So, heat 23. Was it worth the wait? Well, that’s not really the fairest of questions considering how bloody long that wait has been. Well, let’s see how it all went.
First up was Angus Burns, offering what I thought would be
my banker subject, the London 2012 Olympic Games. I didn’t do too badly either,
with 5. Angus looked extremely assured at the start, but as the difficulty
level ramped up from the middle of the round he struggled to add many more points
to his score, levelling off with 7. Not actually by any means a bad performance
considering the width and breadth of the subject, but it looked likely to leave
him adrift by half time.
Kim Mackenzie hardly put a foot wrong in her own round on
the architect Frank Gehry. She answered all of the questions she was asked
correctly, and it was only a longish hesitation before answering one which
seemed to prevent her from achieving a score in the teens. As it was, 12 looked
highly competitive.
As much as the 2012 Olympic Games was a broad and wide
subject, so was Mark Pagan’s, British waterfowl and wading birds. As with Kim
before him, Mark seemed very much in control of his subject, despite a couple
of wrong answers. Following Kim’s round it looked pretty much as if only double
figure rounds would do in tonight’s heat and that’s exactly what he produced,
with 10.
Thus far I’d scored 5,1 and 1 in the specialist rounds and
Pete Simmonds’ round on the BBC House of Cards trilogy offered the chance to get
a double figure aggregate. I watched and enjoyed the trilogy, all those years
ago and this brought me 4 points for an aggregate of 11. Pete did considerably
better. As had Kim, Pete answered each of his questions correctly. However Pete
did not hesitate as he did so, and this brought him a total of 13 and meant
that when he returned to the chair he would know exactly what he needed to do.
I think that it was a case of what might have been for
Angus Burns when he returned for his GK round. He’d built up a decent head of
steam by mid round and this meant that he scored a good 12 to finish with 19.
Had he had a little more luck with his specialist round, then this GK
performance would have put his opposition under considerably more pressure.
As it was, though, Mark Pagan showed precious few nerves as
he set off on his own General Knowledge odyssey. He didn’t quite match Angus’
score, but then he didn’t have to. A good 11 put him 2 points ahead with 21,
and was enough to at least give the remaining two contenders a little food for
thought.
Kim Mackenzie had been so effective in her specialist round
that it was something of a shock to see her actually getting questions wrong in
her GK round. I’m glad that she still seemed to be enjoying the experience. On
another show, in another heat her 7 for 19 might just have brought her the win,
but it wasn’t going to happen in this company.
So Pete Simmonds walked back to the chair knowing that a
round of 9 points would bring him the win outright. Well, he did quite a lot
better than that. His 14 was one of the best GK performances we’ve seen this
series and an overall score of 27 will put him well amongst the top scorers in
my unofficial table to semi finalists which is something we can all look
forward to after next week’s show.
So was it worth the wait, then? Well, it was certainly a
good show and frankly beat all of those Sleb shows all hands down. Word to the
wise, Auntie Beeb, word to the wise.
The Details
|
Angus Burns |
London 2012 Olympics |
7 |
0 |
12 |
3 |
19 |
3 |
|
Kim Mackenzie |
Frank Gehry |
12 |
0 |
7 |
0 |
19 |
0 |
|
Mark Pagan |
British waterfowl and
wading birds |
10 |
0 |
11 |
2 |
21 |
2 |
|
Pete Simmonds |
The BBC’s House of
Cards Trilogy |
13 |
0 |
14 |
1 |
27 |
1 |
No comments:
Post a Comment