Mastermind 2026 - Heat 2

It’s early, early days in this year’s series of Mastermind, but as the last credits rolled away last night I couldn’t help thinking – there’ll be tears before bedtime over that. Why? I will explain later.

First out of the blocks  last night was Dennis Wang. Dennis has serious TV quiz form from Only Connect, University Challenge (2016 Worcester College) and Jeopardy!, First cause of controversy – there’s always a certain vocal minority who are opposed to people they see appearing across a range of quiz shows. To which my reasoned and thoughtful response is stuff the begrudgers. Due to his pedigree Dennis looked to me like the man to beat, an impression that was only confirmed by his barnstorming round on the Euros 2000- 2024. I managed to sneak one point on this round – the only point I gained on specialist all night. Dennis delivered near perfection, his speed allowing him to take a 13^th point by the end of the round. Impressive.

Naomi Killen was answering on Truman Capote. Now, I may well be proved wrong on this, but based on last week and last night I think it’s possible that contenders may be having ever so slightly shorter questions on average. If so, it’s not before time. Even allowing for that, though, 8 is a respectable SS score, so even though there were gaps in Naomi Killen’s knowledge she can be pleased with her round. However it left her five points off the lead and to all intents and purposes out of contention for the win.

Natalie Abbott was answering on the TV series Gilmore Girls. Perfunctory research tells me that the show ran for 7 seasons and 153 episodes and that, my friends, is a hell of a lot of stuff you could be asked about even without going into production details. Long running popular TV series – they really should come with a government health warning on the side. To be fair to Natalie she did know a lot about the show and powered her way to a good nine points. However, this meant that she in her turn was four points off the lead.

So to final contender David Ford. David was answering on painter L.S. Lowry. Lowry’s most characteristic work has the quality that makes you look at it and think – I can do that. Until you try it then you realise – no I can’t. I like Lowry’s work, but couldn’t copy it. As regards answering questions on the man and his work, well, I couldn’t do that either. David Ford could. He wasn’t going to equal or better Dennis’ score, but he brought himself to within two points with 11. It’s a curious thing, but I’d say a four point gap is more than twice as hard to bridge as a two point gap. I mean mathematically speaking maybe not, but it’s not just about Maths.

So realistically speaking we were left with a two-horse race. First though Naomi and Natalie duked it out for the minor placings. Naomi scored 9, and Natalie 8 to leave both with a respectable 17. Look, the majority of Mastermind contenders don’t end up getting close to a win either, and sometimes it is not all about that. Both of them undertook the challenge and acquitted themselves well. If you can achieve that, then good luck to you and thank you for taking the time and trouble to enter.

But as I said, there were only two contenders left, one of whom looked a strong favourite for the win. I mean no disrespect when I say that it was David who looked like the outsider. At the start of the round that is. By he end of a round which he knocked seven bells out of the situation was very different. David blazed his way to an outstanding round of 16. Nothing seemed to slow him down at all, even the few questions he didn’t know the answers to. 27 in this day and age is a hell of a good score.

Not that you would have bet against Dennis yet as he returned to the chair. He needed 14 and no passes for a tie and 15 for the outright win. Doable but by no means easy. And for the early part of the round he was on course. But errors crept in, and crucially you could see that they were playing on Dennis’ mind as he seemed annoyed with himself over a couple of answers. With only a couple of questions to go the tape was just a little too far away. Dennis added 12 to his total to finish with 25.

Which is the second reason for tears before bedtime. Like many people I do think it’s a shame that two such capable contenders being in the same heat means we inevitably lose one of them. People with lower scores than Dennis’ will win heats and go through to the semis. I can’t help wishing for some kind of repechage system. But I would never want to see a system whereby semi-final places are determined solely by heat scores. That’s not Mastermind. Purely my opinion and as always feel free to disagree.

So congratulations David! Superb performance. If that GK was not a flash in the pan, then you, sir, could do well this year. Best of luck in he semis.

The Details

Dennis Wang	The Euros 2000 - 2024	13	0	12	0	25	0
Naomi Killen	Truman Capote	8	2	9	4	17	6
Natalie Abbott	Gilmore Girls	9	2	8	6	17	8
David Ford	L.S. Lowry	11	0	16	0	27	0

Mastermind 2026 Heat 2 Subjects

Here’s a sneak preview of tonight’s specialist subjects. We have – the Men’s Euros 2000 – 2024, Truman Capote,  The Gilmore Girls, L.S.Lowry. I’ll be honest, purely on selfish personal terms this really does not hold out much promise for me. We can probably forget the Gilmore Girls since I have never knowingly watched an episode. Peter Gilmore in the Onedin Line (more steam, Mr. Baines), him I do remember. Although I am an admirer of his work I can’t expect much from L.S.Lowry. I’ve never read anything written by Truman Capote – I saw the Truman Show and I don’t remember him writing anything in that – so there won’t be much coming from that quarter. Which just leaves the Euros which just might allow me to scrape one or two. See how you get on.

University Challenge 2026. First Round heat 1 - Sheffield v. Warwick

The Teams

Sheffield

Rhys Lewis

Abdelrahman Elsisi

Jacob Price (Capt)

Isobel Dobbie

Warwick

Josh Howarth

Antoni Kluzowski

Chris Levesley (Capt)

Lucy Dennett

Welcome back UC! How nice to see Quizzy Mondays return in July rather than halfway through August. So let’s get cracking, then.

The first starter took a moment or two to get to the point but as soon as it mentioned the Russian Empire suppressing literature in a specific language I took a flyer with Ukrainian. Josh Howarth came in too early, allowing Sheffield the full question. Jacob Price gave the correct answer. I didn’t think I knew that much about David Lynch but I took a full house on his acting roles, while Sheffield missed out on Harry Dean Stanton. Both Jacob Price and I guessed that the term from Jamaican cuisine being called for to answer the next starter was jerk. When Amol said that the bonuses concerned some of the world’s longest continually occupied cities I guessed Damascus (kills all known germs) would be one. In fact we both took a full house. 8 correct answers on the bounce became 9 when Amol mentioned ‘artist’ and Nuremburg which was enough to give both me and Jacob Price Albrecht Durer. That was as far as my run went, as I didn’t know Polish novelist Tokarczuk. A bit of bad luck deprived Sheffield of a full house, but that’s the way it goes. In life, things aren’t clear cut – there’s probably a lot more grey than black or white. But this isn’t life, this is quizzing, and an answer is either right or wrong. (Discuss).  For the first picture starter we were shown the distribution of seats in a recent general election. The name of the majority party was missing. For me, seeing Inkhata told me it must be South Africa so we were missing the ANC. Josh Howarth was the first to work it out. Good shout. For the bonuses I knew the New Popular Front in France and the BJP in India, but didn’t get Morena which Warwick did for a timely full house. The next one was one of those starters that seem unfathomable – I like butterflies and moths but I have never heard of the Bogong Moth – which suddenly becomes crystal when one key thing is mentioned. In this case it was Mount Kosciusko. Both Jacob Price and I knew it had to be Australia where it’s found.  The mathematical groups bonuses that followed proved as impenetrable to me as you would expect. Sheffield took a couple and as we approached the 10 minute mark they were very comfortably in the driving seat, leading 85-20.

I’ll be honest, I always thought that Narbacular Drop was a move which resulted one wrestler inflicting damage to the genitalia of his opponent, but apparently according to Josh Howarth it was also the precursor to the video game Portal. Climate change and the Caribbean region provided us both with 2 bonuses. For the next starter ‘ballet’ and ‘ritualistic’ suggested Stravinsky’s Rite of Spring (which we all know was really about dinosaurs) which was also Jacob Price’s answer. This earned Sheffield a set of bonuses on stadia with a capacity over 100,000. We both answered just the one correctly. ‘Novel’ and 1870s often makes me think of Middlemarch, and when Amol mentioned the heroine Dorothea, Isobel Dobbie came in with just that answer. Sheffield took a full house on people named after ants – sort of. So to the music starter. With classical music starters I occasionally recognise the composer but hardly ever the specific piece of music. -Allo- thought I – this sounds like Mozart’s Requiem-. Bloomin was, too. Rhys Lewis also recognised it. Bonuses on other pieces written late in their respective composers’ lives brought one bonus. I like flags so I knew that the one Amol mentioned in the next starter belonged to the Marshall Islands. Neither team knew it but Sheffield lost five. Abdelrahman Elsisi knew Unicode to take back those five and more besides for the next starter. Le Corbusier – so often name checked in UC – brought 2 bonuses. Antoni Kluzowski recognised various authors of works containing the word Meditations to get Warwick moving again. Bonuses on the Clark (no relation) Medal for Natural Sciences brought us both a single bonus. At least Warwick were moving again. For the Shakespeare starter that followed Abdelrahman Elsisi provided the right play – Othello – but the question required the name of the heroine – Desdemona. I’m sure Lucy Dennett knew it anyway, but she was gratefully in to snap that one up. Looking back this was a pivotal moment in the contest, since Warwick took a full house on beds in Mythology. So instead of increasing their lead, Sheffield actually saw it reduced by 30. At the 20 minute mark the score stood at 150 – 80.

Warwick were still long odds underdogs, though those odds shortened a little when Antoni Kluzowski recogised the work of Degas for the second picture starter. Bonuses on other paintings recently exhibited as the centrepiece of exhibitions in the National Gallery brought one bonus. Lucy Dennett realised that a teacher brought to England by Catherine of Aragon was surely intended for the future Mary I. Warwick’s odds contracted again. Characters from the Lord of the Rings with names beginning with G again yielded a single bonus. However, even though Warwick were only taking bite sized chunks out of the lead, it was now down to forty. Jacob Price extended the lead again, knowing the Kepler space telescope. 2 bonuses were taken on probability. Chris Levesley knew Mickey Mouse’s predecessor – Oswald the lucky rabbit for the next starter. Castles and the kings in whose reigns they were built brought just one bonus. Lucy Dennett knew works with ‘and its discontents’ in their titles. This time they took two bouses and the gap was down to one full set. Chris Levesley came in first to identify plasma in blood. Gap down to fifteen points. Words that can also mean to move effortlessly brought two bonuses, and at this point it was anybody’s game – although all of the momentum was with Warwick. Valley of the Shadow of Death, thinking of Tennyson, had to be the Crimea War. Antoni Kluzowski thought so and it gave Warwick the lead for the first time in the contest. Bicycle brakes brought 2 bonuses. Sheffield desperately needed the next starter, but it was Lucy Dennett who took it with sprites. Don’t ask. A full house on Japanese islands meant that Sheffield needed snookers. But it was too late anyway. With the finest comeback since Lazarus, Warwick had won by 210 to 170.

Many commiserations to Sheffield. A BCR of 66 is not to be sniffed at, but once Warwick built some momentum they just couldn’t win the buzzer races. Warwick themselves had a BCR of 63, but it was their buzzing in the last third which won the game. I think Amol is probably right saying that there’s a good chance we’ll see Sheffield again in the repechage. All in all a fine show to begin the new series.

Amol Watch

Amol’s a seasoned veteran now with a couple of good seasons under his belt. Last season I applauded his not accepting answers which others might have felt were close enough and this continued with The Book of Jacob being given as wrong when the answer required was the Books of Jacob. It seems harsh, but it is the only fair way, in my opinion.

It’s aways interesting to note if and when Amol will offer his plenty of time encouragement to one of the teams. He issued it his time on almost exactly fifteen minutes, when Warwick were 100 points behind and in danger of being overwhelmed. Good shout.

Interesting Fact That I Didn’t Already Know Of The Week

The largest capacity stadium in the USA belongs to the University of Michigan

Baby Elephant Walk Moment

Your bonuses are three questions on the mathematics of groups. A mathematical group must contain what sort of element which does not produce a change when used in the group’s operation? A square matrix with this name features number ones on the main diagonal and zeroes elsewhere. Umm – would that be dum de dumdum dum dum dum dum dumdum?

Quizzy Mondays Return! Mastermind 2026 - Heat 1

I shall come clean. This time yesterday I had no idea that Quizzy Mondays were back. In fact, the first I knew of it was when I was checking out the guide at about quarter to seven. You can imagine that joy was unconfined in LAM Towers at this discovery. No Only Connect last night, but don’t worry, it’s back to full strength Quizzy Mondays from next week.

So the honour of kicking off the series fell to Lorna Frankel. She was answering on The Women’s Institute. I will be honest, I do not know a great deal about the Women’s Institute, other than the things which quizzers know. So I was pretty happy to get my single point on this round. My absurdist streak did half hope Clive would ask – what is the full name of the town where the first Women’s Institute in the UK was formed – so we could watch the round being eaten up while the answer was being given (Llanfairpwllgwyngychgogerychwyrndrobylllantysiliogogogoch – apologies, I’m sure I have parts of that wrong.) We were spared that and Lorna powered on to provide a fine lesson in preparation and handling a round with composure. She scored 12 to put herself into serious contention.

Randall Alleyne offered us a subject more to my liking, the Olympic great, Frederick Carlton Lewis. The ‘Golden Boy’ of the Los Angeles Olympics – in his time he probably frustrated as many people as he thrilled, but without doubt one of the greatest athletes of the 20th century. I know enough about the subject to recognise that this was a testing round and only picked up four. Randall did well to pick up 8, but for all of that it left him four points behind with two contenders yet to come in the first round.

Brian Williams was answering on the military career of Ulysses S. Grant. Now, as it happens I have only recently read Bruce Catton’s two volume military biography of Grant, and remarkably this furnished me with five more points. This was only the first show of the series and I’d already scored my first double figure aggregate on specialist. I don’t know if Brian Williams had read Mr. Catton’s works, but wherever he’d got his information from it was a good source as he powered through to a double figure score of his own, with 10.

The moment I saw that Kate Dapré was answering on the films of the Muppets I thought of my friend and teammate Adam. He loves the Muppets and he loves films, so I reckon he would have done very well on this. Better than me. I guessed one and that was my lot. Kate managed 9 which is a highly respectable return on a specialist round these days, but meant that she was three behind at the turn around.

So the task for Randall Alleyne was, as it always is for the first contender in the GK round, to go like billy-o and get as far in the lead as possible then hope to cling on as others take their turn in the chair. And credit to Randall he gave it a good old lash. Sometimes he had to think for half a moment before giving the answer but it paid off because it gave him a double figure round of 11 to leave him with 19. Probably not a winning score, I thought, but enough to put others into the corridor of doubt.

Kate Dapré never looked totally comfortable in her own GK round. Don’t misunderstand me, she achieved a perfectly respectable 8 points but this was only enough to leave her with 17, some 2 points off the lead. Well, if you can’t win your heat, the next target is to make sure that you have done as well as you could and I’m sure Kate can take pride from this.

Being realistic it had looked as if Brian Williams was the best placed contender to really challenge Lorna for the win. He, like Kate, produced a decent round of 8, and like Kate fell just sort of the target. At times it seemed as if this round was a bit of a struggle – there were some long pauses that probably cost him another question.

So finally Lorna. Lorna required 7 and no passes for the outright win. Sitting at home I appreciate that this looks like a relatively modest target. Well, until you’re sitting in the chair and trying it, you don’t really know. Some contenders seem to come apart in the GK round. Lorna didn’t. She perfomed really well to score 12 and earned my approval by remembering Harry Beck, creator of the London Underground tube map for the last question. If we make a comparison with last series, twenty four and no passes would have put her comfortably into the top five on my unofficial table – equaling the performance of the champ, John Robinson. But let’s not tempt fate.

Lorna, congratulations on a fine performance. Best of luck in the semis.

The Details

Lorna Frankel	The Women’s Institute	12	0	12	0	24	0
Randall Alleyne	Carl Lewis	8	1	11	0	19	1
Brian Williams	The Military Career of Ulysses S. Grant	10	0	8	1	18	1
Kate Dapré	The films of The Muppets	9	0	8	0	17	0

Officer Dibble? Don't be disgusting!

I’m sure that we’ve remarked upon the capriciousness of the English Language before. Considering its rather complex development it’s probably not all that surprising. Mind you, the particular linguistic feature I was thinking about earlier this week is not, I have learned, just confined to English. I refer to the contranym.

Contranyms are those strange words that can be used with two opposite meanings. Back in the mists of time I had a teacher who wished to explain the concept to my class – not trying to be disrespectful but he’d have been a lot better off sticking with noun, verbs and adjectives and giving up the rest as a bad job with a sizeable minority of the class.  Instead he decided to muddy the waters by using the word ‘cleave’ as an example. I mean, not many of us had ever used the word in the sense of to cut, let alone the archaic, well, frankly, even biblical meaning of cleaving unto someone else. The funny thing is that there are such better examples he could have used – dust – fast – left being just three that everyone would at least have heard of before.

You know, despite that, I can’t help being glad to have attended school back in the days when you were sometimes taught useless knowledge like this. I mean, it’s difficult to think of a context in which not knowing that such words have this property could have a seriously adverse effect on your life. Although I can imagine a situation where asking someone to cleave to you could have potentially disastrous consequences.

I’ll be honest, I do quite like using an archaic word like cleave from time to time. Let’s take the word placket, shall we? If you’re a fan of TV shows like the Great British Sewing Bee you’ll probably know that it is, today, a perfectly innocuous term meaning a type of deliberate slit in a garment. However, when Shakespeare, for example, used the word in his plays, he was not trying to give dressmaking tips. No, he was using a term for an intimate part of one’s anatomy. No names, no pack drill – you can look it up if you’re that interested. I will state now that I never called a child that I taught a placket, but it’s a word I would use when I had the odd occasion to do so. The first time I heard it in that context was in a sketch by Dick Emery. You hardly ever hear his name mentioned now, but he was a hugely popular TV comedian in the 1970s, and had a TV sketch show in which he played a range of characters. He was a product of his time, and derived humour from material that you just wouldn’t see today – if you know much about Britain in the 70s it won’t surprise you that he regularly used racist and homophobic material, as did the majority of ‘family’ entertainers of that time.

In the sketch in question Dick Emery was playing one of his stock characters, an aging vicar with prominent buck teeth. In the sketch his daughter had brought her new boyfriend home to meet Daddy. The point of the sketch was that the vicar had a huge aversion to any word or phrase that could have a slightly risque meaning. OK, quite funny. But he twist in the sketch was that the words the reverend had taught his daughter to use in their place were all archaic terms that were far, far ruder than the modern words they avoided.  Hence, instead of offering the boyfriend a mince tart, he offered him a mince placket. The vicar becomes more and more annoyed with the boyfriend. It doesn’t help that he is a bit of an English expert who knows what these terms mean. To placate the vicar he apologises for making these errors – but he calls them boobs. “STRUNTS!” – thunders the Vicar, not knowing that he is fact using an archaic term for penis.

Two other words in the sketch are pizzle and dibble, both of which also mean strunt. I knew pizzle because I had heard it used in the context of a bull’s organ. Yes, the things we learned in Oaklands Junior School could make your hair curl. But Dibble? Prior to this, my only understanding of the word was as a surname, as in Top Cat’s Officer Dibble. Did, I wonder, the writers at Hanna Barbera have any idea of the original meaning of the slang term dibble? I’m guessing not, but I will admit that the thought of the writers’ room at Hanna Barbera giggling away at the name that they’d sneaked past the censors is a pleasing one.

The Pen

So, let’s start with a bit of housekeeping. It’s five weeks since I broke my shoulder. Last Monday I had a second appointment at fracture clinic. In a nutshell the news was good. Bone is growing nicely, the shoulder is securely in place and won’t come out of place again for anything short of another accident like the one that caused it in the first place. If I’m honest I think the doctor really didn’t want me to think about work for another fortnight, but he said I could discuss an earlier return with them. So I did and I’m starting back part time tomorrow.

What a difference a couple of years makes! Over my last 8 years as a teacher I had a number of extended absences with depression. And when you get right down to it, the prospect of coming to the end of those absences and going back to work did not make me happy, as the thought of tomorrow now does. If I’m honest it always filled me with dread. Well, that was then and this is now. So, fingers crossed it goes well.

This blog post is the first thing that I have typed two handed since the accident. I’m getting more movement in my upper arm, but I’m not there yet. Well, I’m no spring chicken any more.

Being the kind of person that I am I couldn’t help wondering about the derivation of the phrase, spring chicken. Yeah, I know it sounds obvious, but actually, like many idioms, it does come down to superstition and ignorance. Apparently in the 18^th century farmers believed that a chicken born in the spring would have more tender meat than one born in the Autumn or Winter, which would have been toughened up by having to survive a British winter when tiny. Cobblers, but there you go.

One upshot of the injury was that for the first two or three weeks I found it really difficult to handwrite. I’m righthanded, yes, but not being able to hold down an answer sheet with my left hand made me come to the decision that Jess was going to have to write down our answers. And to be honest, she did it too well for my liking. Joking. But let’s be honest, one really shouldn’t underestimate the power of the penwielder in a pub quiz. The pen really is mightier than the sword, although I shouldn’t take that phrase too literally if you ever do have the misfortune to find yourself in a swordfight.

Incidentally, did you know who came up with that little pearl of wisdom? Edward Bulwer-Lyttton. Yes, that’s right, Edward Bulwer–Whothehell? Well, Bulwer-Lytton was actually one of Britain’s most popular novelists and dramatists in the immediate pre-Dickens period. He had a prodigious output, although sadly in my opinion not much of it is actually much good. I’ve tried reading several of his novels, including The Last Days of Pompeii, but I’ve never managed to finish them. Don’t take my word for it. One of the most famous phrases coined by him was “It was a dark and stormy night “, the first sentence of the dreary “Paul Clifford”. This was the reason why the annual contest for the worst opening sentence to a novel was named the Bulwer-Lytton prize.

Not that you should feel too sorry for poor old Edward. He was a pretty successful politician and was made a baron in 1866. While better remembered novelists like Dickens and Thackeray privately had no great love for Bulwer-Lytton’s writing, they found him a good friend. Supposedly it was Bulwer-Lytton who persuaded Dickens to rewrite the ending of Great Expectations to say that Pip and Estella would get together in the future. Which is actually quite a comforting thought. We can’t all expect to produce great works of Art and Literature, but at least we can try to be a good friend. Even if it was a dark and stormy night.

Two weeks in . . .

Look, there really isn’t that much that I can tell you. It’s just over a fortnight since I broke my shoulder, but my appointment at the fracture clinic isn’t until tomorrow. I’ll be honest with you, I don’t want to start talking to work about going back until after I’ve had the appointment but I am really anxious to get back and start working again. What a difference a couple of years makes.

So, June 15^th, then. My birthday, as it happens. Both Courtney Cox and Michael Laudrup were also born on 15/6/64, although as far as I know neither Mrs. Cox nor Fru Laudrup were in the same ward of Chiswick Maternity Hospital as Mrs. Clark. It is also the anniversaries of both the signing of Magna Carta and the 2007 Mastermind Grand Final. And Father’s Day. Father’s Day. Hmm. I will be honest, I did not know such a thing existed when I was little, until my friend Bill told me his dad was also born on the 15^th June, and so when his birthday fell on a Sunday Bill, being of a pragmatic and practical nature, would only need to get one card and one present. Back then in the early 70s it never seemed like as much of a deal as the big production umber that was Mother’s Day.

I’ll be honest, I did do a cursory search into the origins of this celebration, and I found very little. What there is seems to concur that the celebration was unknown prior to World War Two, and took quite a long time to gain traction afterwards. Nothing actually said that it was an invention of the greetings card companies but it certainly has nothing like the venerable lineage of Mother’s Day. Both my Nan and Mum insisted on calling Mother’s Day Mothering Sunday, despite neither of them being religious or churchgoers – the two are not always the same thing. Mothering Sunday was the religious festival whose mantle was assumed by the secular Mother’s Day in the early 20^th century. Mothering Sunday always took place on the fourth Sunday in Lent and was an official day of respite from the Lenten fast. Certainly sounds like a good idea. The purpose of the celebration was to honour one’s mother church, that is, the church in which one was baptised. Over the years this extended to honouring the Virgin Mary and then all mothers.

Well, as I said it is my birthday as well. 61. You know, I spent so many years wishing I was 60 so I could take the money and run from teaching that when I got there this time last year I just wanted to stay 60. Well, that was never going to happen. But I am still living in the moment and enjoying pretty much every second of it, shoulder notwithstanding.