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 4,125
She did the same again today in the last numbers round!! Just had to do one correction to what the contestant did to get the answer, instead she totally ignored it (even when the contestant himself had spotted his error) and went off on her own complicated way. She may be good at sums but she's not great as a TV presenter.
yes, I got that numbers round; you just needed to get the one by dividing 9 by 9, but I don't think Rachel saw it, as she was surprised when the new guy said that he just saw it.
As I said before, she probably has her mind on her own solution, and bugger anyone else's
Mudbox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-02-2016, 09:28
bobcar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 14,718
9 plus 6 over 3 isn't obvious?
You go by the percentages and just going straight for the most obvious answer only works if it happens as in this case to fit. When you have to use up lots of numbers to get close then usually other methods are better, it's all about the 30 seconds and it's inevitable that every so often Rachel will miss a numbers game that many others not so good will get.

If you consistently do better than Rachel at the numbers then your comment is fair otherwise I'd say her way is better. I didn't get it either and I (from the comfort and no pressure of my sofa) do better than Rachel and get ones she doesn't.
bobcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-02-2016, 16:45
CherylFan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: In front of the fire
Posts: 1,514
Susie Dent looks rather good today with her hair differently arranged
CherylFan is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:15.