A loveable miscellany of all things quiz
What with Mastermind ending last Monday, and if my suspect adding up is correct only another four UC's to go this year the time is rapidly coming when we're going to have to take our quiz fix wherever we can find it. I've just read that the second series of Gary Lineker's Sitting on a Fortune is due to air starting in a few weeks' time.
There you go.
Let’s not finish April with my rant in my last post still ringing in our collective ears, shall we. I’ve mentioned in the past that I do attend one other quiz than the rugby club. This is the Movie quiz in the Gwyn Hall in Neath. It only takes place once a month, and it is well attended. To give you an example, April’s quiz which took place on Wednesday was themed ‘From Page To Screen’. Traditionally this is not one of the most popular films, in the way that, for the sake of argument, Disney movies is. Yet there were still 23 teams playing on Wednesday evening.
It's a funny theme, From Page to Screen. Basically, any fim
adaptation of a book is fair game, which does at least mean that you can have a
wide and varied range of questions.
Yeah, alright, we won. One new thing this year is that
there’s a winning team each month, but the results all contribute to a League throughout
the year. With a third of the year now done, we’ve won three and been second
once. That was the musicals quiz which was, I think in February. Now I’m
usually of a pessimistic cast of mind when contemplating our chances before the
final scores are announced. I’m not sure why – as I always say, if it’s hard
for us, then it’s hard for everyone else as well. Maybe it’s because in a
General Knowledge quiz at the very least I’m usually at least a pretty good
contributor to the team, whereas in a film quiz I’m at best an auxiliary,
chipping in the odd one or two when I can. So I really didn’t know how well we’d
done. I hoped hat we’d one by a point or two. As it turned out though we won by
8, which is a comfortable margin in this quiz.
Look, if you have a good time and enjoy the quiz, as we
did, then winning is a bonus. But I’m not going to sit here and pretend that it
doesn’t matter to me. I’m far too immature for that.
I was saddened on two occasions this week to hear that two of my nearest and dearest have been given grief over quizzes that they’ve compiled.
My son Mike often plays in a quiz on a Tuesday night – I’ve
accompanied him once or twice when other team members haven’t been able to make
it. Like our quiz in the rugby club, this is compiled by volunteers from the
teams who play in it. Mike’s team are by far the most regular winners of the
quiz, and as you probably won’t be too surprised to hear this has created a lot
of resentment amongst the others. I’m sure it doesn’t help that they are
younger than any of the other teams by some degree. Mike’s team were compiling
the quiz and Mike did the sport round. Well, such was the barracking and the
complaining that the questions (which were perfectly fair in my opinion) were
too hard, that Mike ended up cutting the round short by two questions. Then a
friend, who was guesting for the evening was told by a couple of people by
another team that Mike’s team were ‘the team who always cheat’. Finally, the
last turd in the waterpipe, the organiser asked at the end for volunteers for
the rota because he was going on holiday. Mike’s team volunteered, only to be
told – I’ll have to get back to you , lads. I don’t think they’re going to go
back there.
Does this kind of behaviour come as much of a surprise? No,
not really. A similar thing was the reason why I stopped going out on a Sunday.
But my heart goes out to the lads in the team.
Then, on Thursday night it was Dan’s turn as Question
Master in the club. Dan produced another very good quiz, the highlight of which
was another superb music round. This one was solo piano versions of popular
hits from the decades. Great round. I mean, you’d have to go a very long way to
beat his first string quartets round, but it was still a great and enjoyable
round. And I have to say it, some of those songs sounded terrific with just the
piano. Now, I always used to say that nobody ever complains that the questions
are too easy. Well, that shows just what I know. The questions were not too
easy. But after the break we had a couple of high scoring rounds one after
another. That was when the carping started. It’s one particular team who were
guilty, the same team who were so bloody rude the first tme Jess did it last
year. You know the sort of thing ‘Oh, you’re taking pity on us, are you?’. It
would not, in all honesty, make it any better if they ever provided a question
master themselves, but they don’t. One should always try to be calm and
reasonable when commenting on other people’s behaviour, so bearing this in mind
I would like to call them a bunch of arseholes.
This may sound silly, and if you wish to think that I’m being arrogant or up myself by saying it, then fair enough, you may be right. Still, the fact is that watching the Mastermind Grand Final is always a little bit of an emotional experience for me. I can’t help putting myself in the place of the winner and recalling my own emotions on a day which, while it was 16 years ago stands out as clearly in my memory as if it was yesterday. But I also spare a thought for those who didn’t win, and I’m often amazed at their great sportsmanship in their warm and genuine congratulations to the winner. I hope that I would have found it within myself to react in the same way had things worked out differently in 2007. But I don’t know if I could have.
Stuart Field, Mastermind Champion 2003, said a couple of
things I found really interesting. The first was that he’s been preparing for
20 years for this. Yes, it made me turn in upon my own experiences. If you
stretched it widely, I could say that I was preparing for over 30 years, from
the moment when I was about 10, watching the show, picking off an answer here
and there and my Nan said that one day I would go on the show and win. Of
course, I wasn’t actually preparing specifically for Mastermind as such for all
that time, but the seed had been planted. And what were all those years of
shouting answers at Mastermind, University Challenge and other lesser televisual
offerings if there wasn’t at least some element of preparation? I played in my
first ever pub quiz and my first ever quiz league in 1988, 19 years before
Mastermind. That’s another level of preparation. Then I compiled my first quiz
for the rugby club in 1995, 12 years before Mastermind. That’s another level of
preparation. And so on. Always in the back of my mind was that eventual
Mastermind appearance.
Another thing that I couldn’t help thinking about was this
– at what point do you decide that you’re going to stop, and not apply again? I
was lucky. I appeared in two consecutive series. After losing in the first
round in 2006 I basically told myself – well, that’s it then. You’re not as
good as you think you are. At least you got to take part in the show, be
satisfied with that. Then I got the phone call inviting me to be a stand in for
the semis, and while I was there I reappraised what had happened, and decided
that all that had prevented me reaching the semis was a little bit of luck –
well, that and the fact that another of the contenders was better than I was on
the day. So I reapplied, and there you go. Walking to the chair in the final
for the GK round, with another two contenders to go after me, and a two point
deficit after the first round I distinctly remember telling myself – if I lost
then I would not be reapplying for a long, long time. Even if I did, there was
no guarantee I would ever get to the final again. So I was to enjoy the GK
round, because I wasn’t planning on coming back this way. Now, thankfully,
we’ll never know if I would have stuck to this resolution or not. I kind of
have the feeling that four or five years down the line the urge to have another
go would have become to strong to resist.
This was something that I also reflected on as Stuart paid
tribute to his partner, Elaine. I can run that up the flagpole and salute it.
Preparing for an appearance on Mastermind, be it in the heat, semi or final is,
I believe, an experience tailor made for obsessives. In fact if I’m honest I think
one of the reasons why I applied so quickly to have another go at Mastermind
was because I’d enjoyed the preparation so much. It appealed to the obsessive
side of my nature. I loved learning each of my subjects. But it was very time
consuming. From time to time Mary still talks of long evenings mumbling away to
myself in the dining room. Testing myself on my flash cards actually, but yes,
I can see how it must have looked. So here’s to all the husbands, wives,
families and friends who put up with loved ones preparing for Mastermind.
Thanks to you all.
The Teams
Durham
Harry Scully
Chloe
Margaux
Alex
Radcliff (Capt.)
Bea Bennett
UCL
Rachel
Collier
Michael
Fleetwood -Walker
James Salmon
(capt.)
Louis
Collier
You know, it
all seemed a lot clearer and easier a few weeks ago, before the quarter finals
started. I was pretty clear that Bristol, UCL and Durham would make up three of
the semi-finalists, and then either Southampton or Jesus,Oxford as the other.
Well, maybe Jesus had flattered to deceive in their first and second round
matches, but they lost both and they’ve gone. In the two qualification matches
so far, Bristol comfortably defeated UCL to go through, then in what I thought
was an upset, Durham, still leading relatively comfortably at the 20 minute
mark, lost out to a fine performance from Royal Holloway, whose chances I had
dissed in my preview. Sorry again. So Royal Holloway took the first place in
the semi-finals. Which put Durham on a collision course with UCL. Two of my
chosen semi-finalists, yet only one of the teams would be going through. Not
only that, but next week’s last quarter final pits Southampton against another
team whose chances I dismissed in my preview, Newnham. Well, if Roma Ellis
dominates the buzzer the way she did in their last match, Newnham have an
excellent chance too. Whatever happens, three of this year’s semi finalists
will have lost at least once during the competition.
Coming back
to last night, then. The first starter asked us about a species of squirrel and
Louis Collier was the first to realise we were talking about a groundhog. The
first starter asked us about a species of squirrel and Louis Collier was the
first to realise we were talking about a groundhog. (see what I did there? No?
Well, please yourselves.) Unusual buildings in Wales yielded just the one bonus
but at least UCL seemed to have found their buzzer range early doors. Durham
found theirs almost immediately too, with Harry Scully very quickly recognising
a Turner Prize winner. Historical conflicts in board games sounded intriguing. They
weren’t that generous mind you, yielding only one correct answer. With the next
starter the cluse seemed to be pointing towards flamingo especially when Alice
in Wonderland was brought into the equation, at which point Louis Collier took
his second starter. Bonuses on the wors of the Bronte sisters saw UCL pick up
the two, including a harder one on The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, yet miss out on
the easier Wuthering Heights. This brought up the picture starter, with an area
of what looked like Indonesia highlighted o a map. The area represented an area
where a main language with no official status was spoken. Michael
Fleetwood-Walker correctly identified it as an area where Javanese was the main
language. Three more similar maps brought 2 correct answers, and that was two
more than I managed. Look, I knew nothing about stoichiometry before the next
starter, and I still know nothing about it but Harry Scully said it was the
answer to the next starter and that was good enough for me. For JP too as it
happened. Mammalian cell culture sounds like an 90s Indie band, but apparently
it was some biology thing, which yielded one correct answer. This meant that at
just past the 10-minute mark UCL led by 30 – 55.
James Salmon
knew about capsids and viruses for the next starter. This gave UCL a full house
on Physics. Both teams rather sat on their buzzers before James Salmon
recognised a reference to Lemuel Gulliver. Bell Hooks, whose work I cannot
claim any great familiarity with, however I did know Sojourner Truth’s ‘Ain’t I
a Woman?’. So to the music starter, and the work of an Italian composer. Where
the hell I dredged up Donizetti from I don’t know, but it was right. Neither
team managed it. I don’t understand the question – what is the sum of the
natural numbers from 1 to 100, but Alex Radcliffe worked out it was 5050
extremely quickly. The music bonuses were three operas that were based on
literary works whose authors we had to identify. The only one we both managed
was Dumas. The Durham skipper took his second starter in a row knowing that
various Spanish words all started with the letters m-a-. Endurance races brought
just one bonus again. Ubiquitin is a beautiful word to say – never bloody heard
of it myself but that means nothing. James Salmon, so much back to form after
his uncharacteristic misfiring against Bristol, took another starter with it.
Flannery O’Conner yielded nowt, I’m afraid. Louis Collier knew that the
Egyptian hieroglyph for Life is the ankh. Eponymous bodily features earned me a
lap of honour for my dear old friend, the Golgi Apparatus! Yay! No little bit
of knowledge acquired is ever totally wasted! UCL took a full house, which
meant that they were leading by 130 – 60 at the 20-minute mark.
Right,
remember how Durham were ahead a 20 against Royal Holloway? They were going to
have to fight for their lives now to avoid going out. The picture starter
comprised of Edouard Manet’s Olympia. Bea Bennett won the buzzer race for that
one. More pictures from a 2019 exhibition featuring paintings of previously
unnamed black models gave us just one bonus with an unmistakeable Henri
Rousseau. James Salmon lost five for pi mesons (mmmmm, pi mesons) giving a free
shot, allowing Harry Scully to score with kaons. (who I’m sure made their first
appearance in Season 3 of Star Trek The Next Generation) UNESCO World Heritage
Sites in Iran brought 1 bonus. Still, the gap was being eroded. A good buzz
from Michael Fleetwod-Walker identified God as the other artist a Picasso quote
concerned. Bonuses on the artist Leonora Carrington contributed nothing to the
UCL fund. A wonderful UC special on literature and chemistry saw Bea Bennett identify
Lolita as Sodium. Na – first letters of the author’s name, is the symbol for
Sodium. OK only one bonus on currencies followed, but the gap had been halved
in quick time. If Durham took the next starter then it was going to get very
interesting. Harry Scully recognised that the valediction in various titles
referenced was going to be Goodbye. Jacinta Arden didn’t help, but nonetheless
a full house would put Durham into the lead. Poor Michael Fleetwood Walker
ended up yielding five points when he zigged with towns that were on either
sides of the USA Mexico border. Given the full question , told the answer was a
river, Alex Radcliffe took the free throw and scored with Rio Grande. On such
small margins did further participation in the series hang. A full house on
marine creatures added to UCL’s woes. 10 points between the teams, neither need
panic yet. Harry Scully knew Milliamps hour for the next starter. If they took
one bonus, UCL would need a full house to tie. If they took two bonuses then
one visit to the table wouldn’t be enough. They took the two they needed.
Surely there wasn’t enough time left for UCL? James Salmon took the next
starter with Budapest. There was only time for two bonuses on Areas of
Outstanding Natural Beauty in Northern Ireland. So, in a grandstand finish,
Durham claimed the semi final place by a score of 160 – 145.
Many
congratulations to Durham. A brilliant fightback. Commiserations to UCL. You’ve
been a fine team during the series, and at another time, on another day, who knows?
This time it was not to be.
Interesting
Fact That I Didn’t Already Know Of The Week
Pericles is
also the name of a board game.
Another Mastermind Grand Final. Another healthy portion of egg all over my face. I’ll come to that in the fullness of time.
So, kicking off our final was Ben Spicer. In my preview I
had Ben as an outside chance of a podium place but more likely amongst the
minor placings. In tonight’s final Ben was answering on British and Irish Lions
Tours of the 21st century. After the drought of the last few semi
finals I rather fancied myself to do quite well on several of the specialists
tonight and this was one of them. Well, I did okay with 3. Ben did much better,
putting on 10 points. A competitive score, but not I fancied the highest that
we were going to see in this round.
I predicted that James Beeby would just miss out on the
podium, and cited the fact that his heat and semi final specialist rounds had
been good, but not outstanding. Well, that goes to show how much I know, for
the round that James put in tonight really was outstanding. I managed correct answers on his round on Princess
Margaret – well, I have watched every episode of the Crown after all – but James
managed an excellent 14. That was a round that was going to take some beating.
I predicted that Michael McPartland would become the
champion. This prediction was built on the solid foundation hat he had top
scored in all of the first round heats by four points, and then he had done the
same in all of the semi finals. Michael was answering on the Rocky Films. He
didn’t do badly. . . but crucially he didn’t do as well as he could. It must
have been crushing to him to have just his one under par round in the whole
series during the final. Michael scored 9, putting him five points behind with 3
contenders yet to play. I scored four on this round.
Stephen Finn I suggested might well be one of those contenders
who gets better and better as the series goes on. He certainly improved between
first round and semi. Tonight he was answering on Bletchey Park during World
War II, and he did well, scoring 12. At only two points behind he was still in
with a chance, especially if nobody beat James’ score of fourteen. This looked
as if it might be my dodgiest subject for the final and that’s exactly what it
proved to be as I scored just the one.
I suggested that James Davidson had already won his final
by getting this far, and that he would probably not have the firepower to make
a successful challenge at this point in his quiz career. Tonight he was
answering on the Emperor Augustus – this was my banker subject and indeed it
yielded me 6. James did well, but not well enough, ending with 9 like Michael
before him.
Bringing the round to a close was Stuart Field. Now,
despite the fact that he needed a tie break to win his heat, and a pass
countback to win his semi final I fancied Stuart’s chances enough in my review
to predict he would be runner up. Well, he certainly didn’t go through his
specialist round as if he was settling for second place. He faced fifteen
questions, and answered every one of them correctly. It was a brilliant
performance on the BBC sitcom Extras, and it was one of those rounds where you
felt that Clive could have carried on asking him questions for another two
minutes and he would still have had all of them right. 1 point on Extras gave
me an aggregate of 19 – not bad but then that was based on 6 rather than four
rounds.
First back to the chair then was Michael. I never expected
him to be first to go in the GK round tonight – and I can only apologise to him
for cursing him with the Clark tip. To my mind he was the best and most
consistent GK performer in this final line up. Could he score enough to win?
Well, all he could do was give it his absolute best and hope to hang on. He did
very well too. Once again he got into the mid-teens, scoring 15. I had the
sinking feeling that although this might well push him up onto the podium, I
couldn’t see it being quite enough.
So, I said in my preview that I didn’t think that James
Davidson would have the firepower to really challenge. Well, he might have only
scored 9 in the Specialist but he made up for that with what I thought was his
best GK round. No, he didn’t quite match Michael’s round, but he kept plugging
on to accrue a highly praiseworthy 13 points for a total of 22, 2 points behind
Michael.
Ben had put in a good specialist round, and yet still found
himself five points behind at half time. Not only that, but he was faced with
the daunting fact that the only way he could go into the lead was by scoring
16, since he had accrued a pass already. Well, he gave it a lash, and acquitted
himself well, scoring 12. On countback he was just behind James D because of
that 1 pass. So Michael was up to no worse than fourth.
Stephen Finn, well, how should I put it? He had one of ‘those’
rounds in his GK. Not a bad round, not a bad round at all, but that’s just not
enough when you need a great round. Stephen just couldn’t build up any momentum
and put together a string of correct answers. In the end he battled to add 9
and take his total to 20. So at least Michael was once again on the podium.
James Beeby had a massive five point lead over Michael at
half time. So he needed 10 points to go into the joint lead and 11 to go into
outright lead. What followed from him was a great example of calm under fire.
He did get a few wrong, but importantly he never let it bother him – or he
certainly seemed calm – and kept going. Having equalled Michael’s score he had
just one question left . . . and he got
it right! He was in the lead, with just one other contender to go. Well, I know
how that feels.
As had all the contenders in the final, Stuart had taken
his preparation extremely seriously and now here he was, on the brink of
achieving his goal. He was on fifteen. The target was 26 for an outright win.
12 points. Definitely within his capabilities, if the questions didn’t conspire
against him and if he kept his head. Well, he certainly did that. A picture of
concentration, Stuart passed the target with questions to spare and forged
onward putting daylight between himself and James B. In the end he won clearly
having added 13 to his total to win with 28.
Thank you all, gentlemen, for your efforts all series, and
for an exciting final. Thank you Clive Myrie. It’s only his second series, and
yet it’s difficult to envisage anyone else in the question master’s chair now.
But above all else, thank you, Stuart Field and congratulations on becoming the
Mastermind of the United Kingdom, 2023!
The Details
|
Ben Spicer |
British and Irish
Lions Tours of the 21st Century |
10 |
1 |
12 |
0 |
22 |
1 |
|
James Beeby |
Princess Margaret |
14 |
0 |
11 |
0 |
25 |
0 |
|
Michael McPartland |
The Rocky Films |
9 |
0 |
15 |
0 |
24 |
0 |
|
Stephen Finn |
Bletchley Park during
the Second World War |
12 |
0 |
8 |
3 |
20 |
3 |
|
James Davidson |
Augustus Caesar |
9 |
0 |
13 |
0 |
22 |
0 |
|
Stuart Field |
The BBC Sitcom Extras |
15 |
0 |
13 |
0 |
28 |
0 |
If you’re a member of the Contestant Hub group on Facebook you maybe saw the post about yesterday’s Manchester Evening News post about the next series of University Challenge. One of the big claims in the report is that questions will be harder for the next series. The artclae claims that this may well be in response to criticisms of questions on such subjects as the TV series ‘Love Island’ during the current series.
Personally I can’t help wondering whether this is just a
wee bit of hyperbole, understandable considering that the change of presenter
is quite probably the biggest shake up to the show since its 1994 revival. I
certainly hope that’s all it is. Be honest, how many times do you watch
University Challenge and think – blimey, the show is really dumbing down. I
wish they’d make these questions a bit harder. – I certainly don’t. I think
that the level of the questions is just about right, and this is show after
show, year after year. There are times when I’m surprised about what student
teams don’t know, but that’s not because there’s something drastically wrong
with the questions. You know, there’s things a regular pub quizzer of several
years’ standing would just know, but if you’re not one, then it’s less likely
that you would.
I wish Amol Rajan every success – he has two tough acts to
follow. But the fewer changes to a show like University Challenge – the better.
My memory’s going. Oh, not in the quiz, so far, fingers crossed. No, I’ll tell you what I mean by this. Adam set the quiz on Thursday evening ad I have to say it was his best yet in my humble opinion. I think that there was something for everyone, and a winning mixture of more well known stuff, easier questions and more difficult questions. And one of the things I really like about a quiz, that Adam managed to do, is to ask a question where you think – hmm, that’s a bit more difficult than the average question, not sure that I know the answer – and you manage to dredge it up from somewhere. Adam had at least one or two of these, but frustratingly I’ve forgotten which questions they actually were!
This wasn’t one of them, because I knew the answer and what’s
more, I knew that I knew the answer. But I still liked the question very much
:-
In the 1985 Wembley Live Aid concert, which performer only
sang the one song, which was ‘All You Need is Love?’. It was Elvis Costello and
he rather cheekily described it as a northern folk song.
This coming Wednesday is the monthly film quiz in the Gwyn
Hall in Neath. This one is From Page To Screen, which maybe promises me a
little more than Musicals in February did, but certainly not as much as Oscars
did in March.
Well, shall we have a look at the form book? Here are the runners and riders – first round scores on top, semi-final scores underneath.
I’ve been quite vocal about the way that the first five of this set of semi finals were all quite polarised, with 1 and 5 having most of the highest scorers of the fist round between them, and 2,3 and 4 having mostly lower scorers. Does this matter?
It’s a serious question. After all, you want to have the
best final possible, don’t you? Well, yes, but then if that was the be-all and
end-all then surely the answer would be to use the same format they used in
Sports Mastermind several years ago. In that show there were the usual heats,
but only the highest scorers went through to the final. Personally, I would
hate to see this happen in the parent show. If a show is successful for as many
years as Mastermind has been then it must be doing most things right, and you
tamper with it at your peril.
Here's the list of scores from the 2023 semi-finals. Despite
the polarisation of the semi final line ups what we see here is that most of
the semi final winners are among the top scorers anyway. So let’s take the
highest scoring non qualifier. Ben Farren was unlucky. But it’s not as if he
would have automatically won every other semi-final. He’d have needed a tie
break against Stephen Finn. Every year at least one runner up posts a score
that would have won at least one, and sometimes more than one of the other
semi-finals.
So, now that we’ve discounted the idea that the way that semi final places were allotted has resulted in a weaker line up for the Grand Final, let’s look at the finalists. In order of semi finals:-
Michael McPartland
So, it’s obvious isn’t it? If Michael turns up, he wins.
Well, nothing in this world is guaranteed, other than death and taxes. Anyone
can have a bad round. However, the better quizzer that you are, the less likely
you are to encounter such a round, and Michael is a very, very good quizzer.
He’s been to the final before as well, so the chances of the atmosphere and the
occasion adversely affecting him are very slim. Michael top scored in the first
round by four points. Michael top scored in the semi finals by four points. I
think it would take an under-par performance from Michael coupled with another
contender having the performance of their life. It could happen, but I’m going
to have to say what I’ve been trying to avoid saying all series – prediction –
champion.
Stephen Finn
So far it’s been a game of two halves for Stephen. He was
the second lowest scoring heat winner in the first round with a modest 18 and 2
passes. Yet here he is in the final with the joint second highest score with 23
and no passes. So which Stephen is going to turn up in the final? Well, I do
have a sneaking feeling that he might just be one of those contenders who gets
over a nervous performance in the first round and gets better as the
competition progresses. I’ll be honest, the contenders’ performances so far
make it very difficult to pick out the minor places, so my prediction is –
potentially 3rd
James Davidson
James has done brilliantly to get to the grand final.
Obviously he is now a Mastermind Grand Finalist and nobody will ever be able to
take that away from him. However, his performances on GK have been good – 11 on
both rounds – but not great. I just don’t see him being able to produce enough
firepower to make a realistic challenge. Prediction – Not on the podium.
James Beeby
James is another contender whose semi final performance was
better than his performance in the heats. Like Stephen he improved his general
knowledge, scoring 13. Now, okay, I don’t think that this gives him a realistic
chance of the win. Purely based on the fact that his average specialist score
is good but not outstanding I am going to say he is one of the less likely to
get on the podium. But honestly there is so little to choose on paper between
four of these finalists your guess is as good as mine. Prediction – just missing
out on the podium
Stuart Field
In Stuart’s case the only thing which separated him from
Stephen and Ben was a single pass. Yet I would argue that he had something of
an off night in the semis compared with his first round heat. He had a huge
pause in the specialist which I reckon cost him at least 1 point. Now okay, I
can’t say that this isn’t going to happen again But what I’m looking for is
potential to do better, and I just jave a sneaking feeling that Stuart could
well do a bit better. I apologise to you now Stuart for the Clark tip is well
known to be the kiss of death to a contender’s chances, but my prediction is –
On the podium, potentially silver.
Ben Spicer
Both of Ben’s wins have been built upon great performances
on specialist. So he could well find himself handily placed at the halfway stage.
However this has been backed up by good rather than outstanding General
Knowledge rounds. So even if he does have a lead at half time, I just can’t see
him quite doing it. My prediction – potential podium, more likely a place or
two lower.
The Teams
Newnham, Cambridge
Bethan Holloway-Strong
Hannah Bowen
Roma Ellis (capt.)
Chen Zhiyu
Jesus, Cambridge
Josh Kaye
Juliette Tindall
Hamish MacGregor (Capt.)
Sumit Aggarwal
Howdy pardners. Let’s see who was drinking with us in the last chance saloon last night. Why, it was none other than Newnham, Cambridge, comprehensively defeated by Bristol in their first quarter and Jesus. Cambridge who were likewise beaten by UCL. Since then Bristol have beaten UCL to take their place in the semi-final. Victory in this match would guarantee nothing other than another match. Defeat, though, would mean departure from the competition.
Last time out Newnham’s superbuzzer, captain Roma Ellis,
couldn’t quite find her range. Last night though she was on target as early as
the first starter, knowing that the English samurai and various others were all
surnamed Adams. 3 bonuses on my next planned sketching destination, Copenhagen
followed. Yeah, I did take a lap of honour for knowing the first being a
Science question. I knew – guessed – Einstein for the last as well. Newnham
took the same pair. Sumit Aggarwal showed a nifty turn of speed on the buzzer
himself to identify Bangladesh as country that became independent in 1971.
Dorothy L. Sayers brought just the one correct answer in he bonuses, although I
loved the idea of Virginia Woolf possibly having written adverts for Colman’s
Mustard. Roma Ellis took her second starter knowing subdivisions of the
Carboniferous period. I went through one of hose when I was learning not to
overcook. Bonuses on a faunal boundary line turned out to be a rather more
gentle set than I was expecting and we both took a full house. So to the
picture round and we were shown the symbol of a supranational organisation. I
sympathise with both teams because it really did look like the sort of thing
you’d see on the tailplanes of airliners in the late 70s. Actually it belongs
to the Nordic Council. Roma Ellis won the battle race to identify the
villainous Cylons from Battlestar Galactica for her third starter to earn the
picture bonuses. Flags of three minor members of the Nordic Council brought
another full house. No two ways about it, Newnham were on fire last night.
Nobody knew the FA Vase competition for the next starter. There’s FA Cup, then
FA Trophy, then FA Vase – down to FA Pipette and FA Sachet, one supposes. Roma
Ellis took her fourth starter before the ten minute mark by knowing the term
blanching. Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin (gesundheit) brought us both a single
bonus. Didn’t matter. After a barnstorming start Newnham led by 85 – 15 just
after ten minutes.
I don’t think that I’ve ever heard of the term skeumorphic
but Sumit Aggarwal knew it, to get Jesus moving again. We both took a full
house on noted philosophers. However Roma Ellis cut short their revival by
buzzing in early to identify Bikini Atoll as the island whose population the US
kindly moved before blowing the place to kingdom come in 1946. Pairs of words differing
on in the one having an initial a and the other an initial e provided a good UC
set that saw us both take another full house. For once I got the music starter,
recognising “I’ve grown accustomed to her face” from My Fair Lady. It was Roma
Ellis taking starter 6 who had that one. Songs from other musicals that also
won platinum records brought, well, yes, another full house. Newnham were
having one of those nights when everything goes in the net. Hannah Bowen
guessed that decises must mean legal precedents. The film director Mia
Hansen-Love (me neither) still brought them a couple of bonuses. Poor old Jesus
were looking rather like rabbits in headlights, having received a battering on
the buzzer in the first half of the contest. I don’t know Henrietta Lacks, but
Juliette Tindall did. A couple of bonuses on Popes helped, but much more was
needed. More correct answers, that is, not popes. Roma Ellis took starter
number 7 when she knew that the element named after the daughter of Tantalus is
Niobium. Space in 20th century art brought just the one bonus. Neither
team knew that St. Cuthbert is buried in Durham Cathedral. So just on the cusp
of the 20 minute mark Newnham led by 170 – 50.
Let’s be honest, you could have named your own price if you
fancied taking Jesus for the win at this stage. It was still theoretically
possible, but let’s be honest, to all intents and purposes the game was over as
a contest. Sumit Aggarwal was sstill giving it a lash though, identifying the
Polish mathematician Sierpinski, who incidentally was the second man after
Abebe Bikela to defend his Olympic Marathon title. Barentzs, after whom the Sea
was named, brought them a bonus. For the second picture starter, despite the
couple’s obvious resemblance to Adolf Hitler and Tom Baker (in his Doctor Who
days) Hannah Bowen identified Sparks. Yay – I loved Sparks back in the day.
Other groups who featured in documentary films provided just one bonus. Didn’t
matter. The game was won, this was just gilding. Given ‘musical composition’
‘Chopin’ and ‘period of the day’ Hamish MacGregor could buzz in with Nocturne.
Eponymous chemical reactions promised and delivered nowt to me, but brought one
correct answer to Jesus. Roma Ellis knew that Henry V opens with an invocation
to a muse of fire. Designers and architects brought one correct answer. Hannah
Bowen recognised a description of buckwheat to take Newnham through the 200
points barrier for the first time in the whole competition. Bonuses on metal
working brought a further points to
their burgeoning total. Sumit Aggarwal knew a Bessel function – me neither –
for which the sign was J. Fair enough. African capitals supplied just the one
correct answer, but did at least push them within striking distance of a triple
figure score. I did not understand the following maths starter but Sumit
Aggarwal had it with 30. Triple figure score duly achieved. Books with days of
the week in their titles brought the couple of answers they needed to take
their score to 115, while Newnham won with 215.
Hard lines to Jesus, but once again they were well beaten
and will have no complaints. As for Newnham – well, what a performance. Aside
from Roma Ellis’ magnificent 8 starters, they achieved a bonus conversion rate
of 63.6 percent. On this form, a semi final place is not beyond them.
Interesting Fact That I Didn’t Already Know Of
The Week
In legal terms the term decises refers to the concept of
legal precedents.
Well, at least with the last semi final we knew exactly who’s going to be in it.
Up first tonight was Ann Mayner. She’d answered on Rennie Mackintosh
in the first round, and carried on in similar architectural vein in this semi
final with Sir Edwin Lutyens. I was quite chuffed with myself for getting two
of these which was at least one more than I’d expected. It was a good round.
Not quite perfect, but she pushed onwards to a total of 12 and the evidence
from most of the other semi finals went to suggest that this would certainly
give her the chance of a win.
Ben Spicer answered on Peaky Blinders last time out. In
honour of this he wore shirtsleeves, waistcoat and cap. Tonight he was wearing
a colourful short sleeved shirt covered in guitars, doubtless in honour of his
semi final subject of the band Coldplay. Again I outdid my own expectations,
getting one right where I had expected none. Ben was very close to an
exceptional round, but even allowing for a mistake he still finished with 13.
He’d won his first round through an excellent round on specialist followed by a
good performance on GK. Would this be a case of History repeating itself?
Of these last four semi-finalists the strongest first round
performer on GK had been Joe Andrew. If this was an accurate reflection of the
contenders’ relative strengths, then what Joe needed to do was to put himself
within striking distance of the lead b the end of the specialists. I would
certainly say he managed this. Answering on the Karen Pirie novels of Val McDermid
he didn’t take the lead, but finished with 11, just two points adrift of Ben. All
to play for.
Alex Shilton had put in a decent specialist round on the
films of Wes Anderson in his heat. Sadly, he didn’t manage to do quite so well
on the films of Terry Gilliam tonight. Don’t get me wrong, the score he managed,
7, is nothing to be ashamed of but it put him out of the competition to all
intents and purposes. The sad thing was that he was close on a number of
answers, but somehow his prep had just not quite readied him for the demands of
the round. Not quite. It’s a fine line sometimes.
It was a quick turnaround for Alex, as he was first back
into the chair for the General Knowledge round. He could have quite easily let
the travails of the specialist round rob him of all composure, so all credit to
him for keeping his head and producing a useful round of 9. Not, I dare say as
good as his 13 in the heats, but considering that this had all the appearances of
not being his night, I think he came back well.
With the best will in the world, though, the winner was
going to come from our final three contenders. First up was Joe Andrew. Now, in
the heats Joe’s MO had been to not rush, take each question as it comes and
pick off everything that was there to be picked off. It had resulted in a
mighty score of 1 then. Tonight it didn’t quite come off as well. Sometimes the
questions suit you more than others.Nothing was wrong with Joe’s score of 9 for
20, but it just didn’t look like it would be enough.
It wasn’t enough, either. Not many contenders do better in
their semi final GK round than they do in their heat GK round, but Ann did. If
she had equalled her 8 from the first round she would have only tied with Joe.
However, she went one better. As had Joe and Alex she scored a total of 9,
which put her one ahead. With just Ben to go, the big question was whether she
could hang on and find herself in the final.
All 3 contenders so far had scored 9 on GK. If Ben could
repeat this then he would win. Whether it was by accident or design, Ben had
hit upon a technique which gave him the best chance of doing so – snap out
answers as quickly as you can, without stopping to worry about those you get
wrong. 9 would have done it but in the end Ben scored 10. Very well done, sir.
As I said, I shall post a preview of the final, but let’s
stop to thank all of the semi-finalists for their valiant efforts and for the
entertainment that they have provided over these past few weeks
The Details
|
Ann Mayner |
Sir Edwin Lutyens |
12 |
0 |
9 |
0 |
21 |
0 |
|
Ben Spicer |
Coldplay |
13 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
23 |
0 |
|
Joe Andrew |
The Karen Pirie
Novels of Val McDermid |
11 |
0 |
9 |
0 |
20 |
0 |
|
Alex Shilton |
The Films of Terry
Gilliam |
7 |
0 |
9 |
1 |
16 |
1 |
Well, by a process of elimination we know that Monday’s semi-final contenders will be Ann Mayner, Alex Shilton, Joe Andrew and Ben Spicer. We also know that their specialist subjects will be :-
Sir Edwin Lutyens
Coldplay
The Karen Pirie Novels of Val McDermid
The Films of Terry Gilliam
We don’t know who will be taking which subject, but I dare
say we’ll learn that on Monday. Looking at the subjects I really can’t see
myself finishing the semis with a flourish on specialist. I predicted 3 – 5 last
Monday and ended up with 4. Similarly, this coming Monday I might sneak a point
on Lutyens, I might sneak another on Coldplay and maybe 2 on Terry Gilliam. On
the Karen Pirie novels, no, I’ve never read any so cannot reckon on scoring any
points there.
I’ll be posting a review after the show as usual, and then
a preview of the Grand Final, giving my honest (although invariably inaccurate)
predictions.
I don’t think that I’ve ever watched a quiz show on Netflix before. I don’t know if Netflix have made a quiz show before. Earlier today I watched an edition of “Cheat”, their new quiz presented by Danny Dyer and Ellie Taylor. I think it’s important to make the point that it is a Netflix show, because that brings certain expectations with it. Let’s be honest, it would be unfair to expect that they are going to make a highbrow, serious quiz show. No, this is entertainment, and it's a game. So I’ll try to judge it as such.
The show works like this. We start with four contestants.
They are asked questions in turn, to which they have to give a correct answer.
If they don’t know the answer they can push the red button in front of them,
cunningly concealed so that the other contestants can’t see them do it. This
reveals the correct answer to them. Correct answers add money to the prize
fund. However the other contestants can each call out the others for cheating. Got
that? Okay. After each has been asked four questions, money is removed for each
time a contestant cheated. The complicating factor is that whichever of the
four contestants has the best accuracy rate for calling out others automatically
goes through to the next round. They can also eliminate another player. If the
player cheated, let’s say, three times, then money for each of those three
cheats is returned to the prize fund.
The game continues with three players. The second round is
much like the first. Four more questions face each contestant. However this time,
after the other contestants have either buzzed in to accuse, or not, then it is instantly
revealed whether the contestant cheated or not. At the end of the round, then,
the viewer has a pretty good idea about who will have been the most accurate cheat
spotter. And as before, the most accurate goes through to the next round, the
final, and can eliminate either of the other two contestants. Essentially this
boils down to a choice between eliminating the biggest cheat and bumping up the
prize fund, or eliminating the stronger player and not putting so much back
into the prize pot.
For the final then, the gameplay is essentially sudden
death. The contestants face questions in turn. If they get the answer wrong,
they are out. If they cheat and are challenged correctly, they are out. If they
don’t cheat, and are incorrectly challenged, they win. So, basically, it pays
to observe the opposition closely so that you have a good idea what your
opponent is likely to know. That’s the game, and being on Netflix if you want
to watch the next edition straight afterwards, you go for it.
You know, there’s quiz shows I’d like to play in, and there’s
quiz shows I like to watch. There’s a lot of shows which are both, but there
are also a few that I’d watch, but I wouldn’t want to play in. This isn’t one
of those. I wouldn’t like to play in it, and I don’t see myself wanting to
watch it again. In any quiz show it is not guaranteed that the person with the
best general knowledge will win. That’s fair enough, but in “Cheat” it seems
that your level of general knowledge is somewhat incidental. It’s all about how
well you can spot other people cheating. And I don’t kid myself that my ability
to judge people is anything out of the ordinary. It’s a valid game but it’s not
a game that I really want to play.
There’s something I’m not clear about either, and that’s
the whole concept of the most accurate cheat spotter. It isn’t explained just
what measure they use to determine this. I know that it isn’t just about the number
of correct buzzes – in the second round Danny Dyer gleefully tells contestants
who’ve made an incorrect accusation ‘you’ve ‘armed yer accuracy rate there,
mate’ or words to that effect. But is it
simply a case of using the percentage of accusations that you make that are
correct? But if it is, then the thing would be that if your first buzz in round
two is correct, then just stick. Don’t buzz again and you’ve got a 100 percent
accuracy rate. It would just be interesting to know exactly how they work it
out, bearing in mind that accuracy in accusations is such a crucial part of the
game mechanics.
There’s another thing I find a bit strange about this show.
Make no mistake, this is Danny Dyer’s show. I’m not going to say anything
critical about Danny Dyer – he is what he is, he knows his own brand and he
knows his own appeal. If he’s not your cup of tea then don’t watch the show
because you won’t like it. But . . . why have Ellie Taylor on the show as well
if all you’re going to ask her to do is read out the questions? She’s a fine
presenter in her own right and I’m sorry, but her talents seem almost totally
wasted in this. It’s not as if she gets any meaningful opportunity to indulge
in any useful presenter & sidekick banter of the kind we’ve seen in a
number of shows across the years. I don’t get it.
To use a familiar refrain, I do think that “Cheat” does
what it does pretty well. There’s a decent amount of cash to be won, the
presentation is fairly slick, and it doesn’t drag. But at the end of the day, I
don’t like what it does that much. The questions are too simple to interest me
much, and the cheat/no cheat aspect doesn’t interest me. You may feel differently.
