Right, then, let’s begin with the
first heat of this year’s Mastermind. For the first time this season,
Mastermind has been produced by an independent production company – I noticed
the names Hindsight and the more well known Hat Trick at the end of the show.
So the big question, especially considering the document the BBC put out this
time last year inviting tenders, was what was the new-look Mastermind going to
turn out like?
Well, I will admit that I was worried,
but actually reassured by the end of the show. Yes, there were some design
changes. The font being used is bolder, and somewhat harsher and more serious.
At the start of the show John’s podium and the chair podium are highlighted in
white circles, and roundels with a large white M glow on the walls. However if
anything this reflected what appears to be a more back to basics approach. The
innovations of last year have been shown the door. Contenders once again sit in
a row by the side of the chair, and the portal of portent is no more. Frankly, I
can’t see it being missed. It also means there’s none of this nonsense about
not telling the contenders what each one has scored. All to the good. A smaller
cosmetic change is that the blue line of death is no more. Instead it’s more
like the white filling of the border is sucked out of it as the last fanfare
plays.
It’s far too early to tell if the
change I most wanted to see is going to happen in this series, though. Put in
most basic terms, and I apologise if this upsets anyone, last year’s series saw
too many low scoring contenders in the first round. There is nothing in the
least bit entertaining seeing a contender being way, way out of their depth,
and struggling their way through a round, and I felt that a number of last year’s
contenders should have been saved from themselves.
Thankfully, that wasn’t the case for
any of the contenders in this first heat. Kicking off the series was David
Gerrard, answering on the History and Geography of the Lake District. This was
one of three specialist subjects on this particular heat where my knowledge was
extremely limited, and only general knowledge brought me a couple of points.
David, on the other hand, took a fine 12 points and no passes, and I’ll be
honest, judging by this first show, the question lengths seem to have slightly
extended again – so much so that 12 looks like a mighty good score, and I would
imagine 15 to be impossible.
The only subject that I really knew
anything about in this show was The Novels of Sue Townsend, offered to us by
Ned Pendleton, from Only Connect’s Road Trippers, and then I only know most of
the Adrian Mole books. Still, that was enough to bring me 5 and save me from
total specialist embarrassment in this heat. Ned, again, was a well prepared
contender who knew his stuff, and also scored a very fine 12 and no passes.
Doctor Lucy Reynolds gave us the life
and career of Dorothy Hodgkin. Now, I know enough about her that whenever a UC
question contains the words “X Ray crystallography” and “Nobel Prize” I answer
with her name. That’s about it, though. For the third time in a row, though, we
had a very well prepared contender, who also scored 12 and no passes. What a
good show so far.
Last to go in the specialist round
was Emma Laslett. Emma last passed this way in the 2014 series, where she won
her first round heat with a very high score, and lost out to 2018 champion
Brian Chesney in the semi final. Emma is
by now an experienced TV quiz hand, and experience counts for a lot in this game.
She couldn’t take an outright lead at this stage, but she too scored 12 and no
passes on Stephen King’s “The Dark Tower “ series.
I don’t ask a lot. Give me 4
contenders who have all prepared thoroughly on their specialists, thus showing
the chair the respect it deserves, and I’m happy. I’m even happier if they can
all manage to put up a decent show on GK, but that remained to be seen.
David Gerrard certainly did that.
Okay, 9 might sound a wee bit modest, not being in double figures, but I felt
he gave his round a good old lash. If you end with a score in the 20s you have
absolutely nothing to be ashamed of. Would it be a winning score, though? I
somehow doubted it.
With about 30 seconds to go, maybe
even a little more, Ned Pendleton was on 21 and cruising, and a score of around
25 looked highly likely. However the last5 or 6 questions just were not to his
liking, and he only managed to add one more point to the total. Two rounds in
double figures, that’s good quizzing, but again, I didn’t quite see it being a
winning score.
Lucy Reynolds put on another good
performance, but a number of the questions she missed were the sort of
questions the real challengers for the title would be able to answer correctly.
For a while it looked as if she would maybe just equal Ned’s total, but a let
spurt saw her just edge over the line with 11 to take the target to 23. That’s
a good performance, and I say this because if you can’t blast the opposition away,
the next best thing that you can do is score enough points to put them into the
corridor of doubt.
If there was any doubt in Emma
Laslett’s mind, though, she didn’t show it. In her previous first round in 2014
Emma scored 29, and I would say that the 15 she scored to earn 27 overall was a
performance of similar stature, bearing in mind the miserly amount of questions
the contenders are being given in their specialist rounds. It was by far the
best round of the day, and is the benchmark against which contenders in
forthcoming heats will have to be measured.
So John wrapped up proceedings, and
then we got the real innovation for this series, a piece to camera by the
winner, in this case Emma. Well, I’ve nothing against that per se, and coming
at the end you can watch or not watch as the fancy takes you. Overall then,
well, I have to say I found this show reassuring. That BBC document last year
invited visions of viewers being invited to play along interactively at home,
and other horrors, which thankfully we were spared. A cautious thumbs up to the
latest revamp of the show.
The Details
David Gerrard
|
History and Geography of the Lake
District
|
12
|
0
|
9
|
0
|
21
|
0
|
Ned Pendleton
|
The Novels of Sue Townsend
|
12
|
0
|
10
|
0
|
22
|
0
|
Lucy Reynolds
|
The life and career of Dorothy Hodgkin
|
12
|
0
|
11
|
0
|
23
|
0
|
Emma Laslett
|
Stephen King’s The Dark Tower series
|
12
|
0
|
15
|
0
|
27
|
0
|
15 comments:
You’ve missed the one huge “innovation”: no repechage slots. Only four contestants in each semi-final.
Hi Dan,
Ah, the reason why I didn't mention it was because I didn't know! Either they didn't mention it or it went in one ear and out of the other. Hmmm, not sure that I like that. Although if they'd had repechage slots in 2006, I'd have been in the semi finals in a series in which there is no chance I could have won it, so it all worked out okay for me.
I’ve been told by one of this year’s contenders (who came second)
As I said, I don't really like that. You might be the joint highest scorer in all of the first round heats, but if you have one pass and the other contender has none, then you're out. I know that this is the nature of knockout competitions, but still.
I don't mind the show's new look, it brings the show back towards its original look having veered away from it somewhat in prior series, and, apart from no highest scoring runners-up, the format hasn't changed. So far, it's a yes from me.
This is not the first time that all 4 contenders have been tied on points after the SS round - both a heat in July 2004 and the final SF in the 2006 series saw all 4 contenders score 11 in the first round.
Yes, I had an audition for the current series. I appeared to be a bit of an afterthought from their side, as I had a long journey at my own expense to get there very late in the audition cycle. I also heard that they were returning to the old format after the BBC Studios experiments of the past few years. Otherwise, same old story; old, white, male: don't bother applying, no matter how good a quizzer you are.
Hope you had a good holiday, and very glad to have the blog back!
I had a question about this episode – as someone who took part in Mastermind during the only year I've ever spent in the UK, I was always interested in what was considered an easy or difficult question (since unlike on, say, University Challenge, where all questions are supposed to be of roughly equal difficulty, Mastermind intentionally tries to have a range). I'm fascinated by what, within a given quizzing culture, is assumed to be common knowledge.
Emma, who on considerable evidence is a very strong quizzer, was asked to identify the political party that (among other things) currently rules Israel. She couldn't. Now this, to me, is a very easy question, a sitter – I have no particular knowledge of Israel, and have never been, but in India I'd expect any good quizzer to get that.
In UK quizzing, is that sort of world-affairs question something that is *outside* the bounds of common knowledge? And thus trickier?
Not really, no.
At the risk of being pedantic, Emma didn't win her heat in 2014, because I did. 29 points was only good enough for second (and third) and with no highest loser slots, would have resulted in her being eliminated.
Come to think about it, that was 2012, I think, but I didn't think Emma had been on again since.
Oops - apologies for inaccuracies, Neil. No offense intended. Keshava, no, I would expect a good quizzer to know Likud, but hey, you're under pressure, and sometimes things you know well just won't come out. All of us have a few things which are common knowledge to other good quizzers which for some reason just don't stick.
I reckon it was 2013/14, Neil. I remember it well.
Yes, I thought you might remember it, Dan, and you are, of course, correct. I am now fairly certain that it was recorded in 2013 but may not have been shown until 2014.
According to our very own Life After Mastermind, it was heat 23 of 24, broadcast in February 2014 and presumably recorded in summer 2013.
Post a Comment