One quiz at a time

Post by **jdaw1** » 08:00 Wed 21 Oct 2009

Malvedos ’62?

Post by **DRT** » 09:17 Wed 21 Oct 2009

jdaw1 wrote:Malvedos ’62?

JDAW's up!

Post by **jdaw1** » 11:27 Wed 21 Oct 2009

jdaw1 wrote:port-related regret-inducing question.

Wine Society catalogues from November 1953 until November 1955 listed ‟Quinta do Noval, 1934 (Nacional Pre Phylloxera Vines)”.

At what price, in shillings and old pence per bottle?

Post by **DRT** » 12:29 Wed 21 Oct 2009

29/6?

Post by **jdaw1** » 12:49 Wed 21 Oct 2009

Not that dear! What do you think this is?

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 13:17 Wed 21 Oct 2009

17s6d

Andy Velebil · Post by **Andy Velebil** » 13:46 Wed 21 Oct 2009

jdaw1 wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:port-related regret-inducing question.
Wine Society catalogues from November 1953 until November 1955 listed ‟Quinta do Noval, 1934 (Nacional Pre Phylloxera Vines)”.

At what price, in shillings and old pence per bottle?

Well since Nacional was never sold by Noval until 1985, I'd say less than 1-2 pounds (shillings). Yes, an interesting factoid is that Cristiano Van Zellar was the first to offer Nacional for sale in 1985. Until that time it was a free-be give away

Andy Velebil · Post by **Andy Velebil** » 13:48 Wed 21 Oct 2009

jdaw1 wrote:Malvedos ’62?

I hope it arrived safely?

Post by **DRT** » 14:35 Wed 21 Oct 2009

Andy V wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:Malvedos ’62?
I hope it arrived safely?

Sure did, thanks

Post by **DRT** » 14:37 Wed 21 Oct 2009

Andy V wrote: Well since Nacional was never sold by Noval until 1985, I'd say less than 1-2 pounds (shillings). Yes, an interesting factoid is that Cristiano Van Zellar was the first to offer Nacional for sale in 1985. Until that time it was a free-be give away

Although Nacional was not sold by QdN commercially until the 1980s they did put bottles into circulation by giving them away so the bottle in the catalogue is probably being offered on the secondary market.

15s 6d

Post by **jdaw1** » 17:55 Wed 21 Oct 2009

KillerB wrote:17s6d

DRT wrote:15s 6d

Too low. This isn’t any old rubbish: this is Nacional 1934.

Andy V wrote:I'd say less than 1-2 pounds (shillings).

Insufficiently precise. And it suggests that you don’t know that there were twenty shillings to the pound.

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 05:23 Thu 22 Oct 2009

Let's go for the old 19s11d

Andy's patently baffled by the shillings thing. So let me explain:

Before decimilaisation in 1971 we had a much simpler currency system with the lowest denomination being the farthing (which went out earlier), so, obviously:

1d (penny) = 4 farthings
1s (shilling) = 12d
£1 (pound) = 20s

Unsurprisngly people were baffled by decimal and claimed they's never get used to it (this is not actually a joke).

Please, nobody mention a half-crown.

Post by **DRT** » 07:35 Thu 22 Oct 2009

20s 6d?

Post by **jdaw1** » 07:40 Thu 22 Oct 2009

KillerB wrote:Let's go for the old 19s11d

DRT wrote:20s 6d?

Too low. This isn’t any old rubbish: this is Nacional 1934.

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 11:52 Thu 22 Oct 2009

24s11d

Post by **DRT** » 12:25 Thu 22 Oct 2009

21s4d?

Post by **jdaw1** » 12:41 Thu 22 Oct 2009

KillerB wrote:24s11d

DRT wrote:21s4d?

Too low. This isn’t any old rubbish: this is Nacional 1934.

Post by **DRT** » 13:05 Thu 22 Oct 2009

DRT wrote:29/6?

jdaw1 wrote:Not that dear! What do you think this is?

jdaw1 wrote:
KillerB wrote:24s11d
Too low. This isn’t any old rubbish: this is Nacional 1934.

I can't guess yet

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 13:11 Thu 22 Oct 2009

27s6d

Post by **DRT** » 13:53 Thu 22 Oct 2009

25s9d

Post by **jdaw1** » 13:59 Thu 22 Oct 2009

DRT wrote:25s9d

Too low. This isn’t any old rubbish: this is Nacional 1934.

KillerB wrote:27s6d

Exactly so.

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 15:25 Thu 22 Oct 2009

Interesting to see the Cockburn's Special Reserve was over-priced then a well.

Harvest time. I have just stripped the vine of its grapes. What weight to the nearest ten grammes, including the stalks, does the harvest come to?

Post by **jdaw1** » 15:44 Thu 22 Oct 2009

102oz?

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 15:49 Thu 22 Oct 2009

jdaw1 wrote:102oz?

Use the appropriate unit of measure.

Post by **jdaw1** » 16:20 Thu 22 Oct 2009

KillerB wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:102oz?
Use the appropriate unit of measure.

I have specified a weight far more accurately the the required tolerance: 2891.65g.

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 16:26 Thu 22 Oct 2009

jdaw1 wrote:
KillerB wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:102oz?
Use the appropriate unit of measure.
I have specified a weight far more accurately the the required tolerance: 2891.65g.

No you haven't - it's wrong. Too low.

Post by **DRT** » 19:07 Thu 22 Oct 2009

3.2kg

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 21:41 Thu 22 Oct 2009

DRT wrote:3.2kg

Higher

Post by **Alex Bridgeman** » 22:09 Thu 22 Oct 2009

19 degrees baume

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 22:44 Thu 22 Oct 2009

AHB wrote:19 degrees baume

I asked for the weight or more realistically, mass not relative density.

Post by **DRT** » 23:15 Thu 22 Oct 2009

4.6kg?

Post by **jdaw1** » 23:58 Thu 22 Oct 2009

1 slug? (≈14.5939 kg)

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 05:20 Fri 23 Oct 2009

DRT wrote:4.6kg?

Too low

jdaw1 wrote:14.5939 kg

Too high - it's one vine... ...in Coventry

Post by **DRT** » 07:02 Fri 23 Oct 2009

6.7kg

Post by **jdaw1** » 08:42 Fri 23 Oct 2009

0.25 slugs (≈3.648475 kg)?

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 08:58 Fri 23 Oct 2009

DRT wrote:6.7kg

Too high

jdaw1 wrote:3.648475 kg

Too low

Post by **jdaw1** » 09:26 Fri 23 Oct 2009

Summary: >4.6kg ≈ 162.2602oz; <6.7kg ≈ 236.3355oz; answer must be correct to within Â±0.01kg ≈ 0.3527oz.

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 09:34 Fri 23 Oct 2009

jdaw1 wrote:Summary: >4.6kg ≈ 162.2602oz; <6.7kg ≈ 236.3355oz; answer must be correct to within Â±0.01kg ≈ 0.3527oz.

Thinking about it, that could take a while. Let's make it nearest 100g.

Post by **jdaw1** » 10:19 Fri 23 Oct 2009

209 possibilities. If done with interval bisection into equal(-ish) pieces, that can be done in eight steps. Not so much. A mere twenty possibilities can be done in five.

It isn’t my turn.

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 13:30 Fri 23 Oct 2009

jdaw1 wrote:209 possibilities. If done with interval bisection into equal(-ish) pieces, that can be done in eight steps. Not so much. A mere twenty possibilities can be done in five.

That would be the case if people followed a straightforward bisection routine instead of random guesses between. Even better if some muppet doesn't throw in a value outside the already established range.

Post by **DRT** » 15:14 Fri 23 Oct 2009

7.2kg?

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 15:26 Fri 23 Oct 2009

DRT wrote:7.2kg?

Hey Fozzie - too high

Post by **jdaw1** » 21:22 Fri 23 Oct 2009

5.6 of your EU kilogrammes.

Post by **DRT** » 21:25 Fri 23 Oct 2009

5.1kg

Post by **jdaw1** » 21:43 Fri 23 Oct 2009

6.1 of your EU kilogrammes.

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 21:45 Fri 23 Oct 2009

The Great Gonzo wrote:5.6 of your EU kilogrammes.

Too high

Fozzie Bear wrote:5.1kg

Too low

Post by **DRT** » 22:46 Fri 23 Oct 2009

5.3kg

Post by **jdaw1** » 08:08 Sat 24 Oct 2009

5.2 of your EU kilogrammes (if I had guessed 5.4 or 5.5 the next person, who could not be me, would have known 5.2 is the lowest-information guess that I can make).

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 08:11 Sat 24 Oct 2009

DRT wrote:5.3kg

It was 5.35Kg, so within 100g. I asked my mother this question and she said "about 5Kg?"

Fozzie's up.

Post by **jdaw1** » 08:31 Sat 24 Oct 2009

KillerB wrote:It was 5.35Kg, so within 100g. I asked my mother this question and she said "about 5Kg?"

Your mother replied in Kg? I’m surprised.