The New Year's Quiz

 How was your Christmas then? Mine? Oh, fine, you know how it goes. Sadly everyone else in the house has been ill – they keep checking me every day for symptoms, but apart from an occasionally runny nose, I’ve not succumbed. It’s either teacher’s immunity, or the fact that since I had covid in 2021 it takes ages for me to completely shift a bad chest, and so maybe the antibodies from my cold a few weeks ago are still buzzing around.

So, yesterday I worked through a variety of sources I’ve been collecting for the New Year’s quiz in the rugby club, and put together the quiz. For the first quiz of the New Year we always have a quiz based on the events of the year just gone. I’ve been attending since the first quiz of 1996, which means 27 years by my calculations. I’ve written about the New Year quiz quite a bit in  the past, and I think that I should warn you now that I don’t really have anything new to say about it. After my first few years at the quiz I got extremely competitive about the New Year quiz in the club. Anne, one of my original teammates who sadly passed away a few years ago always used to work hard for the New Year quiz, learning stuff like who’d married whom, which celebrities had given their babies which names and so on. It speaks badly of me, but I didn’t want to be so badly outshone by one of my own teammates that I would learn for the quiz as well. Both Anne and I used to say that if we could only win one quiz every year, then we would want it to be the New Year quiz. Well, we never quite had so bad a year that it was the only one that we won, but for a few years we were pretty much unbeatable.

Nothing lasts forever. We started losing team members and the bloody phones started making an appearance. Around about 12 years ago it became ridiculous. Two of the teams would bring along other members who never usually played, and some of these were quite blatant in the way that they cheated with their phones. This became pretty obvious with the four part gambles. Its a tradition that the last question of each round should have four parts. A team could answer as many or as few parts as they liked. If they answered 1,2 or 3 parts, then they would get points for each correct answer, and lose nothing for a wrong one. If they tried all four, though, if they got all four right then they would get 8 points, but if they got any part wrong then they would get zero.

Thankfully that all seems to have died the death in the New Year quiz. Brian, our organiser and the best question master that the quiz has had, passed away a few years ago. Since then I’ve been QM for the New Year quiz, and I’ve enjoyed it too. Last year my team even won – they’ve got a lot to live up to now on Thursday, but I’ve every faith in them.

It isn’t the easiest thing in the world to put together, is a New Year’s quiz, so I hope that it will go okay. If not, well, it’ll be 12 months before anyone has to put up with another one.

I'd like to wish you all a Happy New Year, and thank you for your support during 2022.

LAMMY Awards 2022: 4) Award for the most enjoyable quiz-based social media content

Award for most enjoyable quiz-based social media content

Yes, it was difficult to work out what I wanted to call this one. After all, it encompasses blogs, reviews and Facebook groups. Throughout the year I’ve particularly enjoyed

Jack’s Online Writings

Weaver’s Week (UK Gameshows.com)

The Contestant Hub (Facebook)

All Things Quiz (Facebook)

Without further ado, the winner is

All Things Quiz

Yes, All Things Quiz takes a well earned LAMMY. Not just for the regular quizzes, but also I’ve really enjoyed Gareth’s excellent videos – the after-show interviews with Mastermind contenders have been something a a highlight for me. Thanks, and keep up the good work, please.

LAMMY Awards 2022: 3) Award for the best achievement in Question Mastery

 Award for the best achievement in Question Mastery

Yes, I don’t always give an award in this category. It’s even more difficult for me to do so now than it used to be back in the days when I was playing in many different quizzes throughout the year. But I have to say that this year there’s only 1 nominee, because there’s one thing that I’ve enjoyed more than anything else in any quiz I’ve played in during this year.

So, without further ado, the LAMMY award for best achievement in Question Mastery goes to :-

Dan Ayres

Yes, I know that awarding a LAMMY to my own son-in-law leaves me open to accusations of favouritism. I don’t care. He’s earned it. During 2022 Dan single-handedly resurrected the music round in the rugby club quiz, and his round on String Quartet versions of popular songs is my favourite single round of the year, not just in any quiz I’ve played in, but also in any round of quizzing that I’ve watched this year.

LAMMY Awards 2022: 2) Award for the finest performance in a broadcast quiz

Award for the Finest Performance in a Broadcast Quiz

The nominees are:-

Sarah Trevarthen – Brain of Britain

Alice Walker – Mastermind

Imperial College (Max Zeng, Fatima Sheriff, Michael Mays, Gilbert Jackson)

As is usually the case, any of the nominees would be worthy winners of the award. Stating with Imperial, they looked likely winners of the series from the early rounds of the competition. Many commentators paid particular attention to the almost superhuman Geography knowledge of Max Zeng. Yet it was the buzzing of Reading captain Michael Hutchinson that looked as if it might prevail in the final, until Imperial managed a 10 point win.

Sarah Trevarthen edged out Mastermind champion Marianne Fairthorne in a really exciting and high-quality final of Brain of Britain. This in a year which had also seen her finish runner up in Mastermind, and have a great run in Counterpoint. In fact if the award was for performance across a range of quiz shows in the year, then Sarah would have won it hands down.

I did mention that Sarah was second placed in the Mastermind Grand Final. Defeating her on that occasion was Alice Walker. Alice had looked to be a serious contender in her heat and semi, but only one of a number of very serious contenders. In the final though she carried all before her. She scored a point more than any other contender in the specialist round, then produced the round of her life in the General Knowledge.

Three very worthy nominees. Without further ado the winner is:-

Alice Walker – Mastermind 2022.

I know that me awarding a Mastermind winner for the second year in a row leaves me open to accusations of favouritism. But the award is for the performance of the year, and that’s what Alice’s Mastermind GK round was for me.

LAMMY Awards 2022: 1) The Best New Show of 2022

 Yes, it’s time to begin handing out the LAMMYs for 2022. Let’s begin with what is often the blue riband award, for the best new show of 2022. Let’s have a look at the runers and riders. In no particular order we have :-

Riddiculous

Fastest Finger First

One Question

Unlimited Win

A One and Six Zeroes

The One Percent Club

Bridge of Lies

Possibly the biggest hit of all of these new shows in terms of audience and media buzz was The One Percent Club. Not such a hit with many of the 100 contestants in each show if some of their online comments are anything to go by. I like Lee Mack, but I’m afraid that this show is a lot of things I don’t like in quiz shows. As a quiz, its pace proved to be funereal for me.

In  fact I could say similar things about A One and Six Zeroes, One Question and Unlimited Win. All of them have talented and popular hosts – respectively Dara O’Briain, Claudia Winkleman and Ant and Dec. Yet as a quiz, none of them really floated my boat at all. Guys, as a rough rule of thumb, the more decent questions you pack into your show the better your chances of winning a LAMMY.

I liked Ranvir Singh on Strictly a couple of years ago, but I have to say she didn’t quite convince me on Riddiculous. The show itself proved to be enjoyable enough, but I do think that it needs a couple of tweaks. On a show where riddles are so important, you cannot afford to have any riddles that could possibly permit an alternative answer to one on the card. I also think that the end game needs work.

Well, many years in the past there’s only been one realistic candidate to receive the LAMMY for best new shows, and indeed there have been years when I haven’t seen anything I like enough to make an award at all. Not so this year. In 2022 there have actually been two shows worthy of the award.

The first of these is Bridge of Lies. I thought that Ross Kemp did an excellent job of balancing the dreaded chatting with contestants elements, with the actual gameplay of the show. I thought that this gameplay was well conceived, and allowed great play at home potential for both serious quizzers and casual viewers at home.

The other nominee is Fastest Finger First. The prize on offer to contestants in this Millionaire spin off is a guaranteed go in the hot seat on the parent show. I wrote a glowing review of the show when it first aired, and I stick by what I said. I would far rather watch this show than the revived Millionaire. Pacing – chat/gameplay ratio – question range and level all contributed to a very good quiz.

I’m tempted to break with tradition and split the prize but I have made the decision. The LAMMY for the best new quiz show of 2022 goes to (drum roll )

Bridge of Lies

Yes, it just about pips Fastest Finger because of the originality of format. I hope that both shows will be back, and that they’ll both run and run.

The Poisoned Chalice of an Appearance on UC at Christmas

My mother-in-law has many excellent qualities. However a lively interest in quizzes is not one of them. She’s currently staying with us although she’s off back to Spain before New Year. When we watched the first of this year’s University Challenge at Christmas, as JP went through the very lengthy introduction to the team members, listing all of their admittedly very impressive achievements, Jen offered the opinion that they ought to be too good for the show. – Au contraire – I replied, or words to that effect. – You’ll be surprised how much they get wrong and how many times they don’t seem to understand the question. –

To be fair, she was, too.

I’m not trying to denigrate the great and the good who appear on the show. Far from it. You could argue that anyone accepting an invitation onto UC at Christmas is really on a hiding to nothing – and indeed JP often alludes to this in his opening or closing remarks. Think about it. In the student series, the teams have all gone through some sort of selection process – I’m sure it differs between institutions – and then had to earn selection as a team for the series. Yes, every series in the first round there tends to be at least one team who have a bit of a ‘mare, but for the most part they are competitive and do themselves and their reputations no harm by appearing on the show.

When I first started watching UC at Christmas more than ten years ago it wasn’t unusual for some of the teams to be given a ‘ringer’ that is, a champion quizzer in their line-up. Funnily enough the teams that benefitted from these selections tended to do conspicuously well. I always hoped that if Goldsmiths ever got invited on I might be that champion. Well, sadly that policy seemed to end a good ten years or so ago, and when Goldies were on a couple of years back they were a Clark free zone.

Well, there we are. I’m enjoying the current series, and trying to keep my mean comments (Can’t believe you don’t know that – how can you not know that – you stoopiiiidddd! – etc.) to a minimum. (Not succeeding very well, but at least I’m trying.)

Mastermind 2023 First Round Heat Fourteen

Good evening and welcome to the last Mastermind before Christmas. Kicking off this evening was Katherine Pathack, answering on rebellions against the Tudors. I was a bit disappointed to only manage a couple of these myself – alright, it’s a very long time since I did my A level History, but the Tudors were a significant part of the course. Katherine knew a lot more than I did – not difficult – and she managed double figures with 10. Always a mark of quality, that.

From the sublime to the – well, I’ve no doubt that some people would describe Christina Aguilera as sublime in her own way, and who am I to argue? Bhagwan Manku went at his round on this particular chanteuse with gusto and frankly it came as a surprise when he missed out on just one of the questions – up to that point this seemed to have perfect round written all over it. A terrific performance. I was surprised that I managed to get exactly the same score as I’d managed on Tudor rabellions – 2 – and all that without having had the benefit of studying for an A level on Christina Aguilera.

Stewart Holden followed on the US Space Shuttle programme. Once again, two points were forthcoming to add to my aggregate total. Well, I can’t say I ever followed the Space Shuttle thing as avidly as I did the Apollo programme. Stewart was definitely very knowledgeable, but he was taking a little longer over his answers than the other contenders and I think that this was the reason why he fell just a little bit short of double figures with 9.

This left Jonathan Evans to finish off the specialists for us with James Parkinson, he of the eponymous disease. I did manage one point on this round, but only one. Jonathan did a lot better, overhauling first Stewart and then Katherine, to finish with 11. Taking all of the contenders’ rounds into consideration it’s been several weeks since we saw all four contenders in a single show produce rounds of this quality, so this was very much a pleasure and I congratulate all four for this.

However, this still left the GK rounds to be negotiated. Stewart returned first. He wasn’t really answering more quickly than he had managed in his specialist round, but for the first minute or so he was doing so pretty accurately. However, as we so often say the GK round is a marathon and not a sprint and Stewart’s round started to run out of steam a bit in the second minute. Ideally he needed a double figure score to put those who had to come after him within the corridor of doubt, and he didn’t quite manage that. In the end he scored 8, which gave him a respectable 17.

Katharine’s round was in a way quite similar to Stewart’s in the way it played out. For the first minute she was going very well, but once the wrong answers started to crop up she found it harder going. In the end though she added 9 to her first round score to raise the bar to 19. A very respectable performance that, and at least both of the contenders yet to come were going to have to fight for it.

Jonathan Evans, it must be said, fought well. No, okay it wasn’t the best GK round we’ve seen all series, but it was a good performance – any performance in double figures nowadays is a good one. The key to this was not letting a couple of wrong answers put him off his stride – and until you’ve tried it for yourself it’s difficult to appreciate just how hard this is to do. You’d still rather have been in Bhagwan’s position, but whatever happened this was not going to be a walkover.

Now was it. In fact it was a very close run thing. Bhagwan was not putting together as good a round as Jonathan had, but then he was starting 2 points ahead of the mark from which Jonathan had done. It was a desperately close-run thing. As the line started snaking round the number he was just one point adrift AND he hadn’t passed, while Jonathan had passed once. All Bhagwan had to do was find a correct answer and he would win. Alas, he couldn’t quite do it. In the end he scored a respectable 8 to finish with a good total of 21. Good, but not good enough and so to the victor, Jonathan, went the spoils. Well played everyone, an enjoyable show.

The Details

Katherine Pathack	Rebellions against the Tudors	10	0	9	0	19	0
Bhagwan Manku	Christina Aguilera	13	0	8	0	21	0
Stewart Holden	The US Space Shuttle Programme	9	0	8	0	17	0
Jonathan Evans	James Parkinson	11	0	11	1	22	1

University Challenge - First round review/ Second round preview

Right then, so regular series University Challenge is on a break for the moment to make room for I Can’t Believe It’s Not University Challenge – or University Challenge at Christmas as the BBC call it. So this might be a convenient moment to run through the runners and riders through to the second round.

Team	For	Against	Match Total	Bonus Conversion
Durham	195	185	380	56.7%
Newcastle	195	115	310	63.3%
University College Oxford	175	110	285	48.4%
Cardiff	230	50	280	51.2%
Royal Holloway	155	110	265	62.5%
Queen’s, Belfast	165	105	270	29.4%
St. Andrews	140	120	260	50%
UCL	180 (tb)	170	350	70.3%
Christ’s, Cambridge	150	130	280	48.1%
Jesus, Cambridge	225	105	330	52.6%
Southampton	210	115	325	52.7%
Bangor	135	125	260	33.3%
Courtauld	175	160	335	53.3%
Robert Gordon	210	90	300	41%
·       Newnham	175	110	285	30.5%
·       Bristol	185	150	335	66.6%

(tb denotes that this score includes 10 points for the winning tie break starter)

(* denotes that these are the statistics for the team’s victory in their repechage play off)

There’s a lot to digest in these figures. After all, you might say that Cardiff were the highest scorers in the first round, so you might want to make them favourites. Yet their opposition only score 50, suggesting that they maybe were not that great on the buzzer, allowing Cardiff to play fast and loose with the starter. Then again their 51.2% bonus conversion rate is fine, but considerably lower than UCL, Bristol, Newcastle and Royal Holloway.

Let’s look a little more closely at UCL. They had to defeat Sheffield in a tie break and suffered a few penalties. Sheffield themselves were buzzed out of their repechage match against Newnham, so maybe, just maybe there might be a question mark against UCL’s buzzing. But it’s hard to argue against that bonus conversion rate.

Going on just the first round performances I’d like to pick out just a few teams that you might want to keep an eye on.

Durham won the highest scoring match of the first round, beating Bristol, who have also qualified for the second round. %6.7% is one of the higher bonus conversion rates.

Speaking of which, Bristol, in both their matches had a bonus conversion rate of over 55%. Jacob McLaughlin was very much a star buzzer in the repechage as well. It’s been a long time since a repechage team won the series, and of the two this year Bristol seem comfortably the better bet.

Newcastle looked a class act when they comfortably defeated the Open University.They didn’t have an out and out star buzzer in their match, but they did have good buzzing throughout the team and that’s something I like to see.

Cast a glance in the direction of Royal Holloway, if you will. A bonus conversion rate of over 60% is always worthy of praise. Like Newcastle they lacked a standout star buzzer, but again this meant that they have buzzing throught the team and that will always give you a chance f performing close to your best.

So, apologies to the 4 teams I’ve just highlighted, for as we know, the Clark tip is usually the kiss of death to any team or individual. Whatever happens, I’m looking forward to the second round as much as I always do.

Expect the Worst. . .

 . . . but hope for the best. It was the Christmas quiz on Thursday evening at the rugby club, and after my curmudgeonly post last week I found myself eating humble pie as part of the Christmas buffet.

For one thing, the trappings I moaned about in last week’s post were absent this year. No elf hats, no chocolate coins for bribing the quiz master, no Elfselfies. Now, I know what you think. You think I’m going to turn round and say that I missed them. Well, you’re wrong. I think that in this case less is most definitely more and that the evening was all the better for it. And the thing is, that when you stop trying to force jollity amongst people, then it does at least create a little space for real jollity.

That’s my feeling on the subject, anyway. On top of that, the setters took the very sensible decision to limit the number of specifically Christmas questions to one per round. At the end of each round we were given a line from the middle of a well known Christmas carol and asked to identify the carol it came from. Well, to anyone who attended Oaklands Middle School in Hanwell iin the early 70s that really wasn’t much of a chore. Our headteacher, Mr. Warden, a truly wonderful man, was Welsh and he was heavily involved in local choirs, and he saw to it that we all sang on a regular basis.

There wasn’t a handout which was probably for the best. I’ve said before on more than one occasion that I don’t really like picture handouts and prefer something more wordy and more cryptic. My son-in-law Dan feels the same way. Having said that, I don’t act as question master very often now and so when I do I usually do a picture handout because I know that lost of the players in the quiz enjoy and prefer it, even though I personally don’t.

This post is in danger of becoming a curmudgeon free zone. I’m not really sure how I feel about that. Much more of this and I’ll be ejected from the International Grumpy Old Sod Club. (I keep my membership card in my wallet, next to the one from Cheapskates Anonymous – or should I say Cheapskates notorious.)But there we are, it was a nice note on which to end the year in the club, and the next quiz will be my quiz of the year on 5^th January.

University Challenge: Repechage 2 - Bristol v. Oriel College, Oxford

The Teams

Bristol

Sam Kehler

Jacob McLaughlin

Tess Richardson (Capt.)

Alejandro Ortega

Oriel, Oxford

Thomas Ford

Jerric Chong

Tanmayee Deshprabhu (Capt.)

Katy Marchant

Okay, dearly beloved. The tale of the tape informs us that Bristol were the highest scoring runners up of the first round with 185 while Oriel scored a more modest 135 in their heat. Advantage Bristol? Not necessarily. Different questions, different opposition could possibly mean different result. Just out of interest, Thomas Ford said when introducing himself “I live in Norway, but I’m from the United States.” Norway? Hell of a commute to Oxford there, Tom.

Okay, so off we go. Jacob McLaughlin heard the words “time’s arrow” in the first starter and grasped the wrong end of the stick. He answered Kingsley Amis – which was written by son Martin Amis anyway. This allowed Oriel to hear the whole question and allowed me to earn a ridiculously early lap of honour by answering ‘entropy’. So did Jerric Chong, thus earning Oriel a set of bonuses on fallacies and biases. A bit like the judges’ scores in the last couple of series of Strictly Come Dancing. These brought a couple of correct answers. A lovely UC set on a composer gave a series of locations of compositions working backwards chronologically. Jacob McLaughlin fell into the trap of possibly going by the first – Egypt, and answering Verdi. I went by the last, Crete (Idomeneo), and answered Mozart. Nobody had that. Alejandro Ortega wiped out his team’s minus score, recognising a list of things denoted by the Greek letter rho. 2 bonuses on botany meant that their score looked a lot more healthy. Now Jacob McLaughlin found his range with the buzzer, correctly identifying the term Theatre of the Absurd for the next starter. It would not be his last of the night. Ways of walking brought Bristol two bonuses, although they might have been expected to get meander, what with the helpful mention of a river in the question. This was enough to put Bristol into the lead as we arrived at the first picture starter. Nobody could identify the world heritage site of Delphi just from its position on a map. Me nether. Jerric Chong earned the picture bonuses when he identified the type of soil that lent itself to the name of a fictional county in some of the novels of George Eliot as loam. Other places which, like Delphi, have been described as the navel of the world, brought 1 bonus. Now, with the next starter, which asked for the African empire of Mali, we had the unusual spectacle of one team member buzzing, Thomas Ford, and another team member, Jerric Chong, jumping in with the answer. If JP had not pointed it out I would not have noticed, since the camera was zooming in and cut out Mr. Chong. No points for that. Jacob McLaughlin knew that any question mentioning Impressionism and America will give you a good chance of success if you answer Mary Cassatt. The paintings of Ustad Mansur brought 10 points which were enough to see Bristol lead by 40 – 35 at just past the 10 minute mark.

I didn’t understand the next question about kinetic energy but Alejandro Ortega got the correct answer of four. This gave them the chance to take a full house on short novels. The next starter gave us several people all nicknamed The Tiger and Thomas Ford won the buzzer race to give the answer. The answers to the bonuses all began with diff – and Oriel took a full house. A fine buzz from Sam Kehler saw him identify isolate languages for the next starter. Session musicians brought a bonus, and a bit of embarrassment for Tess Richardson who misheard Motown and answered Motel instead. It can happen in the heat of the moment. The music starter followed, and Katy Marchant and I both answered ‘The Clash. The Ice age is coming – how appropriate that feels at the moment. Three more bands for which Don Letts made videos or documentaries reduced the deficit between the teams to just five points again. Now, for the next starter I did actually know that bromine is a halogen that is a red volatile liquid yuttah yuttah. Probably should have taken a lap of honour again, but what the hell. Jerric Chong took that one to give Oriel back the lead. One of a set of bonuses on the Lake District extended the lead a little. If it’s the 1920s and its about a German philosopher you’ll be right more often than wrong with Wittgenstein (whom I ‘m told was a beery swine). Thomas Ford took that one. They didn’t do much with bonuses on Eastern European architecture, but Oriel were pulling ahead. Now, for the next starter the subtitles mentioned the River Mono. No such place – it’s the Monnow. Katy Marchant zigged with Severn allowing Jacob McLaughlin to zag with Wye. The Bafta award for documentary brought one bonus. This meant that Oriel led by 110 to 100 at just after the 20-minute mark.

Jacob McLaughlin knew that Alex Haley wrote the ‘autobiography’ of Malcolm X. A swift full house on Greek letters put Bristol back in the lead. For the second picture starter Thomas Ford recognised a photo of Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs in the Battle of the Sexes. More pairs of tennis players brought them nothing, and this was sadly rather the tale of Oriel’s evening – failing to answer bonuses correctly when they needed them. Jacob McLaughlin knew that Lingala is spoken in both Kinshasa and Brazzaville for the next starter. His powerful buzzing was proving the difference between the two teams at this vital stage. Mind you, Bristol struggled with African fauna, taking just the one bonus. Still Oriel came back. Thomas Ford knew the title A Theory of Justice. Oriel managed just the one bonus on a pretty gettable set on Thomas Hardy. Jacob McLaughlin buzzed in again with the answer of the Han dynasty for the next starter and took the spoils. Which in this case were bonuses on Caribbean islands and their flags. This brought a full house which crucially meant that Oriel could not pull level with just one visit to the table. Again, the McLaughlin buzz beat Oriel to win the buzzer race, identifying Gods of Fire in various flavours. A couple of bonuses on eponymous scientific principles really put the outcome of the match beyond question. This didn’t stop Thomas Ford coming back with vena cava for the next starter. There was time for one correct answer on bonuses on Pennsylvania, but then the contest was gonged. Bristol won by 185 – 150.

It wasn’t just about Jacob McLaughlin’s buzzing, although with 7 this was impressive. Bristol converted two thirds of their bonuses – Oriel slightly less than half. Nonetheless, as JP said it was a close, exciting contest, and a pleasure to watch. Hard lines Oriel, congratulations to Bristol.

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

A language unrelated to any other language, thus the only member of its language family, is a language isolate.