More Thoughts on 1977

Received wisdom tells us that Mastermind was better in Magnus’ day, doesn’t it? I’ll be honest, I did think that BBC were playing with fire a bit by showing the 1977 series on BBC4 just a couple of hours after the current series on BBC2. I’ve watched every episode of the 77 series as each has been shown. So the question we should ask is – is the classic series REALLY that much better than the current version?

Well, first of all, let’s leave behind fripperies like the odd fashions and hairstyles. Those in 1977 weren’t much better either. Boom boom. But joking aside, let’s try to concentrate on the show itself.

One clear difference is the 2x2 format of the rounds in the old series. I always preferred this even split of two rounds of two minutes’ duration each. 1-0 to the classic series. Now, you’d think that the 1970s questions are a clear advantage over the modern day questions. Well, they were certainly less long winded than the questions that get asked nowadays, yes. The lengthy questions are a major gripe with the show in the current era. But at least . . . at least the questions in the current era are for the huge majority, written with precision. They make you either give a wrong answer or a right answer – they don’t allow for much grey area and I personally feel that this is how it should be. I have been struck by how vague some of the questions in 1977 were. In fact I have gone so far as to call some of them quite poorly written – speaking as a question setter of pretty long standing myself. In every show, it seems, Magnus was called upon to exercise judgement over whether a contender had got the gist of the answer. Well, getting the gist is not good enough. So what the old series wins on the volume of questions, it loses on the imprecise nature of so many of them. Score draw.

What about the contenders? On this very blog, I’ve made the point that the talent pool  in the current era is shallow, and too thinly spread. Well, judging by what I’ve seen in the 1977 series so far, the average contender was no better in 77 than they are today. Yes, they score more points, but only it would seem because they get asked more questions. The 1977 series was considerably shorter than the 31 show series of the modern programme, so maybe the talent appeared a little more thickly spread because it didn’t have to be spread quite so far. I can only speculate on the difference in quiz culture 49 years ago. I don’t know how many quiz leagues there were back in the day and I don’t know if pub quizzes – if indeed they existed – were anything like as popular and plentiful as they are today. I was around in 77 but I was only 13. Even back in the 70s, pub going at that age was frowned upon. However, quiz shows were surely as much a staple on TV back in those days as they are today.

An obvious point of comparison is in the kinds of subjects being offered for specialist round. The 1977 subjects seem more consciously highbrow for want of a better term. In many cases they seem a lot wider as well. I have found that this can make it a little harder to really get a feeling for just how well a contender really knows their subject and how well they seem to have prepared. I have no intention of accusing any contender of skimping on their preparation in my reviews, but I do feel you can usually tell who hasn’t put the work in– and this isn’t just a matter of seeing who had the lowest scores either.

For many of those of us of a certain age, Mastermind WAS Magnus Magnusson. I loved him as a question master and in the years since the original series came to an end it was gratifying to see just how many people who met him and who knew him paid tribute to what a warm, funny, good guy he was. ‘nice’ is a word that loses a lot of currency when you apply it to people but personally I think it’s one of the best things you can say about someone. I spoke in my mum’s funeral last week, and I unashamedly made the point that she was a really, genuinely nice person. She was too. However – and I’m feeling a little bit of a heel for saying this- I have been surprised on the number of fluffs Magnus made in certain shows.

Of course, in my own experience the production teams have been quite zealous about reshooting and ironing out the bumps in the modern series. As for the presenters, well, I always felt with John Humphrys that taking part in 6 shows with him never really constituted an introduction. I knew him no better the last time I met him than I did the first time. But, when he got in the studio, he was a thorough professional, I have to give him that. Likewise, today’s Clive Myrie does a thoroughly professional job as well. More than that I can’t say, never having met him.

If we move to more intangible things, the atmosphere in both shows is more different than I would have expected. For all the formality – in 1977 the contenders were all dressed very formally and each was either ‘Mr.’, ‘Mrs.’ or ‘Miss’, the show seemed somehow a little more intimate than the current series. Contenders’ Row was closer to the black chair. The lighting was a little more natural, without so much of the bright spotlit interrogation of the modern series. Magnus did not try to oversell the drama or artificially build the tension like poor old Clive does – Why are they here? I hear you ask? What is it that persuades ordinary upstanding members of the public to volunteer to face the ordeal of the black chair. Is it masochism? Is it hubris? Is it a combination of both? Do any of you give a rat’s doodah? Etc. etc by which time I’m yelling ‘get on with it, Clive! On the other hand Clive doesn’t have to tell us “We come to you tonight from the Great Hall of St. Angreevsey’s Academy for the sons of smarmy gentlefolk in Shrewsbury, founded in 1562 by the grandfather of Guy Fawkes, Sir Arbuthnot ‘Tuning’ Fawkes. The school’s motto is taken from the family motto of the Fawkes family, which is “Lawks a Lordy, my bottom’s on fire.”

I think that the most honest assessment I can make is to say that despite being essentially the same show, they are pretty different and it’s actually more hard to make a compelling case that one version is much better than the other.  What the audience of 1977 would make if suddenly taken by TARDIS and brought to the recording of the modern show – well, that really would be interesting.

 

University Challenge 2027 First Round SOAS v. Edinburgh

The Teams

SOAS

Josephine Newcombe

Seb Lawson

Lola Finch (capt)

Aidan Langston

Edinburgh

Daniel Bloom

Caitlin Tambini

Fred Whibley (capt)

Siddhant Kumar

London’s School of Oriental and African Studies have passed this way before – not as many times as Edinburgh – but at least they’re not strangers to the competition.

First blood fell to Aidan Langston, recognising a group of words, each beginning with bis. 20^th century history brought two bonuses. SOAS’ Seb Lawson, who was going to have a most productive evening, took the first of his starters knowing that Wimbledon’s Crazy Gang defeated Liverpool in the 1988 Cup Final (Lawrie Sanchez goal won it). I’ve lived in Wales for 40 years, but have never before heard of the Seven (so called ) Wonders of Wales but two of them were easy for us to guess, the same two that SOAS took. Keen to halt the SOAS charge, Edinburgh captain Fred Whibley buzzed early for the next starter and got the correct answer with third. The bonuses for you, then Edinburgh, announced Amol, are on the control of gene expression. I think my exact expression when he announced this was – oh, bloody hell. Which should make me feel slightly guilty for the fact that I had a full house because of the very helpful clues given at the end of each of the questions. Edinburgh took 2 and I set off on my wheezy lap of honour around the sofa. Every year I think I can’t get any slower and every year I prove myself wrong. For the picture starter we saw a flag representing the office of president of a country. Nobody, me included, knew it was Cuba. Fred Whibley tried another interruption on the next starter but unsuccessfully. Given the whole question he’d have known the answer required was St. Elmo’s Fire – the weather phenomenon, not the song nor the brat pack movie it was taken from. Aidan Langston had that. More presidential flags brought two correct answers – I only had Botswana. (If you have Botswana, try a little ointment to help clear it up). The next starter gave us the first line of Thomas Hardy’s gagfest “Jude the Obscure”. The mention of Christminster in the question gave Seb Lawson what he needed to take a second starter. Characters whose names appear in novels with title and surname, eg Mr. Hyde, saw SOAS take two, and just miss out on Mr. Norrell from the excellent Susanna Clarke novel “Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell”. Nonetheless it had been a fine first 10 minutes for SOAS who led by 80-10

Seb Lawson started the middle 10 the way he had ended the first, correctly answering that Frankfurt is the home of the European Central Bank for his third starter. Philosophical zombies – nope, me neither – conjured up some strange mental images and also two correct answers for SOAS. Poor Siddhant Kumar took a flier on the next starter and was a little unlucky to get his water pump mixed up with his vacuum pump. This gave Seb Lawson his 4^th starter. SOAS took 1 bonus on alloys and should probably have had the old quiz chestnut, amalgam for another. You had to wait with the next starter for it to become obvious. Edinburgh understandably didn’t and unfortunately lost five. Seb Lawson did and took his fifth starter with John Wycliffe. Grammatical aspects of verbs meant nowt to me – well, be fair, I only taught English for 37 years – but brought a couple more correct answers to SOAS, whose lead was now over 100 points. A fine buzz from Daniel Bloom brought an early correct answer to the music starter as he recognised the work of Siouxsie and the Banshees. (Their Dear Prudence is probably my favourite Beatles cover) Other works that sample songs by them brought 1 bonus. Gawd knows why, when the next starter mentioned ‘which brand of physics’ I said thermodynamics, but Siddhant Kumar did the same and we were both right. Central Asian History brought just the one bonus although they did throw one away when the correct answer had been very much on the table. Daniel Bloom was on a roll though and took the next starter with the term ‘calque’. Animals whose names are part of the name of teams in the NHL brought two bonuses. SOAS didn’t panic, though, and the words ‘painter’ and ‘yellow house’ were enough to give Seb Lawson a 6^th starter with Vincent Van Gogh. People born in 1825 yielded two bonuses and the revelation that Darwin’s bulldog, Thomas Huxley, was born in my home borough of Ealing! Yay. Skipper Lola Finch knew the term diegetic for the next starter. Atypical instruments used in works of classical music brought another two bonuses. This meant that on the cusp of the 20 minute mark SOAS led by 175 – 45. Game over? Probably.

Edinburgh were still leaping to the buzzer, though and Daniel Bloom was very quickly into identify a wee bit of Rousseau for the second picture starter. Two bonuses on paintings of storms followed. Seb Lawson’s 7^th starter identified Frederick the Great. The chemistry of painkillers brought a bonus, and only a very slight mispronunciation robbed them of one more. A good buzz from Siddhant Kumar linked Kekule – whose chief claim to fame was almost being an anagram of ukulele – with the word ouroboros. Publications linked by the word crisis brought a bonus.  Nigerian writer looked likely to be Wole Soyinka or Chinua Achebe – Seb Lawson zigged with Soyinka, but he shoulda zagged with Achebe. I didn’t get enough of the next question to understand it but Daniel Bloom knew the answer was zakat. Decades of the 11^th century brought just one bonus. Would they quite get to triple figures, I wondered. Well, Seb Lawson took starter 8 knowing beta carotene is a precursor to vitamin a. SI Derived units and elements were a nice UC special set but brought just one bonus. Didn’t matter, it was all gilding by this point. Aidan Langton knew that a language is a dialect with an army and a navy for the next starter. Two bonuses on pink were taken. Seb Lawson completed a haul of 9 starters knowing Krakatoa is in Indonesia (although not East of Java). Tone poems brought just 5 more points. My grandson was tickled pink to hear that the first tank was nicknamed Little Willie – he has inherited his old Grampa’s schoolboy sense of humour I’m afraid – but nobody had it. GOOONNNGGGG! SOAS won by 240 – 80.

With a bonus conversion rate of 56.4% to Edinburgh’s 42.8% it’s clear that SOAS were the better team in both buzzing and bonuses, and may well be worth an each way bet at this stage of the competition. Me? Sorry, no, with my tipping track record the Clark 50p is staying glued in my pocket. Even if SOAS swore to have wrapped Seb Lawson in cotton wool and given him a 24 hour bodyguard between matches.

Amol Watch

Can’t say anything caught the eye particularly tonight.

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

The phrase St. Elmo’s Fire derives from an Italian corruption of the name of the patron saint of mediterranean sailors.

Baby Elephant Walk Moment

Conversely, what term is used for a region of DNA immediately upstream of a gene that facilitates binding of RNA polymerase, therefore initiating transcription? The same word is used generally for a person who organises or supports an event. Dum de dumdum dum dum dum dum dumdum.

Mastermind 2027 First Round Heat 12

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is what you get when you don’t have any repechage slots in your series. But I fear I’m getting ahead of myself.

First into the lists was Kieran James answering on my banker subject, JRR Tolkein’s Lord of the Rings. I scored 5 on this set, but I reckon that Kieran has read the books far many more times than I have, for he answered every question correctly and I reckon he could have gone on doing so all night. In fact the only way you could criticise the round is that his answers were just a little measured which prevented him getting in a 13^th question. Exceptional performance, still.

Teacher Lydia Dias had support from the Clark sofa to overcome (yeah, alright, I’m well out of the classroom now and I ain’t never goin’ back, but I still want to see my brethren and sistren doing well) And doing well is something Lydia did. Answering at top speed she ot through 13 questions in total and it was a surprise that she only managed 11 of them. Only! It was a great performance and meant she would be well in contention.

Sadly Mark Hamid could not do the same with Foyle’s War. I don’t really know what went wrong with the round for Mark, but sometimes when it rains, it pours. I picked up 3 points with guesses on Jitterbug, Gone With the Wind and Rembrandt – all of which went begging for Mark. But it’s a shame, and he did look rather crestfallen on his return to contenders’ row.

Finally Joe Gellman, who was answering on the PDC world darts championship. 1 point took my aggregate to 9, with which I was delighted and happy to take the points and run. Joe had prepared thoroughly and gave us our third double figure round of the night, finishing with 10.

So to the GK round. Mark Hamid returned to the chair and delivered a thoroughly splendid round of 12. That’s class. You couldn’t help thinking about what might have been had he only had a better specialist round. Certainly worth your while thinking about having another try in the future Mark, for what it’s worth.

Here’s a thought for you. In the whole show tonight only two of the rounds did not score double figures. Mark’s specialist was one and Joe Gellman’s GK was the other. Mind you, he came pretty close, scoring 9 to give himself a total of 19. In terms of what we’ve already seen this series, that’s a good score and wherever he finished Joe could be well satisfied with his evening’s work.

As could Lydia Dias. From what I’ve already said you know that she achieved a double points round. What I haven’t said yet though is that this wasn’t just a double figure round, but a round in the teens. Yes, it looked like Lydia had a few guesses, but that’s the thing you see. A good quizzer will guess, but guess more accurately than others would. 24 is one of the highest totals this series so far. If Kieran was going to beat it, he was going to have to do it the hard way.

In fact, Kieran didn’t beat it. He scored 12 and 1 pass to equal Lydia’s score and this gave us a tie break. Which was fine by me,, as this was a contest to savour. In the end, given the same 5 questions Mark scored 4 to Lydia’s 3. Congratulations, sir. You have marked yourself out as a frontrunner in the current series and I really wish you the very best of luck in the semis. As for Lydia, I can only commiserate. This was the best performance from a teacher since John Robinson won 2 years ago. You were brilliant.

As for the people who make the show. We have seen a total of 15 win a heat in this series which beings an automatic place in the semi final. We have now seen a total of 24 which does not bring an automatic semi final place. I don’t know how much more clearly I can say this. There is not enough talent in the contender pool that you can afford to weaken the semi finals by not having one or two places for highest scoring runners up like Lydia. It was glaringly obvious last year. It is glaringly obvious this year. Please.

The Details

Kieran James	JRR Tolkien	12	0	12	1	24	1	4
Lydia Dias	Talking Heads	11	0	13	1	24	1	3
Mark Hamid	Foyle’s War	5	0	12	0	17	0
Joe Gellman	The PDC World Darts CHampionship	10	0	9	0	19	0

Rewarding Bad Behaviour

You know all about the Prisoners’ Dilemma, right? You also know how it translates to quiz/gameshow endgames. If not, it’s the endgame that offers two contestants a prize pot. All they have to do is to individually decide whether to share/split the pot with the other player, or steal it/shaft them by taking it all for themselves. If they both split/share, then both receive half of the money in the pot. If just one player decides to steal then they take it all while the other gets nothing. If both steal, then neither gets anything. We’ve seen it in Shafted, Golden Balls and Bank Job.

Well, the latest show to use this endgame is BBC’s the Inner Circle, which I watched last night before the endurance viewing marathon that is the early weeks of Strictly. One player had been by far the best player all show and I predicted he would shaft. He did too. I reckoned he was smart enough to know that your outcome cannot be worse if you shaft/steal. It did leave a bit of a nasty taste though.

Well, that’s the prisoners’ dilemma for you. It says a lot for pragmatism and very little for altruism. As indeed does another reality gameshow I don’t love myself for watching. Tempting Fortune has been back for another series. Paddy McGuinness hosted the first two series, and the latest is being hosted by Celebrity Faithfull Rob Beckett.

If you’ve never seen it, well, a number of contestants are given minimal equipment and rations and given 18 days to trek across a jungle. Everyone who completes the trek will take an equal share in a jackpot of £300,000. Ah, but along the way they will be tempted with treats, ranging from a Gregg’s steakbake to a night in Champney’s spa. The cost of the treats is deducted from the prize pot. So while one person may get to enjoy the treat, everyone pays for it.

The first time I watched the show I got rather angry with the takers – notwithstanding the fact that, were I in the same position, it’s very likely I would be one of them. But the fact is that the mechanics of this game do mean that you cannot be worse off if you are a taker. Yes, it is annoying to see people being deceitful and behaving in a way you would never condone outside of the game. For example, we did see a vicar in the previous series, and I wouldn’t have minded being a fly in the wall when some of his parishioners were talking about what they thought of his behaviour. But it’s a game. And the fact is that the mechanics of this game reward selfish behaviour. However self denying you are, others are going to grab the experience with both hands. You might just as well join ‘em, because you certainly ain’t going to beat ‘em.

I have watched each episode of the latest series. But I don’t like myself very much for doing so.

So that's the secret, is it?! I should cocoa.

I really shouldn’t click on clickbait on Facebook. But “Richard Osman reveals how the Chase makes sure that contestants lose most of the time” was just too much of a draw. Well, I read the article and Richard, who to the best of my knowledge has not ever been involved in the production of The Chase, does no such thing.

When you get right down to it, if you play in a lot of quizzes you’ll know that while you can always get a freak result, for the most part quizzes are won by the best quizzers who have the greatest general knowledge and the greatest quiz knowledge. There’s no dark secret about it. The Chasers are much better quizzers than the great majority of the contestants. Richard kind of acknowledges this, suggesting that if a Chaser’s win ratio went down significantly then the producers might well send them on their way. It’s never happened though. The Chasers are too good for that.

It might be the case that the contestants would win a few more shows if they didn’t have to buzz in to answer the questions in the Final Chase – although there’s no proof that this would make a significant difference.

There you are Rich, simple as that. Next time they pester you with questions about this sort of thing, then send them round to Uncle Dave and I’ll put them right. You know it makes sense.

Help Required

I posted this on the Mastermind Club Facebook page, and thought I’d post it here as well. I received this email yesterday :-

“Dear Londinius

 I found your email address when looking for information on Mastermind. I understand that you know a lot about it.

I'm trying to track down a recording of my brother, Andrew Hillier, from years ago. I believe his specialist subject was regarding horse racing. He is now 75 and has a terminal illness and I think it would tickle him pink if I could get a recording of the programme so he could watch it with his great niece and nephews. 

 Do you have any idea how I could find the recording? I've looked in the online BBC archive listing but can't find it. I hope you're able to help me move forward with this.

 Best regards

Jenny Copeland”

I compiled a database of all Mastermind contenders up to the 50^th anniversary in 2022. However it’s on my old laptop and I haven’t been able to download it yet. If I do manage to do this, I will let you know in which year Andrew appeared. If you can help at all, please leave a comment.

Tomorrow Night's Mastermind specialist subjects

Here it is, folks, tomorrow night’s Mastermind specialist subjects:-

The Lord of the Rings by JRR Tolkien

The band Talking Heads

The Television Series Foyle’s War

The PDC World Darts Championship

On a personal level this kind of puts all of my eggs into one basket. Yeah, if there’s a really, really, really easy one on Talking Heads there might be a point there, likewise for the darts, but I’ve never seen Foyle’s War, so my banker has to be Lord of the Rings. I mean, I’ve read the trilogy many times, but even so it’s so very easy to get things mixed up with it.