One quiz at a time

Post by **DRT** » 22:22 Tue 21 Apr 2009

I am currently drinking a bottle of red wine which, incidentally, will not see the sun rise ever again. Name the grape, vintage and new world country of origin.

Post by **jdaw1** » 22:24 Tue 21 Apr 2009

Shiraz, 2006, Australia.

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 22:26 Tue 21 Apr 2009

Pinotage, 2005, South Africa

Post by **jdaw1** » 22:27 Tue 21 Apr 2009

Cabernet Sauvignon, 2002, USA.

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 22:27 Tue 21 Apr 2009

Zinfandel, 2005, USA

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 22:28 Tue 21 Apr 2009

whoops, out of order

Post by **DRT** » 22:29 Tue 21 Apr 2009

jdaw1 wrote:Shiraz, 2006, Australia.

HTF did you do that

JDAW's up.

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 22:30 Tue 21 Apr 2009

Just like to mention - really impressed with the Kinks knowledge

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 22:30 Tue 21 Apr 2009

DRT wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:Shiraz, 2006, Australia.
HTF did you do that
JDAW's up.

Check your web cam.

Post by **DRT** » 22:32 Tue 21 Apr 2009

KillerB wrote:Just like to mention - really impressed with the Kinks knowledge

Ermm?

Post by **jdaw1** » 22:35 Tue 21 Apr 2009

My next bottle of port has been chosen I have two of them visible. A house of the second rank, though known for doing a very fine job in an occasional vintage, and a year of which there has been a horizontal in the UK but not the US (at least, not under the auspices of

).

Name house and year.

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 22:36 Tue 21 Apr 2009

1977 Croft

edit: gah, read the hint backwards

Post by **jdaw1** » 22:36 Tue 21 Apr 2009

KillerB wrote:Just like to mention - really impressed with the Kinks knowledge

Errrm.

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 22:39 Tue 21 Apr 2009

KillerB wrote:Just like to mention - really impressed with the Kinks knowledge

My first 3 guesses were legit. After that I had to resort to Google as I'm not all that good with song titles.

Post by **jdaw1** » 22:40 Tue 21 Apr 2009

jdaw1 wrote:Name house and year.

Glenn E. wrote:1977 Croft

I could be mischievous and suggest that houseâ‰ 1977 and yearâ‰ Croft! But, of course:

jdaw1 wrote:a year of which there has been a horizontal in the UK but not the US

jibs badly with 1977 Horizontal, Saturday 29th March 2008, New York.

Post by **DRT** » 22:44 Tue 21 Apr 2009

Smith Woodhouse 1966

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 22:44 Tue 21 Apr 2009

jdaw1 wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:a year of which there has been a horizontal in the UK but not the US
jibs badly with 1977 Horizontal, Saturday 29th March 2008, New York.

Yes, I read it too quickly and the first offline that came to mind was the fabulous Croft offline, and I didn't recall one of those here in the US, so guessed quickly.

Of course, "year" and "horizontal" should have been clues...

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 22:47 Tue 21 Apr 2009

1980 Gould Campbell

Post by **DRT** » 22:50 Tue 21 Apr 2009

1966 Gould Campbell

Post by **jdaw1** » 22:50 Tue 21 Apr 2009

DRT wrote:Smith Woodhouse 1966

Neither house nor year.

Post by **jdaw1** » 22:51 Tue 21 Apr 2009

Glenn E. wrote:1980 Gould Campbell

Correct.

Post by **jdaw1** » 22:51 Tue 21 Apr 2009

DRT wrote:1966 Gould Campbell

Half-correct. GEE’s turn.

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 22:54 Tue 21 Apr 2009

jdaw1 wrote:
Glenn E. wrote:1980 Gould Campbell
Correct.

I wish I could join you!

Half of my favorite rock groups are British. The other two are Bon Jovi and Styx. Name either British group.

Going offline for a while, so you have time to think.

Post by **DRT** » 23:00 Tue 21 Apr 2009

The Spice Girls

Post by **jdaw1** » 23:19 Tue 21 Apr 2009

The Who?

Post by **DRT** » 23:32 Tue 21 Apr 2009

Queen

Post by **DRT** » 00:55 Wed 22 Apr 2009

Glenn, where are you? I need another guess before bed

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 01:02 Wed 22 Apr 2009

Glenn E. wrote:Half of my favorite rock groups are British

DRT wrote:The Spice Girls

Let it be known that DRT's taste in music is now and forever in doubt. Not only does he willingly acknowledge that The Spice Girls are British, but he also evidently believes that they are a rock group.

jdaw1 wrote:The Who?

Wrong, though a much more satisfying guess.

DRT wrote:Queen

Correct. Given the aforementioned taste in music, presumably blind luck.

DRT is up, though hopefully not still awake at 2:00 am.

Post by **DRT** » 01:07 Wed 22 Apr 2009

"The Spice Girls" is my standard first response to any American question about music. It's humour, not serious, but I can see how Americans would struggle to see the difference.

My tropical fish tank holds 1530 litres and is 5 feet long and 2 feet deep. The average length of each fish is around 5 inches. How many fish do I have in the tank?

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 01:21 Wed 22 Apr 2009

1530 liters is roughly 400 US gallons.
400 US gallons is roughly 53 cubic feet.
5 feet long, 2 feet deep means the tank is also roughly 5 feet wide.

That's a big tank. And an odd shape, unless by "2 feet deep" you mean depth measured horizontally away from the viewer and not depth measured vertically from the surface of the water.

I'll assume the former as that makes for a more normal looking fish tank. To populate such a tank with 5" long fish without overcrowding but with a sufficient number that the fish do not appear lonely, I think you'd need around 20 fish.

Post by **DRT** » 01:27 Wed 22 Apr 2009

Glenn E. wrote:1530 liters

litres! JDAW, is this in the same bracket as cutlery?

Trusting Glenn's measurments I now think the 1530 printed on the front of the tank relates to the length rather than volume. The tank is 5' x 2 ' x 1.5' - 2' being the vertical depth.

g-man · Post by **g-man** » 02:42 Wed 22 Apr 2009

DRT wrote:
Glenn E. wrote:1530 liters
litres! JDAW, is this in the same bracket as cutlery?

Trusting Glenn's measurments I now think the 1530 printed on the front of the tank relates to the length rather than volume. The tank is 5' x 2 ' x 1.5' - 2' being the vertical depth.

my dad's got a bigger tank ... I'd say 14 fish.

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 04:20 Wed 22 Apr 2009

DRT wrote:
Glenn E. wrote:1530 liters
litres! JDAW, is this in the same bracket as cutlery?

More along the lines of colour, I believe. The correct spelling in the US is 'liter'... how you spell it over yonder notwithstanding.

I suspect that '1530' is probably the model number, though it is also probably not coincidental that 5 feet is 1.5240 meters. Close enough to 1530 cm.

I'll guess again and say 8 fish.

Post by **DRT** » 06:58 Wed 22 Apr 2009

Both wrong.

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 10:35 Wed 22 Apr 2009

1530 litres? I bet that weighs a tonne and a half.

17

g-man · Post by **g-man** » 13:22 Wed 22 Apr 2009

Do you have a salt water tank or a fresh water tank?

Can we get a description if the fish are tropical, or boring like goldfish?

12 fish

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 16:00 Wed 22 Apr 2009

Post by **jdaw1** » 20:58 Wed 22 Apr 2009

[url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=24611#p24611]Here[/url] DRT wrote:a re-count is required. I just found two more books that were not included in my initial calculation.

Glenn's answer is wrong, principally as a result of my incorrect clue. Sorry.

[url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=25110#p25110]Here[/url] DRT wrote:I now think the 1530 printed on the front of the tank relates to the length rather than volume. The tank is 5' x 2 ' x 1.5' - 2' being the vertical depth.

New rule: DRT is not allowed to ask numerical questions.

Five?

(5”²×2”²×1½”² ≈ 425 litres (or liters, depending on your preferred variation of English).)

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 21:16 Wed 22 Apr 2009

Post by **jdaw1** » 23:59 Wed 22 Apr 2009

Six?

(With no clues this question might become dull. How many prime factors has the number? Then for each answer say how many factors are correct.)

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 00:33 Thu 23 Apr 2009

9?

If we keep up at this rate, though, we'll have covered all reasonable answers fairly soon.

Post by **jdaw1** » 00:52 Thu 23 Apr 2009

None? (They all died after Derek poured the Croft pink into the tank?)

Glenn E. · Post by **Glenn E.** » 04:18 Thu 23 Apr 2009

11?

Let's see, we've now covered 0, 5-12, 14, 17, 20.

Post by **jdaw1** » 04:39 Thu 23 Apr 2009

Two?

Adding to, without having checked, GEE’s list: 0, 2, 5→12, 14, 17, 20.

Post by **DRT** » 07:11 Thu 23 Apr 2009

The range is correct but, quite unbelievably given the number of guesses, the correct answer has not yet been given.

Post by **DRT** » 07:34 Thu 23 Apr 2009

g-man wrote:Do you have a salt water tank or a fresh water tank?

Can we get a description if the fish are tropical, or boring like goldfish?

Tropical. In decending order of size:

Lemon Barb
Oscar
Tinfoil Barb
Black Tailed Silver Shark
Pleck
Clown Loach
Flying Fox

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 07:44 Thu 23 Apr 2009

13 - that's got to be unlucky though, especially with fish and the Biblical implications

Post by **DRT** » 07:46 Thu 23 Apr 2009

KillerB wrote:13 - that's got to be unlucky though, especially with fish and the Biblical implications

No.

g-man · Post by **g-man** » 13:40 Thu 23 Apr 2009

DRT wrote:
g-man wrote:Do you have a salt water tank or a fresh water tank?

Can we get a description if the fish are tropical, or boring like goldfish?
Tropical. In decending order of size:

Lemon Barb
Oscar
Tinfoil Barb
Black Tailed Silver Shark
Pleck
Clown Loach
Flying Fox

Size as in the population or the physical dimension of the fish itself?
mm given the variety
you'd probably have 2 of each of the bigger fish
3-4 of the clown loach and flying fox.
16 fish

Post by **DRT** » 13:42 Thu 23 Apr 2009

g-man wrote: Size as in the population or the physical dimension of the fish itself?

Dimension.

g-man wrote: mm given the variety
you'd probably have 2 of each of the bigger fish
3-4 of the clown loach and flying fox.
16 fish

Good logic, but still wrong.