University Challenge 2022 Semi Final - Reading v. Edinburgh

The Teams

Reading

Sylvian Jesudoss

Margaret Ounsley

Michael Hutchinson (capt.)

Kira Bishop

Edinburgh

Ben Russell Jones

Lewis Thomas

Rishi Sundar (capt.)

Niall Karunartne

Last night was going to be the end of a long road for one of two teams who have provided much to enjoy during this year’s series. On paper, Edinburgh were unbeaten, while Reading lost one of their quarter finals. However, the fact is that Reading only lost to the might of Imperial, whom Edinburgh had not had to face. Add this to the fact that Reading were packing the buzzer power of the Michael Hutchinson and Margaret Ounsley combination, and it would have been a brave person who confidently predicted the outcome of this one.

I had the first starter – ‘Oxford on the surface but Liverpool below’ which clearly pointed to William Gladstone. Michael Hutchinson went for his shooting irons but was beaten in the race by Lewis Thomas. People with the surname Smith brought 2 bonuses. One of the answers was William ‘Strata’ Smith – I thought he created Charisma Records and managed Genesis. Michael Hutchinson took his first starter, knowing that a series of events all took place in or either side of 1904. The prehistoric Botai Culture – no, me neither – brought two bonuses. Another fine buzz from Lewis Thomas identified the word oblate for the next starter. The measurement of interspecies intelligence promised but little for the bonuses, I actually managed a couple, but Edinburgh just missed out on any. So to the picture round, and a map showing the trajectory of a space probe. Respect to Rishi Sundar for recognising Cassini-Huygens. Respect to the whole Edinburgh team for getting a full house on three more of the same. Michael Hutchinson, wary of letting Edinburgh stretch their lead, came in with a good buzz to identify Buck Mulligan from “Ulysses”. Two bonuses on sculptor Dame Elizabeth Frink meant that at the 10 minute mark, Edinburgh had a slim lead of 55 – 40.

I was surprised that neither of the teams managed to add up the number of psalms in the Bible, the number of Shakespeare sonnets and the number of tales in the Decameron to the nearest 100. Michael Hutchinson knew that Chess960 has another name which concatenates Random with Fischer. Bonuses on films scored by Mica Levi brought them the one bonus they needed to level the scores. Nobody knew that Zaragoza is the capital city of Aragon. Edinburgh, in the shape of Ben Russell Jones, struck back when he recognised a description of Henry James’ The Wings of the Dove. Some stuff I didn’t understand about matrices and determinants followed. They made enough sense for Edinburgh to bring them two correct answers. Margaret Ounsley, as she’s done throughout the series, popped up to correctly answer a starter which caused furrowed brows among all the other players, knowing the Trial of the Pyx. Bonuses on the poetry of John Keats sounded good, but we both only picked up two, missing out on woe-begone. This again levelled the scores. With the music starter we heard a song which sounded like Madonna’s voice from the 80s, but not any song that I knew. I think Margaret Ounsley felt the same, as she seemed surprised when JP confirmed that her answer of Madonna was right. More moments commemorated in an exhibition that defined New York’s music scene in the 80s included Kid Creole and the Coconuts singing the happiest song ever written about telling a child that you are not their biological parent. I knew that one, and the Laurie Anderson O Superman, which was the only one Reading managed. However, they were now in the lead for the first time in the match. Nobody recognised a description of the larch for the next starter. Michael Hutchinson came in too early for the next starter and lost five, allowing Ben Russell Jones to correctly answer that ‘The Assyrian came down’ referred specifically to Sennacherib. My early obsession with dinosaurs meant that I knew that saurischia and ornithischia are respectively lizard hipped and bird hipped dinosaurs – well they were, anyway. Yeah, what the hell, I did award myself a lap of honour for that one. Come to think of it I took a full house on that set. Unlike Edinburgh, who missed out on bonus just when they needed them most. Which meant that the teams were tied on 85 at the 20 minute mark. Altogether now – squeaky bum time!

Nobody knew the physicists Burbidge and Burbidge for the next starter. The Hutchinson quick draw won the buzzer race to identify ancient Egypt as the country divided into administrative districts called Nomes. Garden nomes? Travesti, that is, trouser roles in opera, brought a full house at exactly the right time. For the second picture starter Michael Hutchinson was first to buzz in to identify a photo showing a production of Six Characters in Search of an Author. Images from three other theatre of the absurd works brought two bonuses. For the first time this gave Reading a lead that could not be wiped out in just one visit to the table. If you concatenate the second letters of the symbols for lead, gold, tin and silver you get the word bung. Rishi Sundar played a captain’s innings to take that one. They could have done with a full house, but only took 1 bonus, meaning that they were still two scores away. Rishi Sundar tried for a double on a quote from Shakespeare but zigged with Lear while Margaret Ounsley zagged with Othello. Revolutions of the 21^st century meant that Reading’s lead extended to 5. Crucially, there just didn’t seem to be enough time left for Edinburgh to take the two full houses they needed. Lewis Thomas did take the next starter, knowing that Austria was the next country clockwise in a list of those bordering Slovakia, but they didn’t get the kindly set of bonuses they needed, getting ballet for their pains. They reduced the gap to 30, but it was all too little too late. We were gonged during the next starter. Reading won by 145 to 115.

It will be little consolation to Edinburgh, but that was an excellent match between quality teams, worthy of a semi-final. As for the final – well, Reading lost their quarter final to Imperial, but it has happened before that a team has beaten the same team that beat them in the quarters when facing them in the finals. Whatever the case, there’s good buzzing in both teams, so we should be in for a fine final.

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

Pyx – as in the trial of the – means a small box.

Mastermind 2022: Semi Final 5

 First Round Heats

Martin McCann	La Vuelta a España	10	0	12	0	22	0
Sarah Trevarthen	Rocky Horror	13	0	15	0	28	0
Dom Walker	The Life and Works of John Clare	12	0	12	0	24	0
Rachael Neiman-Wiseman	Kate Bush	11	0	12	0	23	0

Well, dearly beloved, last week we saw the highest scoring contender from the heats, Anthony Fish, duly book his place in the final with a fair degree of comfort, it must be acknowledged. Last night saw the second highest scorer from the heats, Sarah Trevarthen, try to emulate his performance. Standing in her way were three contenders whose performances in the first round heats were separated by a mere 2 points. On paper, this looked cut and dried.

Of course, it wasn’t. Last week Anthony’s task was made easier by his three fellow contenders not being able to whack in the kind of performances in specialist that would at least give them a reasonable chance. Kicking off last night with Irish Involvement in the Spanish Civil War, Martin McCann whacked in an 11-point round – incidentally a point more than he managed on specialist in his heat. Judging by the previous semis this series, a perfect performance would only net you 14 or at most 15 points. This suggested that barring something exceptional, Martin would be in contention at the turnaround.

Sarah too matched her specialist performance from the heats. Back then she was answering on Rocky Horror, whereas last night she answered on Pulp. Both times she scored 13. I like Pulp, but it turns out I know next to nothing about them, as I failed to score any points on her rounds. Even on Martin’s round I scored a point – Guernica, since you’re asking. As I’ve said, 13 is very close to optimal performance. However, the fact that Sarah was only 2 points ahead of Martin kept the interest going in the heat.

For the third round in a row, the contender – Dom Walker in this case - repeated his specialist performance from the first round. Then he scored 12 on the poet John Clare. Last night he repeated that score on my favourite round of the night, Brian Clough. 8 points took me to the brink of double figures, and you can trust me, that doesn’t mean that Dom got an ‘easy’ round, because he didn’t. If you put the hard work into your preparation, then that’s what makes a round look easy.

Last to go was our very own Rachael Neiman-Wiseman. Look, I won’t lie about it. I always try to give every contender a fair crack of the whip, and most of the time I’m non-partisan. Well, I’m sorry, but last night it was a case of stuff that for a game of soldiers. Rachael has been this way before, and I was crossing everything that she’d be able to make it all the way this time. Well, Rachael was the only one of last night’s contenders to improve on her first-round heat specialist score. Back then she scored 11 on Kate Bush. Last night Rachael scored 12 on my second favourite subject of the night, The Harry Potter novels. Incidentally this subject is one that more people put on their applications forms than almost any other – the same is true of Fawlty Towers and Father Ted. Every few series they let someone take it – in this series Rachael got the nod. So, not in the lead at half time, but poised just one point behind, right on the leader’s shoulder.

All contenders were still very much in with a chance with only two points separating all of them after the specialist rounds. Martin returned to the chair, and delivered a battling 11 points. This was just one point down from his performance in the heats. However, without wishing to disparage anyone, the opposition in the semis is tougher than the opposition he faced in the first round. 22, I reckoned, was highly respectable, but surely at least one of these players would beat the score.

Dom Walker certainly gave an air of confidence as he answered the questions in his round without passing. He did well and scored 11, but I couldn’t help feeling that he’d left the door ajar for both Rachael and Sarah.

Rachael returned next. We’ve seen in her previous appearances and appearances on other shows that the target of 13 for an outright lead is within her capabilities. And at the start, she seemed very much on target for this. Oh, but come the 5th or 6^th question and she faltered. I thought things were not quite right when she asked for a repeat and had to endure some wobbles after that until she regained composure and momentum in the second half of the round. Vital time had been lost, and sadly she only managed to score 10, and agonisingly fell a point short of the target.

So to Sarah Trevarthen. She’s looked a potential champion in her GK round in the heats, scoring 15. She didn’t manage quite such an outstanding round this time round. Too many of the questions seemed to be going begging, but the finishing line was coming closer, and, with the last question on Yeats’ Lake Isle of Innisfree, she clamed the 10^th point she needed to take her to 23. Her reward? Well, since both she and Dom had scored 23 and no passes this meant a tie break. The result – well, Sarah won the tie break, 4 – 2.

Very hard lines to Dom. You can’t get much closer to a semi final place than that, sir. But congratulations to Sarah, who kept her head well in the tie break to find the answers that she needed. Only one semi final left now, and the Grand Final will soon be upon us.

The Details

Martin McCann	Irish Involvement in the Spanish Civil War	11	0	11	0	22	0
Sarah Trevarthen	Pulp	13	0	10	0	23	0	4
Dom Walker	Brian Clough	12	0	11	0	23	0	2
Rachael Neiman-Wiseman	The Harry Potter Novels	12	0	10	0	22	0

I guess you should never say never

I am officially a man of straw. I posted this on the blog on 2th October last year –

“My son Mike played in a quiz in Coity in Bridgend last Tuesday. His team came second, and he told me that when they had a chat with the team who won, my name reared its ugly head. I’m not exactly sure how – but it did, and the other team’s reaction was words to the effect of ‘Oh God, he’s not going to start coming here, is he?” According to Mike they calmed down a bit and seemed mollified when Mike told them that I hadn’t been invited, and even if I had I probably wouldn’t come because I only go to one quiz anymore, and I’d only started going back to that one recently. Mike reckoned that they’d been part of the Bridgend Quiz League during the years I’d played from 2010-16. Their argument went something like this – “This is just a nice friendly quiz, and nobody takes it that seriously.” Then it went something like this – “If he came we’d never have a chance of winning.” Honestly, I’m not making this up or embellishing it to big myself up, this is what they actually said.

You know, I have a nasty little metaphorical quiz devil that pops up on my shoulder sometimes and whispers suggestions in my ear. Nowadays I rarely listen to it, but there was a time when, If I’d been told something like this, then I would have made a point of going to the quiz the next time it was on. Yes, I’d have justified it to myself with the observation that there was a disconnect between their two statements and that if nobody takes it that seriously then you wouldn’t care if you don’t win. There was a time when I’d have said that if winning matters that much to you, then start learning stuff, make yourself a better player and increase your chances that way, rather than just hoping that a better team never turn up. But that was then. Now, I can honestly say that I hope they enjoy the quiz, and I promise that I won’t be there.”

I had a phonecall last week. All of Mike’s team were unable to play on Tuesday, and would I like to come and play? I did think about before agreeing. However it was guaranteed that I would be home by bedtime – absolute latest being 10:30 on a school night. And it was going to be a one-off, Mike’s own team coming back to play next week. So what the hell?

So it was a team made up entirely of members of my family – Mike, me, son-in-law Dan and daughters Zara and Jess. It wasn’t bad at all, either, 6 rounds of 10 questions, and a picture handout. Each round had a linking theme I think, and we came a cropper on ‘the Queen in from 2000 to 2012’ I think. Thankfully I think all of the other teams must have come a cropper on that round too. I think that with in the news questions, they have a very limited shelf life. Just because something is newsworthy now, it doesn’t mean that it will be at all remembered 10 or more years later.

Yeah, alright, we won, pretty comfortably. Thankfully the Bridgend league players didn’t get upset because they weren’t there. So I think I’ll get away with it as a one off.

Time was when I would go to three quizzes a week on schoolday evenings, an even do a fourth if I could find one. Not now. Granted there was parents evening in school on Monday. To put that into context, imagine doing a full day’s work. Then having a 20 minute break, then starting again and doing another three hours work on top of that. After Monday I was exhausted at work for the rest of the week, and so going out on Tuesday wasn’t the smartest decision that I’ve ever made. By my reckoning I have a good 2 and a half years left before I can think about finishing, and so while I’m still teaching I can’t see me regularly doing more than just the one quiz a week.

The History of Mastermind : Part 1: The Early Years

Do you know what’s special about the 11^th September 2022? There’s no reason why you should. But this date will be the 50^th Anniversary of the broadcast of the first ever edition of Mastermind. Now, I don’t know if the BBC have anything particular planned to celebrate this landmark, in the way that they did with University Challenge when that particular quiz institution reached the half century milestone. I can’t help thinking that the Beeb are probably more concerned about celebrating their centenary. 

There’s just under half a year until September, but in TV terms that’s not a huge amount of time. So if there was any kind of commemorative show being planned featuring all the champs who are still with us, then I would have expected to have been sounded out about it by now. Well, fair enough, ‘tis what it is. I do hope they mark the anniversary in some way, though. 

I’m going to write a few posts about the history of the show over the next few weeks. I state now right from the start that most of what I know about the first 25 years of the show, the 1972-1997 era is taken from information in Magnus Magnusson’s own history of the show “I’ve Started So I’ll Finish”. If you have any interest in the show at all, and you haven’t already read it, I can recommend it most highly.

---------------------------------------------------------- 

As Magnus explains, “Mastermind” was born out of producer Bill Wright’s desire to create a challenging quiz that exploited the potential of the televisual medium. Before he created Mastermind he already had some serious form in the TV quiz stakes. He’d produced the popular “Quizball”, which older readers might remember fondly. He was also responsible for a television version of the evergreen Brain of Britain. 

Bill Wright was in the RAF during world war II, and he was shot down and interrogated by the Gestapo. He is supposed to have woken up one night, having had the eureka moment of realising that he could use this horrific experience as the inspiration for the new quiz show he wanted to create. 

Bill Wright’s original idea had been to have contenders just answer a round on their specialist subject. When it was suggested to him to include a general knowledge round as well, then the basic format of Mastermind was born. I can’t help wondering how long it would have lasted if contenders had only had to answer on their specialisms- the potential for viewers to play along at home would have been much less, I feel. 

I think it’s pretty well known that Magnus was not an instant choice for the role of host and question master. The choice was between Magnus and a respected journalist and broadcaster called Alan Watson. Both of them made pilot shows, but Magnus’ must have been the more successful, since he was given the job. And for those of us old enough to fondly remember much of the first 25 years of the show, it’s inconceivable that anybody else could have presented it. He became synonymous with the show. It’s sad that I never actually got to meet Magnus. By all account he was a wonderful man, with a deep and abiding love for the show that he was so much a part of, and a deep affection for and interest in the contenders who submitted to his inquisition.

The format of the show is so strong that despite small scale tinkering over the years, I reckon that even if you’d only ever watched the show in the 21^st century you’d recognise an edition from the 1970s as being essentially the same show. The first series, in 1972, had 11 heats of 4 contenders in each. There were three semi-finals, and only the winners of the semis went through to the final. In all honesty I don’t know if there were any runner up places in the semis in this first series – the maths seems to argue against it, but I’m willing to be corrected on this one. There were definitely repechage places in the semis in the 1973 series, as winner that year, Patricia Owen, had one of them. However, Patricia was our second winner, while our first was Nancy Wilkinson. The 1972 final was a bit of an oddity, featuring only 3 finalists. The specialist rounds were two and a half minutes long, while the GK rounds were a whopping 3 minutes long. With the result that in Nancy Wilkinson’s round they ran out of questions! You couldn’t make it up, and I’m not. More questions were hastily written, and the rest is history.

Mastermind might well have become ancient history, if it weren’t for a bit of good fortune in 1973. The first series was shown late on a Sunday evening, although an audience of 6 million for the final hinted that it had the potential to appeal to a mass audience. The following year a smutty sitcom starring Leslie Phillips was shifted from its pre-watershed slot due to pressure from the likes of Mary ‘Don’t Get Me Started’ Whitehouse. In a bit of a bind over what to replace it with, the Beeb opted to put the fledgling quiz show into this slot, and within a relatively short space of time a national institution was born.

The first three winners of the show were all women – Nancy Wilkinson, Patricia Owen and Elizabeth Horrocks. Two were lecturers, and Elizabeth was a teacher. I’m sorry to say that Nancy had passed away before the 2010 champions series, but both Patricia and Elizabeth took part and it was a privilege to meet them. Our first male winner was John Hart, also an educator. He was a house master at Malvern College. I believe that he has since passed away, and he did not take part in the 2010 series.

I first remember watching the show when I was 10, for Elizabeth’s final in 1974. Incidentally, this final featured the contender Magnus called ‘the best champion we never had’, Susan Reynolds. Having greatly impressed in both heat and semi, the then 19 year old student suffered a bizarre accident a short while before the final, and was not herself at all, coming third.

It’s probably fair to say that Mastermind had the reputation of being a show that would only be won by academics and civil servants during the 70s. As well as Nancy, Patricia, Elizabeth and John, 1978 winner Rosemary James was a teacher, while 1979 winner Philip Jenkins, Port Talbot’s first champion, was a graduate student. 1976 winner Roger Pritchard was a civil servant, and also a former Brain of Britain champion, while 1977’s silver jubilee series was won by retired ambassador Sir David Hunt. However, 1980 was just around the corner, and this series would bring a champion who is probably the best remembered of them all, and he would blow this image out of the water.

The format of the show throughout the 70s also ruled that contenders should return to the chair in the same order as had been the case for the GK round. In practice this could mean that the second round lacked drama, since the first person back to the chair might be so far in front that the other three had no chance of catching them.

New Show- Bridge of Lies

 It isn’t really that difficult to make a decent, quite watchable quiz game show. However, making a good quiz game show, well, that’s a different story. I’m delighted to say that, in BBC1’s new “Bridge of Lies”, I think that they’ve done just that.

I saw the contestant calls for this one on the Contestant Hub on Facebook, but never thought about applying myself. So I did know a tiny bit about it before I watched it for the first time. Like many good quiz games show, the mechanics of “Bridge of Lies”are relatively simple. Like ITV’s Tenable, this is a non-adversarial show, whereby a team competes to try to win cash, and then earn the right to take it away with them. In order to do this they have to cross a giant board. The board is filled with circles. The aim of the game is to cross the circles, building up a bridge of them across to the other end. So our host, Ross Kemp, announces a category. The team consists of  people, one of whom they must nominate to try to cross the board. Then Ross explains the specifics of the round. So, for example, the general category might be Harry Potter, while the specific requirement is to find the names of actors who have appeared in at least one of the Harry Potter films. The two nearest circles to the bottom of the board light up with actors names. At least 1 will be true, the other might be true or might be a lie. The contestant must step onto a true circle. This then reveals more circles, and basically, the idea is to keep stepping on true circles. Once the contestant has stepped on 3 lies in the game, then he or she is out. Making things a little harder is the fact that a contestant only has five minutes in which to cross the board.

The team does have one lifeline. If they think one of the first three of them is not going to cross the board successfully, they can push their panic button. This means that team member goes into the final, with the amount of money they have won at that point the button is pushed. The team member doesn’t know if the button has been pushed until they complete their bridge, or until they step on their third lie.

Those who complete their bridge go on to play in the final. This time the board consist of lines of circles with ‘facts’ – only one of which is correct. The first team member steps forward. If they step on the only true fact, they play on to the next line. The moment they step on a wrong’un, they’re out and the next player takes over. Run out of players and you leave with nothing, and I’m afraid that’s what has happened on every show I’ve seen so far.

One of the strengths of Bridge of Lies is hat the game play and questions are strong enough that you don’t need the host to over-egg the pudding. Ross Kemp gets it pretty much spot on, I’d say. I did worry that we were going to get another cockney-geezer-fest along the lines of Danny Dyer’s The Wawl, but no. And the choices aren’t all easy either. There’s certainly enough to keep you going if you like playing along at home, which is one of my two main reasons for watching a TV quiz game. (The other, I’m sorry to admit, is shouting “NO! Not that one, you numpty!”) In fact the only real criticism I have of the game is that although the title is a nice pun on the film “Bridge of Spies”, and on Venice's Bridge of Sighs, strictly speaking it’s just plain wrong, since the point of the game is to AVOID the lies, and build a bridge of trues. Build a bridge of lies and you’ll be out in three steps. You’d think someone would have noticed!

University Challenge 2022 - Semi Final 1 - Imperial v. Emmanuel, Cambridge

The Teams

Imperial

Max Zeng

Fatima Sheriff

Michael Mays (capt.)

Gilbert Jackson

Emmanuel, Cambridge

Nicole Pullinger

Nicholas Thatte

Cara Malcolm (capt.)

James Wrathall

Blimey, it’s getting serious now, isn’t it, dearly beloved? Semi final time, and from here on, the banker only pays out for wins. Which looked fine for Imperial, as that’s all they’ve delivered so far. Emmanuel, though, are the battle hardened survivors of the series, twice losers and yet still battling. You wouldn’t necessarily have bet against Imperial, but if an upset was going to happen, this could be it.

I do understand why Nicole Pullinger answered Odysseus to the first starter, which asked for the hero of an epic poem who visits the Underworld, but the famous visit to the Underworld was in the Aeneid, and undertaken by Aeneas, which Michael Mays was happy to supply as the answer. Bonuses on Times Square in New York City brought us both just the one correct answer. Cara Malcolm opened Emmanuel’s account, recognising several words ending in amen – stamen gave it to me. Titles of Shakespeare plays which all feature in the titles of academic papers seemed not exactly the most toothsome set of bonuses, but they managed two bonuses to level the scores. Nicholas Thatte knew that iron and carbon are the two main constituents of austenite to take the next starter and the lead. Curvilinear scripts and languages were all brilliantly fielded by James Wrathall to give a full house. Now, for the picture starter, we saw an extract of Dante’s Divine Comedy in the original Italian. It’s rarely a bad idea to go with Beatrice for Dante, and it worked beautifully here for Nicole Pullinger. More of Dante’s greatest hits saw them take one bonus, but the others were gettable. Nonetheless, as we approached ten minute, Emmanuel had carved out a lead of 55 to 15.

Now, when the nest starter asked for the largest city of Japan’s Chugoku region I thought – here comes Max Zeng. And he did, too, with the correct answer of Hiroshima. Game theories provided a couple of bonuses to get the Imperial train moving again. Now, in one of those moments that can turn out to be critical, Fatima Sheriff knew that Andrea Levy wrote Small Island. The question asked for the given name – which we used to call the first name, but she gave the surname, Levy, instead of the given name, Andrea. This allowed Cara Malcolm in with the right answer, which brought Emmanuel bonuses on French terms in literary criticisms. Tough set. They got one, which was one more than I did. Michael Mays played a captain’s innings to come in very early for the next starter, identifying the word lamina as originating in the latin for thin sheets. Bonuses on something to do with proteins which I don’t pretend to understand cut the deficit to 20. Nobody knew that painter Tom Roberts was Australian. Now, the next starter, another of these interminable chemistry/biology things, absolutely begged the contenders to buzz in early and lose five, and it was Nicholas Tatte whose nerve gave first. Given the whole question Max Zeng buzzed in with trypsin, the correct answer. Eponymous Incidents in Chinese history brought a full house to Imperial, and one sensed that they were starting to find their composure, having taken back the lead. For the music starter nobody recognised Liszt. The next question called for an author, and once JP said he married, in 1797, a prominent feminist author, both Fatima Sheriff and I identified William Godwin. Music bonuses, inspired by the folkloric Wild Hunt, brought us all a big fat zero. Nobody knew that Egypt are the most successful team in the African Cup of Nations. I didn’t either. I did know that the River Waveney forms part of the border between Norfolk and Suffolk, and that man Max Zeng did too. Deponents in Latin brought two bonuses. So at the 20 minute mark Imperial led by 105 to 65. The contest was still very much alive, but it was starting to look serious for Emmanuel.

I considered awarding myself a lap of honour for knowing that the father of the Soviet space program was Sergei Korolev, but inertia won. I did award myself one for getting the next starter. Basically – Serbia is beryllium. Finland is Helium. Think of abbreviations for their capitals. So by that logic, Albania is Titanium. Max Xeng knew that one. He was having another very good night. Bonuses on Claudius Ptolemy’s Map of Ireland were meat and drink to him, and a full house extended Imperial’s lead. Gawd knows why, but the moment JP said cupric carbonate for the next starter, the word Verdigris sprang to my lips. It sprang to Michael May’s as well, and we were both right. Although I hadn’t seen all of the films referenced I did manage a full house on Wim Wenders films, although they all passed by Imperial. For the second picture starter we saw a photo of a building which I didn’t recognise and the position of a borough of London on a map that I did recognise as Southwark. Hmm Geography. Would that be a Max Zeng question? Silly question. Of course he buzzed in with the correct answer. Other buildings designed by Jane Drew Prize winners provided no more points. Didn’t matter, the clock was running down, and the gap between the teams was a wide one. Now look – if it’ a book called Junkie, written in the 50s, you go for William S. Burroughs whether you’ve ever heard of it or not. Especially if the question goes on to reference The Naked Lunch. All was still, then there was a sudden buzzer race won by Fatima Sheriff. Astronomical terms starting with – a – and ending in tion brought a couple more bonuses. It was all over, bar the gonging and that even followed before the end of the next starter. In the end Imperial were comfortable winners by 170 – 65.

Except that it didn’t look at all comfortable until the last 10 minutes. Up to that point Emmanuel were giving pretty much as good as they got. But in the end, Imperial were just too good for them. No shame in that – Emmanuel have done well. As for Imperial, well, they’ve looked like potential finalists for the whole competition. Now they are actual finalists. They look like potential champions . . .

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

Sorry but it’s one of those rare occasions when nothing in particular stuck out.

Mastermind 2022 - Semi Final 4

Graeme Jackson	Grace Kelly	12	0	9	2	21	2
Anthony Fish	Alfred Hitchcock films of the 1950s	14	0	16	0	30	0
Ro Duns	The Alnwick Garden	10	0	12	1	22	2
Andrew Fanko	Great Britain at the Winter Olympics	13	0	13	0	26	0

In In every semi final, dearly beloved, there are questions to be answered, and not just those asked by Clive Myrie, either. There’s the perennial questions of whether contenders who have had a good specialist score in the heats can manage to do the same with a different specialist subject. Then there’s the question whether those who produced very good general knowledge rounds can do so again, or whether the score from the heat was just a flash in the pan.

I say this because last night’s heat featured Anthony Fish, highest scorer from the heats. Being highest scorer in the heats guarantees, nothing other than a place in the semi-final, but it’s not unreasonable to think that it’s an indication of a real contender.

First up, though, was Graeme Jackson. Graeme scored 12 in his specialist first time out, which wasn’t one of the highest specialist rounds of the heats, but was certainly good enough to give him enough of a cushion to win. Last night he was offering us one of my favourite poets, Wilfred Owen. He started brightly enough, but a few wrong answers began creeping in, and in the end he levelled out at 8. Perfectly respectable, but sadly it leaves room for other contenders to be out of range at the half way stage.

Such a contender was Anthony Fish. Now, in response to the question – could Anthony manage to produce another specialist round out of the top drawer, the answer was definitely yes. I loved his round – his subject was one I really fancied my chances with. Not without reason – I managed 11 correct answers. Anthony beat that, though. He scored 13. With two contenders still to go he had a lead of 5 points at this stage, and the prospect of a very good GK round to come.

Ro Duns had managed a double figure score in specialist in her heat, but with 10 then, and the target at 13, she needed to do quite a bit better on Frasier. Well, I don’t know how many episodes of Frasier there were, but I’m sure it was a lot, and sadly, Ro’s knowledge proved wanting on too many of the questions. In the end she managed to get 6, but to all intents and purposes this was the end of her challenge.

Now I did have the experience of being a stand in for the semi finals back in 2006, along with the Vixen herself, Jenny Ryan. Neither of us were used. But what I can tell you is that at least I was rung up by the production team very soon after the heats had all been filmed, and asked if I would be prepared to be a stand in, so at least I had a fair amount of time to prepare my specialist in case I was needed. It wasn’t wasted either, for I did use this specialist as my first subject in the 2007 series of Blessed Memory. So unless I hear anything to the contrary I have to assume that this is what happened in this series. Bearing in mind the world we’ve been living in for the last couple of years it’s hardly surprising that one of our semi finalists – Ashleigh Evans in this case – was unable to take part, and so the highest scoring runner up was called up, in the shape of Andrew Fanko. I was delighted, since I’ve banged on enough this series about how much I feel the highest scoring runners up should be given another chance somehow. As I said, I don’t actually know, but unless I’m told differently I have to believe that Andrew was given the same preparation time as the others. Sadly, his round on African World Heritage Sites just didn’t work out, and you could see how disappointed he was to score 7 in a close up just after he returned to his seat.

Ro was first to return to the chair for the General Knowledge. Let’s just remind ourselves that Ro scored a good 12 in the heat. I can’t say for certain that it was maybe a bit of shock at the way that her specialist round had gone that contribute to it, but last night I’m afraid the wheels well and truly came off for her. She scored . And before anyone says anything smart, let’s just remind ourselves that she is a Mastermind semi finalist, and many, many people would love to be able to say that for themselves.

It would be hard to find two more contrasting consecutive rounds than Ro’s GK, and Andrew’s that followed. Okay, it wasn’t quite a perfect round. It was bloody close, though. This was a GK round out of the top drawer. Andrew answered quickly, he answered confidently, and for almost all of the questions he answered correctly as well. The result of which was that in order to win outright, Anthony was going to have to get into double figures in GK.

Before that, though, we had Graeme. I hope that I’m not doing him a disservice when I say that the fact he scored 9 in the heats did mean that I doubted whether he was going to be able to get close to Andrew’s score. He scored 6 to finish on 1, but as I said with Ro, he is a Mastermind semi finalist, and a certain amount of respect is due.

So to Anthony. There were two questions really. Firstly, was he going to be able to get a double figure score, to bring him the win, and the place in the grand final. Secondly, was he going to be able to produce a GK round of the same kind of quality as his round in the heat? Well, it didn’t take too long to confirm that yes, Anthony was going to win, as he reeled off a string of answers. As for the quality of the round, well, it was a very good round again, even if it wasn’t the GK round of the night. Anthony scored 14, one behind Andrew’s fifteen.

So Anthony claims a very well earned place in the final. It was a fine performance, and the only drawback I can see is that it will make it very difficult not to make him favourite for the final, which as we all know has been the kiss of death to more than one contender’s chances.

Graeme Jackson	Wilfred Owen	8	0	6	3	14	3
Anthony Fish	20th century world heavyweight boxing championship fights	13	0	14	1	27	1
Ro Duns	Frasier	6	2	4	2	10	4
Andrew Fanko	African World Heritage Sites	7	0	15	0	22	0