Puffer

Yes, that would work well enough, Freddy, but you are going to quite a lot of trouble for one job. Simply using the router/fence (and maybe short extension pieces, likely not needed if the boards can be cut to length after routing) as I described above would be simple and effective. After all, your routing job is about as simple as they come and, even if your groove 'wanders' slightly in a few places (easily corrected), it will neither show nor matter in a floorboard. Some years ago, I routed a nice rounded corner on both sides of many metres of 3 x 2 (in 3.6m lengths) to be used as visible ceiling joists in a pitched-roof conservatory, using my method. Easy as pie. (On the other hand, the three-dimensional trigonometry needed to work out the cutting angles at the ends, especially with the joists meeting at an apex was certainly not as 'easy as p' and involved me in writing some quite complex formulae, not indulged in since A-level.) You don't surprise me with the wood-yard quote; the probability is that nothing less than 100m would have been worth their (or your) while in setting-up.

Forget Amazon, then, Freddy. I've not had any problems and a couple of returned items were dealt with properly. The 30-day rule cannot be applied if anything is or becomes defective, as distinct from a change of mind. I'm not sure what you propose re routing; if I understand your sketch it is broadly what I had in mind. I would simply clamp the board vertically in Workmate and, if necessary, clamp another short piece of wood at each end, with tops of both (i.e. edge to be routed) flush and extra wood on opposite side to router fence. Then simply run the router with fence along to cut the groove; more than one pass may be needed. I see no need for a table, although this would obviate the need for the 'extension pieces'. Setting up and holding the router so it is stationary and running the wood over it (as with a table) can work but is cumbersome. (Although a router should be used in one direction (so its rotation causes dig-in rather than out), in practice this makes little difference on most cuts and you can run it to and fro, or round and round etc, particularly if cut is fairly shallow.)

Freddy: If you're interested (and quick), this 'used' Bosch router from Amazon is a good deal: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/offer-listing/B001E4EJ5S/ref=dp_olp_used?ie=UTF8&condition=used&m=A2OAJ7377F756P

Play it again, Shyheels! Elementary, my dear Freddy! I will be happy to act as referee if the pair of are going to have a shoot-out to settle things!

Yes indeed, Freddy Yes indeed to all of that, Freddy. And I could add a few others: Gene Tierney; Grace Kelly; Liz Taylor (when young - as in Ivanhoe). There just seems to be something special about these 40s/50s stars; certainly they looked glamorous and dressed accordingly.

I do heartily dislike the term 'guy' being used in the UK - especially when 'you guys' is used to address a mixed-sex bunch of people. I am neither an American man nor a bonfire effigy! I do wish 'guy' could be left where it belongs - in the US; we are 'blokes' etc in the UK! (No offence taken or intended, Shyheels; you are in good (bad) company these days!) Your hotel does conjure up a lot of images, Shyheels! And the posts above cover much of the ground. Bogart and Bacall were indeed great on screen. In fact, most of those 40s/50s Hollywood 'sirens' were not only good to look at but fine actresses. I suspect most of them died too young from lung cancer, however. My favourite 'film noir' is Double Indemnity (Fred MacMurray, Barbara Stanwyck, Edward G. Robinson) - I'm sure you both know it. (The title, incidentally, is a misnomer; life or accident insurance is not a contract of indemnity insurance; it pays out according to a specified scale of benefits for each injury or death. But the title Double Scale Benefits would not have quite the same impact, I admit!)

I wish I had 10p for every handful of assorted debris I have removed from under various floors when boards come up. As you say, Freddy, it is all too easy for previous 'tradesmen' to leave everything there (sometimes including tools, pipe fittings and other useful items!). As to replacing your damaged floorboards, much will depend on whether they are to be covered afterwards (fitted carpet; vinyl; laminate ...). If so, why worry about the different width - if the thickness is the same, surely you can mix-and-match with reusable removed boards and supplement in a suitable place with new ones of whatever width is available (cutting a narrow one if necessary for the fill-in)? You may need to remove a few more boards to achieve the optimum repairable area. And I question the real need for t&g, unless draughts or dust are a particular problem. OK, you may end up with a bit of a patchwork, but if it's solid and covered, so what? You are lucky in that you live (I assume) in a relatively modern house with boards that can be matched from stock for thickness - my Victorian house has boards that are about 3mm thicker than anything commonly used today; I always keep (or scrounge from elsewhere) any decent boards that match for thickness. Another suggestion is to use chipboard (preferably P5 t&g) in 18mm or 22mm if this matches for thickness - a single panel might get you out of trouble in an area that is unlikely to need lifting again. I nearly always screw down floorboards; 1.5" or 1.75" No. 8 csk screws are ideal and allow for subsequent removal with minimal damage to boards or anything under them. A router is an extremely useful tool; I would not be without mine and am certain you will love it if you get one and realise its potential; very little practise is needed. It does not have to be expensive either; 28295 from Toolstation (£49.98), SF 49312 (£49.99) SF 31457 (£35.99), or possibly Argos 711/3914 (£39.99) should all be fine for anything other than heavy repetitive work. An extra set of 0.25" router bits is handy; again not expensive (and much cheaper than buying individually). Mrs Freddy should be instructed to put these items on your Xmas list - NOW! With the supplied fence and a Workmate, you can rout most things - I do have a small table but rarely use it - too fiddly and not always easy to use in its fixed workshop position. You should be able to rout board edges (if you have to) using just the fence from one side, and possibly without needing to plunge cut - I rarely 'plunge' as I find it more difficult to control than taking (if necessary) several cuts at different fixed depths. Just remember to allow a little extra board at each end so that the router/fence still has something to bear against at each extremity of cut.

My only personal experience of firearms is with the school CCF, where I fired a .22 rifle on the range (with some success) and a .303 on exercises, the latter mercifully using blanks! Of sharper memory is the week in CCF camp on Salisbury Plain immediately after Christmas 1962 - the start of the worst winter in England since 1947 (which I didn't experience) and thence to now. Firing blanks at an imaginary enemy when you were up to your armpits in snow was simply silly; I managed to avoid most of that by making myself indispensable in the cookhouse, keeping all the stoves etc going - dry, warm and useful. Sobering now to think that was almost 53 years ago.

I'd never heard the term; not too many armed gangs here in Kent. 'Gat' as in Gatling gun, presumably? Although that was a machine gun, not a pistol.

Good luck with your daring purchase - we look forward to learning how you get on with them (and get them on!). As to the missing driver (abducted?) ... don't forget the golden rule: take the THIRD taxi in the rank outside. Watch out for anacondas.

I agree entirely about many (if not most) knee boots having a too-generous shaft width. Both my pairs (Sherbert, from the now-defunct Big Shoe Boutique, a Barratt offshoot) have shafts that are far too wide for me when wearing even normal-width straight jeans, which then bunch and billow (sounds poetic, but it ain't a good look!). And in tightish jeans they just slosh around my fairly slim calves. An assistant in Evans did tell me that, as the more mature and/or larger lady was its prime customer, its boots invariably had a wide shaft. I'm not frantically trying to find a pair of (affordable) slim-shafted knee boots (with pointed toes and, say, a 4" stiletto or slim stacked heel) in UK11 (Eu45) but it would be nice to know they existed somewhere. I recall that 'killing the fatted calf' was referred to in the parable about the prodigal son. It seems, however, that it would be better if associated with the prodigal mum.

I know what you mean about Tesco (and others) with misleading labels and bulk-buy savings what ain't. Caution is always needed. I don't find much in the way of short-dated discounts at the local Tesco - except perhaps about half an hour after Sunday opening, when a lot of Saturday leftovers are nicely priced - and it's even better at Morrisons (which is, admittedly, a larger shop). I'm not often out at either on a Sunday morning but I can be sure of a quick kill if I happen to be there. I agree with your approach to reviews, whether of consumer products, holidays, restaurants, books or anything else. Probably 50% of all reviews (if readable at all, considering the ignoramuses who often write them) are so bigoted, biased or irrelevant that they should be discounted. Of the others, one does need to eliminate the out-of-date or mistaken (e.g. someone not realising what the reasonable limitations of the purchase were, or misusing it). Surprisingly, one of the best vacuums I have ever known and used was (and still is) a cheapo Argos 'Challenge' bagless vertical cylinder type, given to me at least 6 years ago by my son after he had used (and abused) it for various tasks. It has been my 'DIY' vac ever since, sucking up all sorts of on-site debris without complaint, provided the filters are kept clean (not difficult). I did, early on, have a problem with a wire to the switch fracturing, but that was easily repaired. Such cleaning is not a task I would entrust to a Miele (too delicate!) but the latter is excellent for normal household tasks, including pet hair etc (if you have any - we don't).

The last boots look over-generous in the shaft width. May suit some (not Freddy) but probably not ideal, especially for wearing concealed.

Good points, Freddy. The cost/weight ratio is very important; it is not always the larger pack that gives better value. My wife dislikes shopping of all types - particularly as her eyes are sensitive to fluorescent lighting - and never shops more often or for longer than is absolutely necessary. I quite like wandering round a shop, whether buying or browsing (apart from heel-spotting), so am happy enough to do the major supermarket shopping etc - which ensures that it is done 'properly' . I assume you are saying that you find Asda unreliable at recording discounted prices properly, rather than most reliable; is that so? (I cannot say I have had that bad experience with Asda - although I do find it adept at advertising 'specials' which are nowhere to be found on getting to the branch. And when did you last see any sort of discount coupon issued by Asda?) I do quite often shop there; the local branch, although not large, is quite convenient. (It was formerly a branch of Wickes; alas, no plasterboard or sand available.) Reliable reviews of consumer goods are a must. There are some (e.g. Revoo) on line, or Which? is available in the library. (Avoid those, such as typical of Argos site, which consist of little more than a purchaser saying 'I bought one last week and I like the colour ...' which says nothing about usage.) I've just been persuaded to buy a new vacuum cleaner; Which? (and others) pointed at Miele being by far the best for a standard cylinder type (borne out by our own experience) but they ain't cheap. But the optimum model for us (not the dearest of several variants, some costing £200+) was available from a retailer we know of in Brighton at £130 'collected' (£20 less than anyone else) and easily bought online and picked up a couple of weeks later when I was visiting family in the town; a result all round. I could have bought something 'satisfactory' for half the price but here I think the extra cost for proven reliability/performance was worthwhile. But it's thin gruel for the next week until our finances recover ... (either that or the butler's wages are cut).

I have all the supermarkets (except, alas, Aldi) within easy reach and absolutely no store-loyalty. We have little brand-loyalty either; we avoid most branded items unless they have demonstrably better qualities than own-brand or unbranded items. My wife and I shop wherever is cheapest at the time for certain items, balanced by overall convenience - we don't go to three or four places in the same shopping trip but would take advantage of best buys when in each shop or area. A quick (but not slavish) check on a website such as http://www.mysupermarket.co.uk/ (recommended, but not infallible) gives a good invitation as to the preferred source. And of course any sensible discount coupons (such as £5 off a £40 spend) are taken into account, with immediate needs bolstered by non-perishable extras for future use if a target has to be reached. (I pride myself on adding up the cost of items in my head as I walk round, and usually stop when I reach the 'target'. I am rarely wrong with my total at the till, unless something has been mispriced - in which case I may be prompted to query it - or can only be estimated until it is weighed.) If all this sounds like a Scrooge-like fetish, it is justified not only by the real savings that can be made but also by the useful mental (and physical!) exercise required. My wife does not have quite the same nose for, or pursuit of, a 'bargain' as I do, and sometimes deludes herself when shopping. By that I mean that she will buy something that we need (or she thinks we need) because it is 'on offer' without thinking about the real worth of what she buys as well as alternative sources that might be better/cheaper. I can't really blame her for falling for the first trick in the seller's portfolio but it would be better if she considered the bigger picture. The above considerations apply similarly to non-supermarket purchases. Brand-avoidance may be more difficult (or dangerous) but a little research pays dividends, especially when buying consumer durables - everything from an electric kettle to a range cooker, or a TV or a car. Here, ease of use/reliability/longevity are key factors and the game is then to find the best price for the preferred item, allowing for any advantages or otherwise in the seller's location, service etc. What I will not do is to spend money without thought on any non-trivial impulse buy, however flush I may be. Or buy something that may be both good and desirable in itself but which is so expensive that I could never regard it as giving a worthwhile 'payback'. So, the YSL boots at c£800 will never be mine, however much I may admire them, and however big the likely discount. (That said, if I saw a pair at £100, I would probably surrender!)

Yes, people watching can be fun. I am not a latent crossdresser (at least in any serious lifestyle sense, as distinct from a spot of experimentation) but I very often see a woman in an outfit that makes me wish I could wear it in public and with same ease as she does. And of course just female footwear can have the same effect. This can easily lead me to imagine myself in the woman's skin and wonder about her lifestyle, clothes and shoe choices and whether she likes to wear (higher) heels, other styles ... Easy but sometimes frustrating escapism.

Both are nice; do tell us how you get on with them, and size/heel heights etc.

A sensible overall view. But by 'saving money' do you mean (a) accumulating it (e.g. in a savings account) for the future; or (b) reducing expenditure by buying wisely, (e.g. getting a discount) without sacrificing the nature or quality of what you want? (I am merely curious; different people have different ideas about 'saving'.)

I hope you don't mean that she has been forcibly enlisted in the Royal Navy after being nabbed by the press gang? But, if so, did you engineer it in order to save all the extra Christmas expenditure on such trivia as her food and clothing? That's got me thinking ...

Yes indeed - my wife likes a bit of rough.

Yes, money is for spending - but spending wisely. As I often have to remind my wife (when she cadges £10 to get yet another new outfit from Millets), I will spend a pound as willingly and frequently as any man - but I like to get at least £1.25's worth for it. I was very reluctant to shell out about £110 for my MJ boots (delivered) as that seemed a great deal for just another item of footwear that would get little wear. But I realised that they were not only special, and fulfilling an unrealised ambition, but were actually good value in terms of the bespoke workmanship they represented. I don't regret it, and the £110 would merely sit in an account earning possibly 1.5% net if I hadn't spent it ... Well, that's my excuse, anyway. Must dash now ... off to post my begging letters (unstamped) and note to Santa.

If M&S employed a 'Mr Humphreys' in its branches, he (at least) would have great pleasure in measuring your inside leg so frequently. I can see the appeal of women's jeans (I've not yet tried any) but are they not usually fairly obvious, i.e. because the fly is the wrong way round? (Or is that not the usual convention?) I would wear a 36" waist, 32" inside leg (without allowance for heels) so not sure what woman's size I should try. (If you say WXOS I shall sue ..!)

Yes, a good brand and CU - the Wylex I have spare here is just the larger version of same. (Pity you cannot use it; we could have done a deal!) I also have a TS promo code (£5 off £40+ spend) valid to 21 Dec - but it isn't apparently transferrable or you could have it. (I don't need to use it as I have already bought the filler, silicone, abrasive paper etc for my wife's Xmas present. )

All three ticked in my case - and I suspect by most others!

Good luck, Freddy, if you go - whatever you wear. I'm not a Philistine, nor unduly tight-fisted (unless you ask my wife!) but I am totally unwilling to go to any sort of live performance (theatre, ballet, opera, concert, stage show or whatever) that costs more than, say, £20 for the seat - and not even then if the cost of travel etc is significant. I simply don't enjoy something of that sort enough to justify making a big dent in my pocket - as with luxury hotels or holidays and the like. More to the point, on the last few occasions I have been tempted by (or treated to) such an event, the aggravation of getting to the venue, being ripped off for any extras and finding a poor seat/view and mediocre performance has made the whole event less than worthwhile - I would have been better-off (in all senses) to watch it on the TV! That said, I do enjoy live theatre at one or two of the small provincial places which are easy to access and have a sensible price structure. And, if going alone, I am likely to emulate you and Shyheels and dress to suit my mood without making a fool of myself.