Right, when I posted about low scores on Mastermind earlier this week I had no idea what was going to happen on last night’s Mastermind. Just one of Fate’s nasty little tricks I suppose.
First up with a subject
very close to my heart was Helen Woolston. She was answering on British
butterflies. How I became interested in the subject is a long and not very
interesting story, but I did and knew enough to get 8 on the subject. Yes,
Helen’s 7 is a decent score, but she got some of the harder ones and missed
some easier ones which could have taken her close to double figures.
I scored nowt on
Melissa Hewitt’s round on the Bridgerton books. Hardly surprising since I’ve
never read any, but sometimes general knowledge will sneak you a point on a
subject you don’t know. Not this time. It looked as if Melissa herself was
struggling a bit too, and by the end of the round she had scored 5 points.
Next to come was David
Slater. I agree with everyone who has commented that he was sporting a rather
splendid waistcoat. David was answering on Jefferson Airplane. Again, I was not
totally convinced by the round. Alright, I didn’t know any, but I felt that 6 was
probably a little lower than he would have hoped.
Finally Carter Latif,
who gave us just a little bit of quality in his round on the often baffling TV
series Twin Peaks. Carter scored 8 for what was the best specialist round of
the night, which gave him a one point lead going into the second round.
Right, let me be
careful about what I say here. I am not meaning to criticize the contenders
here. Each put themselves on the line, and I am sure that each gave of their
best in the GK round. However this particular edition was crying out for one of
them to put in a round that blasted away the cobwebs of the specialists and
none of them really did that.
Melissa gave it a good
old lash, but the questions wouldn’t fall for her and she scored 6 for 11.
David did better, He came
closest of all of last night’s contenders to double figures, levelling out with
a pretty decent 9 for fifteen. Normally this would not give a contender a
realistic chance of a win, but there was something in the air.
Helen started her round
brightly enough, but as we’ve seen many times before she lost momentum in mid
round and could only add 6 to her total for 13.
This left only Carter,
but again, the questions did not fall kindly for the contender and he , like
Helen before him, finished with 13.
David, many
congratulations. You can only do your best – and you did – and a win is a win
is a win. I wish you the best of luck in the semi finals.
Right, let’s be
positive. None of our contenders failed to hit a double figure score. This
makes their scores a bit low but not disastrous. Just, I guess, a bit of a
perfect storm all coming together in the same heat. But surely more fuel to the
fire for the case for repechage places. I mean, when you have a contender who
only came second in his heat yet scored 10 more than anyone in this one. . .
well, do the Maths.
The Details
|
Helen Woolston |
British Butterflies |
7 |
0 |
6 |
0 |
13 |
0 |
|
Melissa Hewitt |
Julia Quinn’s Bridgerton Books |
5 |
1 |
6 |
1 |
11 |
2 |
|
David Slater |
Jefferson Airplane |
6 |
1 |
9 |
1 |
15 |
2 |
|
Carter Latif |
Twin Peaks |
8 |
1 |
5 |
2 |
13 |
3 |
2 comments:
I applaud anyone who puts themselves out there to be tested on national television but it really can't be good for the format to have a heat winner who isn't able to get close to 20 points. What can the Mastermind producers be up to? I've seen almost no noted quizzers this series which makes me wonder if there might be a deliberate policy of not letting them through the application process. Of course, it is possible that few have applied but that does seem a bit unlikely based on recent series. Am I only the one who is losing interest in Mastermind because of the interminable heats, many of which veer towards the dull end of the spectrum of excitement? And I haven't even mentioned the essay style questions which effectively block good quizzers from showing us what they know!
This is a tricky one. On the one hand, I really don’t want to say anything that would seem critical of the contenders in any show of Mastermind. But, on the same hand, I don’t want to lie about it either. Now, it is rare that we get to see a show in which nobody manages to come close to a score of 20. I appreciate the preparation that I believe most contenders put into their appearance on the show, but yes, I do find a run of episodes where the top score is 20 or below to be, well, not as interesting to me as more high scoring episodes.
Now, my information about the way that a production team puts together the roster for contenders for particular shows is almost 20 years old, so it should be viewed in this light. Back in that time I was told that the production team are more concerned about the subjects that they put in the same show than they are about the contenders that they put into the same show. So it does come from a good place – their idea being that people would rather see a range of subjects in the same show than very similar subjects.
However, it can result in the situation whereby two of the series’ highest scores happened in the same show. It didn’t matter so much when we had repechage spaces in the semis, but at the very least it does look harsh now when a runner up contender scored 10 points more than a heat winner.
I’m not really in a position to comment on BBC selection policy for the show. I rarely move in circles of serious quizdom any more, so the simple answer is that I just don’t know if the BBC have been turning down potential series winners in recent years. If they have, then they should take another serious look at the policy. If we take the last series, only 9 semi finalists had scored 13 or more on GK in the first round. That number, 13, is not an arbitrary pick. I would say that 13 is the lowest score you need to be capable of getting in a GK round to have a chance of winning the title. In my opinion and my own experience, you can always cram and prepare for a specialist round. But you can’t become very good at GK in a space of a few weeks.
For all I know a production team will have a pretty good idea from the auditions of just who is likely to do well in the GK round. And I can’t help feeling that they have a duty to the audience to include as many of these contenders as possible during the series. To use an analogy – we’re not Strictly Come Dancing Here. If you watch Strictly, you may notice that it is never won by the best celebrity dancer. The reason being that the public won’t vote for a celebrity they feel has an advantage because of a level of dance training and experience they have received in the past. No, the point of the show is for the public to become involved in a non-dancing celebrity’s ‘journey’ and essentially, it is a popularity contest. Well, the point of Mastermind IS to find the best quizzer. If you exclude people because you’ve good reason to think that they might be good at it, I’m sorry but I don’t agree with it.
Essentially, the production team have to ask themselves what they believe is the best for the brand. I would argue that the strength of the brand is the fact that very few people can do it well and to win it, you’ve got to be good. (Well, I would say that, wouldn’t I?)
Post a Comment