University Challenge 2019-20: First Round Review

OK, so, we've finally reached the end of the first round of this year's contest, and even though it's taken the exact same time to do so as last series, plus the two breaks, it feels longer. Maybe its because the two breaks came right in the middle of the round rather than right at the start and right at the end of it, like last year.

Anyway, we're here now, so, here are our fourteen first round winners, in order of qualification, and with their scores and margins of victory:

• Glasgow (230, 135)
• Corpus Christi College Cambridge (195, 55)
• Magdalen College Oxford (170, 20)
• Birmingham (125, 5)
• St John's College Oxford (115, 75)
• Edinburgh (165, 75)
• Manchester (185, 40)
• Trinity College Cambridge (200, 55)
• Courtauld Institute of Art (145, 55)
• Southampton (175, 80)
• Huddersfield (145, 20)
• Wolfson College Oxford (170, won on tie-breaker)
• Imperial College London (255, 185)
• Lady Margaret Hall Oxford (150, 5)

Those are the raw figures; time to do the usual and look past them at the actual performances...

Well, it wasn't a terribly high scoring first round; only three scores past 200, and Glasgow's opening night score of 230 was the highest until Imperial stormed to 255 last week. Those two plus Trinity would probably start as favourites to progress, provided they stay away from each other, and provided they can match that level of performance against stronger, proven teams.

Them aside, the field is pretty tight, with seven teams within 45 points of each other who could realistically make it. And even then, I definitely wouldn't rule out any of the four low scoring teams out either, though, in practice, I strongly suspect they'd sturggle, especially against one of the afore mentioned three.

If I were to single any of that 150-195 bunch out, I'd probably single of Wolfson and Magdalen, both of whose opponents reached the play-offs, and Corpus Christi, whose just missed out. But, as I say, it's an open close field. And that's before we factor in the teams who could possibly come through the play-offs.

Our four play-off teams are:

• Sheffield (170, lost on tie-breaker)
• York (170, 20)
• And two of the three teams on 145, Durham (55), Jesus College Oxford (40) and Downing College Cambridge (5)

Which two we of course don't know yet. Paxo informed us at the end of Monday's show, it would be the two teams who had needed the fewest questions to reach their total, and myself and UCStats on Twitter have spent the two days since trying to work out which two that'd be.

I would say Durham would definitely be one of them, having reached their score via one fewer starter, seven compared to the eight Jesus and Downing needed. And as those two are on the same, and had, to all intents and purposes, the same bonus rate too, telling them apart becomes rather tricky.

I said on Monday I would guess Downing would go through having only heard one fewer bonus than Jesus did; UCStats, meanwhile, has calculated the exact number of questions both teams faced (both starters and bonuses) and has determined that Jesus heard fewer and would go through. It's a very tough call to make, but whichever teams gets the place will deserve it.

Based on the standard 1st vs 4th and 2nd vs 3rd play-off draw we've had for many years now, I'd guess Sheffield will play Jesus or Downing on Monday, then York will play Durham the week after. But, with just 25 points separating the five of them, whichever two matches we get would be way too close to call IMO; these are four good teams.

Whatever happens, all we can hope for, as we always do, is that the play-offs and second round continue to give us more of the same as, of better than, what we've had so far; best of luck to all the teams involved!

I'll talk a bit about Only Connect as well, given that it has finished its first round as well. It's been a good series so far, with some good close matches and some decent performances. Having seen the draw for the first two eliminator matches though, I do wish they would jiggle up the draw for the second phase matches rather than just pairing up the winners and losers of successive matches. I understand it's done for convenience purposes, two first round matches and their resultant eliminator and qualifier matches are filmed on the same day(?), but I'd rather have proper seedings for these matches. But at least all teams get at least two games, which I think everyone agrees is only a good thing.

That's it for now, back on Monday with my usual UC write-up; see you then, I guess.