Chaser Paul Sinha Explains His Method of Cramming For a Quiz! | Would I Lie To You?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ม.ค. 2023
- #WILTY #WouldILieToYou #BBC
Paul Sinha: "Every night, to cram in as much learning as possible, I read a book while simultaneously listening to a completely different audiobook."
With Paul Sinha, Sara Pascoe, and Mary Portas.
Would I Lie to You? is the hit BBC panel show where two teams of celebrity guests try to figure out whether their opponent's ridiculously far-fetched statements about themselves are true or, in fact, a lie.
Featuring inimitable host Rob Brydon with lightning-quick team captains David Mitchell and Lee Mack.
Like Us on Facebook 👉 / wouldilietoyoutv
Follow Us on Twitter 👉 / wilty_tv
Would I Lie to You? is brought to you by Banjiay Rights in partnership with Zeppotron and the BBC. - ตลก
Sarah's savage put-down of Lee trying to score a big man point on Paul was wonderful! 😂
He didn't actually make up those facts. I looked them up, and they're actually true. Impressive
Reagan won with less than 60%
@@Raghy07 Guess he missed the Braile on that one!
I don't see why he'd have to make them up tbh, he could just as easily have read both books in print form and memorised them
@@Raghy07 the popular vote yes. He got 58.8%. But the electoral college was a landslide. 525-13
Paul is a genius!
"He's coming at me with facts to confuse me" is a phrase I use daily
Love how amazingly knowledgeable and calm Paul is, and how he entirely shat the bed on Taskmaster lol
I dont think he shat the bed on taskmaster at all. He leaned into his persona (knowledgeable, but fundamentally inept) and also he'd just been diagnosed with Parkinson's, so wasn't feeling massively competitive. 😂
@@peterclarke7240 he got diagnosed during the studio recordings, but after the location tasks. what really hampered him was a very very recent shoulder injury and surgery
Yeah, he did well specially with the shoulder surgery. It was my first introduction to him and I just identified so much with him as someone with similar health issues.
In fairness, Rylan had a point, his breadth of knowledge isn't itself proof of how he's attained it
It is technically possible to read a book while listening to an audiobook, but it requires intense concentration which will make you very cranky and it will be less efficient than just reading books in sequence. That's because audiobooks are really slow in comparison to fast reading, so you don't "win" much time by having it on. Factor in how it will distract you and require you to read some passages twice and you're better off (and MUCH more chillaxed) by just reading one book after the other. And all that is pretty much the best case.
You don't necessarily have to be paying attention to an audiobook, since you can process background information at the same time to a limited degree. It's part of the cocktail party effect, it's why you can recall details about other people's conversations by just being in the same room
You sound like you're coming at me with facts to confuse me
He did a good job with that lie though. He'd make an infuriatingly competent politician.
Those things he said were actually true, though. If only politicians were so factually accurate...
@@polycrystallinecandy ... and that's why he would be so infuriatingly competent: he uses truths to legitimize the untrue.
Confused? That's what they do.
Just because you know facts doesn't mean you are competent at making good decisions for millions of people. It helps to know facts, but it is hardly the only required criteria.
@@DavidOfWhitehills well, that's up to us to learn that just because two things are tangentially related (him being a good quizzer and him reading two books at once) doesn't mean truthfulness of one has any bearing on the other
@@Bobby.Kristensen There's nothing in the job description "politician" that says you have to make good decisions on behalf of millions of people. Unfortunately.
That was the best lie yet.
I wonder where Paul got the 73% of the vote fact from... the popular vote was 59%-41% and the electoral vote was 98%-2%.
most relevant I can find is Nixon’s victory in Oklahoma in 1972.
Reagan had the biggest win by electoral college, whereas the biggest win in terms of the popular vote in an actual contested election was Jefferson's 73% in 1804.
1788, 1792 were uncontested for Washington, in 1820 only one party had candidates while the Federalists got votes without an actual candidate. Given those qualifiers, the 1984 and 1804 elections were the most decisive. I'd wager that's where he misremembered or misspoke.
That guy looks like hes made of wax