Monday, 20 August 2012

University Challenge - Round 1 - Heat 3 - Observations

Durham v. Strathclyde

I think that I should warn you that if you´re expecting a full review of tonight´s show you are going to be rather disappointed. I´m afraid that my resources here are a little limited this far away from LAM Towers. It was as much as I could do to persuade everyone to allow me tonight´s fix, let alone with putting on the subtitles and demanding absolute silence for me to take notes as we go along. Still, nil desperandum. Both Jack and Daniel usually post full reviews on their own blogs, so you might well want to follow the links in my recommended section.

So as I say, no review as such, but a few observations on the show if I may. Firstly many congratulations to Durham. The last few minutes notwithstanding they are the first team I´ve seen this series where I wasn´t thinking to myself about the gaps in their knowledge that they showed. Yes, I´ve often said that first round form is unreliable, and I stick by this, but the fact is that they seem to be a well balanced team, quick on the buzzer, with firepower throughout the whole team. They cover a lot of ground between them. Early days yet, but I think that they can go further.

I´m glad that Strathclyde came back so strongly in the last few minutes. They were certainly blitzed by Durham´s lightning start, and then a wrong early buzz landed them with a minus score which took them a relatively long time to get back. I think it was a case of being forced into their shells by these circumstances, and so it´s nice that they did manage to find their form, and show that they were a team with knowledge who were worth their place in the series. Low scores unfortunately attract a disproportionate amount of ill informed comment, and I hope that Strathclyde´s late rally will spare them this.

8 comments:

Jack said...

Thoroughly agree with what you say Dave. Durham were certainly a strong team who must be taken seriously later on in the series. Shame they took their foot off the pedal in the final minutes; if they hadn't, maybe they could've come close to their predecessors' first round score from last year.

Strathclyde did very well to list themselves up to respectability in those closing minutes, though. It's no more than they deserved.

The stats: Michael Doroszenko's late run saw him get three starters for Strathclyde; his team answered 6/15 bonuses with two penalties. Philip Ferry answered four for Durham (his colleagues all got at least two), as the team scored a very impressive 26/36 bonuses with two penalties.

True to say, it's not been a very lively start to the series, expect maybe the second match. Hopefully, things will pick up next week, with Queen Mary, London, and Jesus College, Oxford.

Welshguy said...

Which one is Daniel's blog?

DanielFullard said...

Due to the nature of the match I have not done a full report this week. Well done Durham...where I graduated from!

Londinius said...

Hi Everyone

Thanks for the stats, Jack. I´m interested that you mention Michael Doroszenko - talk abotu a game of two halves. He seemed so phased by the experience at the start of the show that his first couple of answers didn´t actually answer the question as asked - a classic case of nerves there, but then in the last 10 minutes he was superb, almost singlehandedly hauling his team to respectability.

Hi Welshguy

Daniel´s blog is The Quiz Addict (TQA) which is in my links section. Where are you based, do you mind me asking - in South Wales by any chance ?

Hi Daniel

I applied to Durham many moons ago, because it was one of only three univeristies in England at the time where you could study a straight English Language degree. They wouldn´t have me. Still wish them good luck, though.

Londinius said...

AH, I´ve just checked out your profile, Welshguy and I see you´re in Bangor. Lovely place.

Welshguy said...

Thanks, I will check out The Quiz Addict.

Our match is on 24th September ;)

joe said...

Strathclyde fielded an all-postgraduate team (average age 25) whilst Durham's were all undergraduates. And still they were thrashed!

It had to be said. :)

Londinius said...

Hi Joe,

I agree that it needed to be said in as much as it proves that the view which I´ve heard on a number of occasions, that a team with older or postgraduate students has an advantage , isn´t necessarily true. It´s a valid contribution to that debate.

But I wouldn´t like to see this fact being used to make Strathclyde seem like a worse team , or to beat them up over their performance. Given the option I´m sure that Strathclyde would have liked to have done a bit better, and scored more highly than they did. But it didn´t happen and that´s that - they were beaten by a better team. No shame in that.