University Challenge at Christmas

No, don’t panic, I’m not reviewing every edition of University Challenge at Christmas. No, but I did think that I might just mention last night’s show, being Amol’s first.

It isn’t easy finding exactly the right words to discuss an edition of the Christmas shows. After all, it’s Christmas. Nowadays the people invited to be members of teams of their own alma mater tend to be largely academics, writers and broadcast journalists. These are people perfectly secure in their own intelligence, who have nothing to prove to anyone. They were invited on the show, and probably get nothing from it other than the fun of it, so I feel a bit of a heel if I criticise.

The thing is though, on some shows you forget that possibly none of these people have a quiz background. Then when you forget that fact, you can be struck with how much they don’t know. This always threatens to lead me down a slippery slope to criticism. So I’ll simply say that I enjoyed last night’s show, albeit that the questions were to me noticeably easier than the regular show. Amol took to this like a duck to water as I think you’d expect, although I did think that he showed off just a little bit – for example when nobody knew a quote from Macbeth he started reciting more of it. Not going to win friends and influence people that way, Amol.

Toughening up UC - really?

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.

The Poisoned Chalice of an Appearance on UC at Christmas

My mother-in-law has many excellent qualities. However a lively interest in quizzes is not one of them. She’s currently staying with us although she’s off back to Spain before New Year. When we watched the first of this year’s University Challenge at Christmas, as JP went through the very lengthy introduction to the team members, listing all of their admittedly very impressive achievements, Jen offered the opinion that they ought to be too good for the show. – Au contraire – I replied, or words to that effect. – You’ll be surprised how much they get wrong and how many times they don’t seem to understand the question. –

To be fair, she was, too.

I’m not trying to denigrate the great and the good who appear on the show. Far from it. You could argue that anyone accepting an invitation onto UC at Christmas is really on a hiding to nothing – and indeed JP often alludes to this in his opening or closing remarks. Think about it. In the student series, the teams have all gone through some sort of selection process – I’m sure it differs between institutions – and then had to earn selection as a team for the series. Yes, every series in the first round there tends to be at least one team who have a bit of a ‘mare, but for the most part they are competitive and do themselves and their reputations no harm by appearing on the show.

When I first started watching UC at Christmas more than ten years ago it wasn’t unusual for some of the teams to be given a ‘ringer’ that is, a champion quizzer in their line-up. Funnily enough the teams that benefitted from these selections tended to do conspicuously well. I always hoped that if Goldsmiths ever got invited on I might be that champion. Well, sadly that policy seemed to end a good ten years or so ago, and when Goldies were on a couple of years back they were a Clark free zone.

Well, there we are. I’m enjoying the current series, and trying to keep my mean comments (Can’t believe you don’t know that – how can you not know that – you stoopiiiidddd! – etc.) to a minimum. (Not succeeding very well, but at least I’m trying.)

Lillian Crawford Article 29th August

I missed this article earlier in the week. If you haven’t read it, you might find it interesting. University Challenge, Brain of Britain, Counterpoint and Mastermind contender, Lillian Crawford has written an interesting piece which appeared in the Guardian on Monday, and it’s well worth casting an eye over.

Lillian Crawford Article Guardian 29th August

Lillian discusses her reasons for going on these quiz shows – “to reinforce the importance of including more women within the cultural canon by greeting them with a cheery and confident correct answer, rather than a dismissive “pass”. Now, come on, that is interesting. It’s a perfectly valid reason, and rather puts my ‘I like quizzes and I was big headed enough to think I could win.’ to shame. Even with my specialists on Mastermind, I picked what I was interested in, what I already had books about, and in all bar one of them I picked what I thought was learnable within the timescale.

Lilliam recently worked as a researcher on University Challenge, producing a significant number of music and picture rounds – and I would think that is a position which gives you more of a say in what is included in the cultural canon than being a contestant.

Lillian goes on to say “Competing on University Challenge made me realise that I quiz not to perform knowledge, but to acquire it.” This again forces me to look myself squarely in the eye, and if I’m honest, I can’t say that I’ve played in so many quizzes over the years mainly because of what I will learn when I do it. Without doubt I have learned a huge amount from quizzing over the years. I still say that becoming a regular question master in the rugby club from 1995 onwards was when I started to become a good quizzer, and one of the main reasons why I was able to win in 2007. I found learning all of my Mastermind subjects to be tremendously interesting and enjoyable. But at the end of the day, if I’m honest I guess I’d say that for me the first thing about a quiz is showing off what I know, and dredging up the all-important answer from the dump-bin of memory. Yeah, not coming across very well here, am I?

I’m interested to see Lillian say of her 2021 appearance on Mastermind “Before appearing on the show contestants choose five subjects to prepare. . . “ In my day, you put 4 on the online application form, and then if you were lucky you’d whittle these down to three in your audition. If you were unlucky you’d need to come up with 3 replacements, which happened in my first audition. But even then, you wouldn’t prepare all of them in one go. There’s no sense in preparing your second subject until you’ve won your heat, for example.

Lillian makes the point that the questions she was asked about Sylvia Plath were mostly superficial merely calling for the retainment of facts. Well, that is kind of the name of the game on “Mastermind”, in fact the majority of quiz shows, I would argue. The savoir often is more important than the connaitre, to use an analogy which I think may have been made by Nancy Wilkinson, first Mastermind champion in 1972.

Lillian goes on to explain how she has given up on quizzes but explains how creating questions has proven to be more fulfilling. That’s fair enough, and as I said earlier, by crafting the questions you’re in a much better position to exert some influence over what becomes part of the canon of quizzing and what stays outside. As we often say, you can only answer what you’re asked.

One thing Lillian says is, “Quizzing isn’t just about getting the right answer”. No, I agree that it isn’t, but trying to get the right answer is the main point. She continues, “I hope that when someone hears a song or sees a painting they like on University Challenge they will investigate the artists further, and I believe many do.” Well, funnily enough during the last series one of the questions referred to Dan Simmons’ “Hyperion”. I knew nothing about the novel but was so taken by the few words spoken about it that I bought it, and absolutely loved it and the sequels.

I’m not going to argue with Lillian’s final words “So pay attention to those starters for 10 – if you don’t already know the answer you might learn something new.” Agreed, although even though I do pay attention there are some things which I don’t know, and when they come up again a few years later I still don’t know them.

As I said, I find it an interesting and thought-provoking piece, although it would have been nice to see Lillian express just what she thinks about people who quiz just for the sake of the game, because they enjoy doing it. I mean, let’s be honest, if you don’t enjoy actually playing in quizzes, then there are better ways of acquiring knowledge, and I don’t know but I would imagine there are better or easier ways of popularising specific areas of knowledge.

University Challenge at 60 Documentary

Well, well, dearly beloved. After months of having very little to say but still saying it anyway, we’ve got a lot to get through today. We’ve already reviewed last night’s UC. So let’s discuss for a moment the filling in last night’s UC/Starter for 10 sandwich, University Challenge at 60.

I felt it was a little ironic to see that Samira Ahmed voiced this affectionate documentary. She’s been the stand-in presenter should anything happen to JP for a while, yet she has been passed over for the main gig in favour of Amol Rajan. Well, there we are. Her affection for the show came through the voice over, and indeed, so did the affection of everyone else taking part.

There seemed to be a conscious effort to avoid going over similar ground to previous celebrations of OC. This we didn’t have contributions from some of the luminaries who went on from appearing on UC during its first quarter century on ITV. The only one was the lady from Southall (London Borough of Ealing! Yay!) who explained how appearing on University Chalenge for the University of Leicester in the early 70s - the first woman of asian heritage to do so - gave her back some of the confidence which years of racial bullying at school had taken away from her. This was moving and added a welcome serious note amongst all the jolliness of the show. 

Instead we had contributions from Chasers Mark Labbett and Jenny Ryan, both of whom had early TV appearances on UC. Neither won the series, but be fair, they’ve both done alright for themselves since. Then really a group of luminaries from the last fifteen years or so. Erik Monkman was the most relaxed and engaging that I’ve ever seen him appear on TV, and a joy to listen to. Part of the show looked briefly at the question whether anyone could be called the greatest contender ever. The name of Alex Guttenplan, who did not appear sadly, was toyed with, before a section featuring the great Gail Trimble, who it claimed holds the record for a single show of fifteen starters. I’m not arguing. Mind you, it made no reference whatsoever to the greatest controversy of the 60 years of the show when Gail Trimble’s Corpus Christi team were stripped of their win when it emerged that one of their team has left the University before filming the final. I mean, come on, we all know what happened, and a long time has passed. It could easily have been mentioned, along with – filming dates have been since changed to ensure that this won’t happen again. It just struck me as odd that you’d go to the trouble of having Gail Trimble on, yet not even mention it once.

I did enjoy the filmed insert featuring Brandon of Imperial, the 2020 champions. He described his single minded preparation, which involved watching something like fifty hours of Newsnight to get familiar with Jeremy Paxman’s accent and diction. His point was that preparation will beat talent, and he suggested that anyone can do it with the right preparation. I’m not so sure. Preparation beats just talent – yes, probably. But I think that preparation plus talent beats just preparation. Or let’s put it another way. I feel that we probably each have an optimum level of quizzer we could be. Some of us, because of our personal talents and abilities – our recall, for instance – have a higher optimum level than others. So in the same way, it doesn’t matter how hard you practice and how many lessons you have with a top professional, you are never going to be as good a golfer as Tiger Woods was in his pomp. However if you do undertake the preparation and have the lessons you are going to become a lot better than you were. I think it’s the same with preparation for quizzes.

An enjoyable hour then, when all of the talking heads had something interesting to contribute. I found it amusing to hear Griff Rhys Jones say that when he met Bamber Gascoigne the great man was far too polite to mention Griff’s impersonation of him for the immortal Young Ones ‘Bambi’ episode. Mind you, Griff himself didn’t mention that he’d previously made the same impression in an earlier Not the Nine O’Clock News sketch – HM Prisons Challenge. (Was it Reggie ‘the dog’ Trubshawe?)

So now that we’ve had justice done to University Challenge, come on BBC – what about Mastermind’s Fiftieth Anniversary?

University Challenge at 60

 I've just been looking at the schedule for the next week on the iplayer, and it has confirmed that the new series of University Challenge starts on BBC2 at 8:30 following Only Connect, which begins series 18 at 8pm. Happy days - quizzy Mondays are back. No sign of Mastermind returning yet, but soldier on. At the bottom of the BBC's own Mastermind Website History fo the Show page it does say that the show returns in September 2022.

Straight after the first match, though, I noticed there's a special documentary - University Challenge at 60. Fantastic - and it's well deserved by the show. It's an hour long too, so well done, BBC. It's followed by the film, Starter for Ten. So full marks for recognising this milestone.

On the other hand, I've still not found out any information regarding when the next series of Mastermind is going to start. I hope - without necessarily a massive amount of anticipation - that the BBC are intending to mark the 50th Anniversary of Mastermind somehow. In purely symbolic terms if nothing else, 50 is a hugely significant number, which the BBC recognised ten years ago when they celebrated University Challenge reaching the milestone with a similar evening to that planned on Monday. This, mind you, even considering that University Challenge, this most archetypal of BBC quiz shows, was shown on ITV for the first 25 years of its existence. Mastermind has always been made for the BBC, even if it hasn't been made by the BBC for the last few years. On the BBC Mastermind web pages, on the History of the Show page it does say "Mastermind celebrates its 0th Anniversary in 2022'. Well it doesn't actually say 'Mastermind celebrates its anniversary in 2022 (but we don't)' so one can only hope.

Look, you know me well enough by now, and how defensive about Mastermind I can be. I can't help it. I do hope that the BBC mark the anniversary in some way. Even if they've decided not to involve past champions - or even if they do involve past champions but not me - I can live with that. But as I hope hat I showed when I wrote about the history of the show a few months back, there is an interesting story to be told there. 

- and Hello, Amol Rajan

 Blimey. Literally just posted about JP leaving, only to find that the Beeb have announced that the new host will be Amol Rajan. Is this another chalk following cheese choice? Well, I think that there's reasons for saying yes, and reasons for saying no.

Some will say - and some already have said that we have another Cambridge educated presenter with a journalism background. I'll be honest, I'd rather this than some more light entertainment personality who might be tempted to think that the show is all about them. On the other hand, though, you can also argue that Amol Rajan, if he hasn't exactly become a jack of all trades he'd certainly accrued a wide range of presenting experience in over a decade, including Radio 2 where I first encountered him covering for Simon Mayo, the One Show, and a range of other assignments.

It's probably fair to say that the reaction to the news from the some of the most vocal sections of the UC audience has been mixed. A widely held opinion is that Amol probably won't want to stay presenting the show for long. I don't know whether there's any grounds for saying this other than the wide range of jobs he's taken in his career. And to be honest, I'm not sure what the BBC could have done about this anyway. I hope that UC goes on forever, but can you realistically ask someone to commit to, shall we say, a  10 year contract when there's no guarantee the show will still be around. 

Like a lot of people, I thought Samira Ahmed would have been a good choice. For whatever reason, she's been overlooked. There we are. These things happen. Amol has been appointed, and he deserves to be given a fair chance with the show. As i is we have a whole JP series to enjoy before we'll get the opportunity to see what the Rajan era UC will look like. Good luck Amol. 

Duty of Care

What’s this? A weekday post that’s not a review of Mastermind or University Challenge? Has the world gone mad? No, not really. You see by the end of school yesterday afternoon I’d developed a sore throat, bad chest and a splitting headache. I took a lateral flow test and the result was inconclusive. So I booked a test at my local drive in centre yesterday evening, and I’m waiting at home for the results to come back. If I was a betting man I’d say it’s just a cold, but it’s not a gamble I can afford to take. If I am positive the last thing I want to be doing is spreading it to classrooms full of kids. So I do have this little bit of unexpected time. It also means I won't be going to the rugby club quiz tonight.

I’d like to revisit the question regarding how much of a duty of care, if any, a production company has towards the contestants participating in their shows. When I say duty of care I’m not referring to physical safety, since I’m sure that’s pretty much a given. But do production companies also have a duty of care as regards the way that a contestant or a team come across on the screen? Yes, alright, this is inspired at least a bit by the plight of the Sussex team on this Monday’s University Challenge. But I think it’s a fair question.

I can understand if you think that no, they don’t. After all, nobody forces you to apply, do they? Either you’ve watched the show and so you’re fully aware of the risks involved, or you haven’t watched the show in which case you maybe deserve what you get for applying. Personally, I don’t think it’s quite as simple as that.

I think you have to take into account the risk/reward ratio of each different show. If you take a show like, let’s say for the sake of argument, Tipping Point, I’d argue that the risk of appearing on the show is small, while the potential reward is fairly substantial. After all, as much as the show is about getting questions right, it’s also about the luck of the way that the ‘coins’ fall for you. So you go out in the first round? It’s unlikely that you’re going to face a Twitter storm about your assumed lack of intelligence. Now let’s take Mastermind. The risk is – in terms of quiz shows – about as high as it gets. You need to put a lot of work into preparing your subject, and even then you don’t know how you are going to react to sitting in the chair until you are in it, by which time it’s too late. Most contenders manage decent or good rounds. However, on the relatively rare occasions when a contender posts a low score, then there’s the embarrassment factor for the contender, and often a barrage of unkind and ill-informed comments on social media. And let’s be absolutely clear on this – a low score on Mastermind or University Challenge or any other quiz show is NO REFLECTION WHATSOEVER on that contender’s intelligence. Yes, I’d like to think that doing well on Mastermind shows that you’re pretty smart, but really and truly, all it definitely shows is that you’re good on quizzes like Mastermind. As for the reward – well, there’s only one tangible reward, the winner’s bowl. While it’s very nice, and a great conversation piece, it’s not quite riches beyond the dreams of avarice.

So saying all that then, when a show has such a high level of risk with such a (financially) low level of reward, is it still reasonable to say – you applied, no one forced you to, so what’s the problem? Well, to be fair, I don’t think that the various production teams of MM, UC, OC have ever been blasé about the fate of their participants. In Magnus’ book “I’ve Started So I’ll Finish” he does talk about the selection criteria aimed at saving some contenders from themselves. In my own audition in 2005 the 20 GK questions formed an important part of the audition, as did a set of questions and an improvised connections wall in our audition for OC. To my own regret I never explored the possibility of going on UC when I was at uni, so I have no personal experience at their selection processes, but I’m sure that they have their own ‘quality control’ for want of a kinder term. So what happened on Monday night? Who knows? As I said at the time, I have no doubt that the Sussex team are highly intelligent people who are good at their subject. So maybe it was just a perfect storm of questions to which they didn’t know the answers. I don’t care who you are, there are questions to which you don’t know the answer, and if you get twenty or thirty of them altogether on the same evening then you can end up looking and feeling distinctly second or third rate. Maybe that was what happened on Monday night. Whatever the case, I think it’s a shame that the team were put in the position where it happened. I’m not going to reprint any of the Twitter comments posted afterwards, but many of them weren’t pleasant.

Round Up

I’m sorry if you’ve been missing the reviews and features on LAM. Come to think of it, I’m even sorrier if you haven’t been missing them, but then that’s my problem and I’ll just have to get on with it.

To begin with, apologies to Mark Eves. I may be wrong, but I think that Mark’s winning performance in the first heat of this year’s Mastermind is the first regular Mastermind show that I haven’t reviewed on LAM since my own grand final in the 2007 SOBM. If you didn’t see it, well, it was a hell of a heat with which to kick off the series. To give you an idea, Mark Eves, the heat winner, was last seen in Mastermind in the 2006 Grand Final. His main opposition came from our own Gareth Kingston, whose score of 28 would, I am quite sure, have been enough to win many another heat of this series. Without wanting in any way to jinx Gareth, it really has a very good chance of being enough to see him through to a place in the semis as well. My initial impressions, which seem to be borne out by the specialist scores, are that the specialist questions at least seem to be a little more succinct than last year’s, which would certainly be a change for the better. Time will tell, and I await this week’s show with interest.

Congratulations to the Scotland team who won this year’s series of Round Britain Quiz. Congratulations also to our own Stephen Fellows, and everybody else involved in setting questions and putting together this highly enjoyable series.

My apologies to Ted Loveday, Michael Taylor, Anthony Martinelli, and Jeremy Warner of Gonville and Caius, that I was unable to review their magnificent 305 – 105 victory over St. Anne’s Oxford in University Challenge. My apologies too to the St. Anne’s team of Sam Zwolinski, Laura Ludtke, Edward Hicks and Rebecca McKavanagh. A review of last night’s show will follow asap.

Also apologies to everyone who follows the news questions. I freely confess that I have done no work on gathering news questions until this very morning – a fact which undoubtedly cost us points in Sunday and last night’s quizzes – although not fatally so in either. A new set of news questions should be coming your way by the weekend.

So finally, a big thank you all of you who offered best wishes, and were kind enough to enquire how the holiday was going. It was my first holiday away for two years, and I thoroughly enjoyed it (the second quiz notwithstanding). Normal service will now be resumed.