Monday, 13 August 2012

University Challenge: Round 1: Match 3: Wadham vs Bristol

After a two week break for the Olympics, University Challenge returned this evening. I'd like to say we had a good match to resume normal service, but I'm not sure I can (no offence to either team).

Playing tonight were Wadham College Oxford and Bristol University.

Wadham College Oxford was founded in 1610, and former students include the soon-to-be-retiring Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams, Christopher Wren, Michael Foot and, er, my Uncle John! The college last entered the show in 2006-07, where they trounced Robinson College Cambridge and Royal Holloway London, before losing a close match to eventual runners-up Manchester. Tonight's quartet, one of the youngest this series apparantly, were:
Alisatir Smout, from Harpenden in Hertfordshire, studying PPE
Jonathan Hall, from Sheffield, studying Politics
Captain: Jonathan Stanhope, from Durha, studying History and Politics
Oliver Forrest, from London, studying English

Bristol is somewhat newer, having been first established in the 1870s. Alumni include Lucas and Walliums of Little Britain fame, and the author David Nicholls (if you haven’t read Starter for Ten yet, do; it’s a seriously good book). The university last appeared on the show two years ago, where they scraped a win against St Andrews in the first round, and then trounced Newnham College Cambridge in the second; then, despite going into both their quarter-final matches as favourites, they lost both to Queens’ College Cambridge, and eventual runners-up York respectively. Playing tonight were:
James Xiao, from Hampsire, studying Chemistry
Andy Suttie, from Kelso in the Borders, studying the History and Philosophy of Science
Captain: Will Brady, from Hertford, studying Maths
Madeline Fforde, from Wiltshire, studying Classics and Ancient History

Bristol got off to the stronger start on the buzzers, but their poor showing on the bonuses meant that they could never draw out as big a lead as perhaps they could have. Wadham began to slowly make their way back into the match, but they too were struggling on the bonuses, notably, in the music round, on operas where the title character was called ‘Don’. Am I the only one who guessed that ‘Don Carlos would be the final one, before the first one was played?

Throughout the second half of the match, the sides generally swapped starters and, though Wadham came within touching distance a few times, they couldn’t overtake Bristol. Though both sides got starters, not very many bonuses followed suite. In the end, Bristol emerged narrow winners by 120-105. It wasn’t until I was typing up my usual short summary on the forum that I realised that Bristol’s score is the lowest winning score achieved under Mr Paxo’s tenure.

Andy Suttie’s four starters was Bristol’s best tally; the side answered 10 bonuses correctly out of a possible 27, with four incorrect interruptions. Wadham split the starters evenly, with all four players getting two each; the side only answered 6 bonuses out of 24, with one penalty.

Not a classic match by any means; with all due respect, neither side really got into gear. It was Bristol’s slightly better showing on the buzzers that won them the match, as neither side really impressed on the bonuses. Further progress for the Avonsiders looks unlikely, unless they improve on the bonuses next time, which is always a possibility.

Next week’s match: Strathclyde vs Durham

1 comment:

  1. No Jack, I did exactly the same thing with Don carlos. FUnnily enough I knew Don Giovanni, but not the others, so I kept answering Don Carlos , knowing it would definitely be ONE of them. Don Quixote didn't occur to me.

    This wasn't a great match by any stretch of the imagination. You can only judge so much from one match, but I would be worried for this Bristol team if they came up against one of the best sides , who also happened to be good on the buzzer, in the next round. Too many gap areas in knowledge there for my liking - and they didn't do brilliantly with the maths and science either, and you have to have at least one person on your team who can take care of those for you, prefereably two.

    ReplyDelete