Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

All discussion relevant to Countdown that is not too spoilerific. New members: come here first to introduce yourself. We don't bite, or at least rarely.
Post Reply
User avatar
Jon Corby
Moral Hero
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:36 am

Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Jon Corby »

Reminder that Rachel Riley is on Celebrity Mastermind tonight, BBC1 (I'd recommend HD). It looks like her specialist subject is Man Utd, which is a pretty sprawling subject so I hope she knows her history (football didn't actually start in 1992).

BTW, I'll try and make a slo-mo animated gif at some point of her sucking drink out of an ice sculpture of Alan Carr's face (? or somesuch) at some point, which I just happened to catch the other day. The close-up of her sucking at this tube while gazing upwards really was... well, quite something.
Lucy Gowers
Rookie
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 8:10 pm

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Lucy Gowers »

Jon Corby wrote:Reminder that Rachel Riley is on Celebrity Mastermind tonight, BBC1 (I'd recommend HD). It looks like her specialist subject is Man Utd, which is a pretty sprawling subject so I hope she knows her history (football didn't actually start in 1992).
I think she's only covering 1999 onwards!
User avatar
Jon Corby
Moral Hero
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Jon Corby »

Lucy Gowers wrote:I think she's only covering 1999 onwards!
Bah! I wonder how they decide what a valid "specialist subject" is? Surely there's a huge difference in depth?

Oh, I should have said 7pm in my OP as well, apologies.
User avatar
Phil Reynolds
Postmaster General
Posts: 3329
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Phil Reynolds »

Jon Corby wrote:I wonder how they decide what a valid "specialist subject" is? Surely there's a huge difference in depth?
The criteria for the celebrity editions appear to be relaxed somewhat, as is the difficulty of the general knowledge questions.
User avatar
Jon Corby
Moral Hero
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Jon Corby »

Phil Reynolds wrote:
Jon Corby wrote:I wonder how they decide what a valid "specialist subject" is? Surely there's a huge difference in depth?
The criteria for the celebrity editions appear to be relaxed somewhat, as is the difficulty of the general knowledge questions.
Sure, but even then there must be a really huge variety in the depth of people's specialist subjects, celebrity edition or otherwise.
User avatar
Julie T
Kiloposter
Posts: 1130
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 3:12 pm
Location: Hertfordshire, England

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Julie T »

Phil Reynolds wrote:
Jon Corby wrote:I wonder how they decide what a valid "specialist subject" is? Surely there's a huge difference in depth?
The criteria for the celebrity editions appear to be relaxed somewhat, as is the difficulty of the general knowledge questions.
Quite. Admittedly I'm a huge Frasier fan, but I got all but one question right last night as the specialist subject - more than the contestant who went on to win! :D
I got 12 questions correct on one of the 4 general knowledge goes, whereas on the contest proper my usual hit rate is between 6 and 8 per contestant.
"My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me." Benjamin Disraeli
User avatar
Phil Reynolds
Postmaster General
Posts: 3329
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Phil Reynolds »

Jon Corby wrote:there must be a really huge variety in the depth of people's specialist subjects, celebrity edition or otherwise.
Of course, and many nominated specialist subjects have been rejected, in some cases presumably for being too narrow. The Wikipedia article lists a few:
  • Routes to anywhere in mainland Britain by road from Letchworth
  • Cremation practice and law in Britain
  • The banana industry
  • Orthopaedic bone cement in total hip replacement
  • Perfect squares from 9801.
User avatar
Jon Corby
Moral Hero
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Jon Corby »

Phil Reynolds wrote:
Jon Corby wrote:there must be a really huge variety in the depth of people's specialist subjects, celebrity edition or otherwise.
Of course, and many nominated specialist subjects have been rejected, in some cases presumably for being too narrow. The Wikipedia article lists a few:
  • Routes to anywhere in mainland Britain by road from Letchworth
  • Cremation practice and law in Britain
  • The banana industry
  • Orthopaedic bone cement in total hip replacement
  • Perfect squares from 9801.
Interesting. Most of them do look a bit daft, but "cremation in Britain" sounds like it could be a reasonable subject, and "the banana industry" definitely does, although I say that with no knowledge whatsoever of the subject. But it sounds like something which could span thousands of years and be quite varied. Actually, could that be a part of the criteria too, "playalongability" (or even just interest) for the viewers at home? I don't watch Mastermind much.
User avatar
Phil Reynolds
Postmaster General
Posts: 3329
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Phil Reynolds »

Jon Corby wrote:"cremation in Britain" sounds like it could be a reasonable subject
It's certainly a hot topic.
User avatar
Michael Wallace
Racoonteur
Posts: 5458
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
Location: London

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Michael Wallace »

Jon Corby wrote:Actually, could that be a part of the criteria too, "playalongability" (or even just interest) for the viewers at home? I don't watch Mastermind much.
I'd imagine making it interesting for the viewer at home is a factor, although I've never been convinced by Mastermind's playalongability. It's the main reason I don't make a habit of watching it - seeing people answering very specific questions about subjects I have no knowledge of is just a bit tedious. That's not to say I just pooh-pooh any quiz about things I don't know - I enjoyed the first episode of A Question of Taste precisely because I know very little about food trivia - but I think there's a point beyond which it's just a series of questions I don't understand and will never remember anyway. Obviously it's then quite exciting when a subject comes up that you do know about, but I've found that's so rare as to render the show a bit pointles.

Specialist subjects do seem quite open to gaming though. For instance, in the proper series I remember seeing someone whose subject was the Harry Potter books, and having merely read them myself was enough to get most of the questions right. There are presumably plenty of similar examples, and using date restrictions to minimise how much revision you have to do.
User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9494
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Charlie Reams »

Michael Wallace wrote: It's the main reason I don't make a habit of watching it - seeing people answering very specific questions about subjects I have no knowledge of is just a bit tedious.
Agreed. Can anyone explain the appeal?
User avatar
Phil Reynolds
Postmaster General
Posts: 3329
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Phil Reynolds »

Charlie Reams wrote:
Michael Wallace wrote: It's the main reason I don't make a habit of watching it - seeing people answering very specific questions about subjects I have no knowledge of is just a bit tedious.
Agreed. Can anyone explain the appeal?
The play-along factor may be the reason why in recent series they've made the general knowledge round longer than the specialist round. Also, it's no coincidence that the specialist subjects in each show cover a wide range of disciplines, so there's usually at least one on which you can answer a few of the questions.

There's also the pleasure of seeing people do amazingly well, and of course the corresponding schadenfreude when somebody scores 1 point in their specialist subject (which has happened).
User avatar
Jon Corby
Moral Hero
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Jon Corby »

Phil Reynolds wrote:There's also the pleasure of seeing people do amazingly well, and of course the corresponding schadenfreude when somebody scores 1 point in their specialist subject (which has happened).
But again that might not be down to their idiocy, just the fact that they picked a broad subject and got asked some twattish questions. It all seems jolly unfair really.
User avatar
James Robinson
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 10573
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: Mirfield, West Yorkshire

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by James Robinson »

Rachel was very impressive I thought, especially in the GK (even though it is clearly easier than regular Mastermind), when she was the best of the contestants.

I had a feeling that Miles would win it after that brilliant Michael Atherton specialist subject round. (Now that's POINTLESS cricket knowledge. :P :ugeek: )
Eoin Monaghan
Kiloposter
Posts: 1462
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 7:33 pm

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Eoin Monaghan »

Rachel was very good today and would have won last night's show easily. Unlucky to come up against such a strong player in Miles.

Manchester United from 1999 was probably the best topic I could ever hope for and if I was to ever appear it would be a choice. :P (Wouldn't be picked though, too common.)
User avatar
Brian Moore
Devotee
Posts: 582
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 6:11 pm
Location: Exeter

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Brian Moore »

Seems like Rachel's appearance as garnered the attention of some cyclists: http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtop ... t=12829157 - worth scrolling down for the GIF.
Ryan Taylor
Postmaster General
Posts: 3661
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:18 pm

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Ryan Taylor »

Jon Corby wrote:
Phil Reynolds wrote:There's also the pleasure of seeing people do amazingly well, and of course the corresponding schadenfreude when somebody scores 1 point in their specialist subject (which has happened).
But again that might not be down to their idiocy, just the fact that they picked a broad subject and got asked some twattish questions. It all seems jolly unfair really.
See Simon Curtis who is ridiculed (wrongly) (see the 2008 Mastermind champion's blog) for his performance on the show.
Charlie Reams wrote:
Michael Wallace wrote: It's the main reason I don't make a habit of watching it - seeing people answering very specific questions about subjects I have no knowledge of is just a bit tedious.
Agreed. Can anyone explain the appeal?
Mainly what Phil said (the pleasure of seeing somebody showcasing their knowledge and the challenge to answer some questions on a vague area that you may have come across) but also it's a quick and different way to learn some information on a subject which could come up in general knowledge quizzes. With all that said, I usually tune in halfway through (or just sky plus to the GK round).

Well done to Rachel by the way, she did very well and although Snow said that she was joint second, I think she was actually second on her own since she had fewer passes than Gary. And although the GK round is very easy, she was still the highest scorer on this round out of everyone.
User avatar
Phil Reynolds
Postmaster General
Posts: 3329
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Phil Reynolds »

Ryan Taylor wrote:See Simon Curtis who is ridiculed (wrongly) (see the 2008 Mastermind champion's blog) for his performance on the show.
I'm not too sure what happened there since the questions seemed to be mostly the sort of thing someone ought to know if they were a fan of Jim Carrey's films and had watched at least the best known ones recently, which you would expect someone to do if they were going on Mastermind answering questions about them. I notice the application form nowadays requires you to state your main reference sources for each of your nominated specialist subjects, which, they say, "is vital so we can ascertain what you understand your subject to be". I wondered if this might be in response to high profile cases like Curtis's, but looking at that clip again his facial expressions seem to suggest exasperation with himself that he can't quite remember the answers (presumably owing to inadequate revision) rather than bewilderment that the scope of the questions isn't what he was expecting. (I've taken part in a couple of local Mastermind quizzes where the latter has happened, and - on at least one occasion - considerable acrimony has ensued, so the BBC's move is undoubtedly a wise one.)
Ryan Taylor
Postmaster General
Posts: 3661
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:18 pm

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Ryan Taylor »

Phil Reynolds wrote:
Ryan Taylor wrote:See Simon Curtis who is ridiculed (wrongly) (see the 2008 Mastermind champion's blog) for his performance on the show.
I'm not too sure what happened there since the questions seemed to be mostly the sort of thing someone ought to know if they were a fan of Jim Carrey's films and had watched at least the best known ones recently, which you would expect someone to do if they were going on Mastermind answering questions about them. I notice the application form nowadays requires you to state your main reference sources for each of your nominated specialist subjects, which, they say, "is vital so we can ascertain what you understand your subject to be". I wondered if this might be in response to high profile cases like Curtis's, but looking at that clip again his facial expressions seem to suggest exasperation with himself that he can't quite remember the answers (presumably owing to inadequate revision) rather than bewilderment that the scope of the questions isn't what he was expecting. (I've taken part in a couple of local Mastermind quizzes where the latter has happened, and - on at least one occasion - considerable acrimony has ensued, so the BBC's move is undoubtedly a wise one.)
One thing I thought was with him having already got through his heat game he maybe only did have one area of expertise and maybe didn't expect he'd win a show. So then it came as a shock that he had to have another specialist subject. Although on the application I think you do have to state like 5 different specialist usbjects so you'd expect him to know a bit about Jim Carrey. So I think it was maybe just that horrible moment where you think you know things when you are reading it and you think you're taking it in but then it comes to recalling it and you just can't. I've done that in an exam before, thought I knew quite a lot, got in to sit it and everything that I thought I knew just became distorted and all joined up in one big gooey mess in my head.
User avatar
Jon Corby
Moral Hero
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Jon Corby »

Rach did very well, woman at work is convinced she was stitched up on the specialist round by not fitting in as many questions as the others. (Not impressed by Wayne Hemingway's general knowledge either, I'm never going quids in with him on Pub Quiz.)
User avatar
Julie T
Kiloposter
Posts: 1130
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 3:12 pm
Location: Hertfordshire, England

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Julie T »

James Robinson wrote:Rachel was very impressive I thought, especially in the GK (even though it is clearly easier than regular Mastermind), when she was the best of the contestants.
She certainly did do well in GK. She had the knowledge, but also, just as importantly, she rattled through her answers so that she got more questions than most in her allotted time. It's surprising how many contestants in Mastermind proper dither about, never mind in the Celebrity version.
"My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me." Benjamin Disraeli
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Jon Corby wrote:woman at work is convinced she was stitched up on the specialist round by not fitting in as many questions as the others.
I've often wondered how they can do this fairly. If they have a set amount of time and the question-asking is included in the time, surely some people will be disadvantaged by having longer questions.
Mark James
Kiloposter
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 3:21 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Mark James »

Gavin Chipper wrote:
Jon Corby wrote:woman at work is convinced she was stitched up on the specialist round by not fitting in as many questions as the others.
I've often wondered how they can do this fairly. If they have a set amount of time and the question-asking is included in the time, surely some people will be disadvantaged by having longer questions.
Also, they don't seem to allow you cut across and give the answer until the question is asked. Is this the rule or am I imagining this happening?
User avatar
Jon O'Neill
Ginger Ninja
Posts: 4545
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:45 am
Location: London, UK

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Jon O'Neill »

Mark James wrote:
Gavin Chipper wrote:
Jon Corby wrote:woman at work is convinced she was stitched up on the specialist round by not fitting in as many questions as the others.
I've often wondered how they can do this fairly. If they have a set amount of time and the question-asking is included in the time, surely some people will be disadvantaged by having longer questions.
Also, they don't seem to allow you cut across and give the answer until the question is asked. Is this the rule or am I imagining this happening?
I think the guy is just a dick. He lets them get it wrong.
User avatar
Jon O'Neill
Ginger Ninja
Posts: 4545
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:45 am
Location: London, UK

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Jon O'Neill »

The guy complaining to Ofcom about getting ripped on in a comedy show is also a dick.
User avatar
Phil Reynolds
Postmaster General
Posts: 3329
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Phil Reynolds »

Gavin Chipper wrote:If they have a set amount of time and the question-asking is included in the time, surely some people will be disadvantaged by having longer questions.
It certainly used to be the case (not sure if it still is) that the questions and answers were timed so that a contender answering each question correctly and promptly could expect to get through the same number within the two minutes. I suspect this is why some questions seem to be unnecessarily wordy, and also why cutting in with the answer is not allowed.
User avatar
Jon Corby
Moral Hero
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Jon Corby »

Phil Reynolds wrote:
Gavin Chipper wrote:If they have a set amount of time and the question-asking is included in the time, surely some people will be disadvantaged by having longer questions.
It certainly used to be the case (not sure if it still is) that the questions and answers were timed so that a contender answering each question correctly and promptly could expect to get through the same number within the two minutes. I suspect this is why some questions seem to be unnecessarily wordy, and also why cutting in with the answer is not allowed.
Yeah, the woman at work explained this to me, and still maintained that Rachel was stiffed on the questions:time ratio. How many did she get wrong? I remember the Jimmy Ryan one (which she answered Carlos Queiroz after a pause), were there others? If not, she probably has a point.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Phil Reynolds wrote:
Gavin Chipper wrote:If they have a set amount of time and the question-asking is included in the time, surely some people will be disadvantaged by having longer questions.
It certainly used to be the case (not sure if it still is) that the questions and answers were timed so that a contender answering each question correctly and promptly could expect to get through the same number within the two minutes. I suspect this is why some questions seem to be unnecessarily wordy, and also why cutting in with the answer is not allowed.
I did wonder that, but then it's still reliant on John Humphrys not messing up at all, and also if a contestant is a bit slow on some of them, they won't get through all the questions they might have been expected to, so they might be "up" or "down" at that point.
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2025
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Graeme Cole »

Gavin Chipper wrote:
Phil Reynolds wrote:
Gavin Chipper wrote:If they have a set amount of time and the question-asking is included in the time, surely some people will be disadvantaged by having longer questions.
It certainly used to be the case (not sure if it still is) that the questions and answers were timed so that a contender answering each question correctly and promptly could expect to get through the same number within the two minutes. I suspect this is why some questions seem to be unnecessarily wordy, and also why cutting in with the answer is not allowed.
I did wonder that, but then it's still reliant on John Humphrys not messing up at all, and also if a contestant is a bit slow on some of them, they won't get through all the questions they might have been expected to, so they might be "up" or "down" at that point.
I seem to recall that if the host stumbles when asking the question they add on a bit of time to compensate. I remember Magnus Magnusson once cocked up a question so asked for the watch to be stopped while he repeated it.
User avatar
Jon Corby
Moral Hero
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Jon Corby »

Jon Corby wrote:
Phil Reynolds wrote:
Gavin Chipper wrote:If they have a set amount of time and the question-asking is included in the time, surely some people will be disadvantaged by having longer questions.
It certainly used to be the case (not sure if it still is) that the questions and answers were timed so that a contender answering each question correctly and promptly could expect to get through the same number within the two minutes. I suspect this is why some questions seem to be unnecessarily wordy, and also why cutting in with the answer is not allowed.
Yeah, the woman at work explained this to me, and still maintained that Rachel was stiffed on the questions:time ratio. How many did she get wrong? I remember the Jimmy Ryan one (which she answered Carlos Queiroz after a pause), were there others? If not, she probably has a point.
I watched it again and she also paused and answered the Rooney hat-trick question wrong, so that takes us up to 11 questions asked in the time. That leaves her pauses needing to equal a question-and-a-bit (so that the 13th question is started when the buzzer goes) to level up with Miles. Seems reasonable. Hold those complaints to OFCOM.
User avatar
Jon Corby
Moral Hero
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Jon Corby »

Jon Corby wrote:BTW, I'll try and make a slo-mo animated gif at some point of her sucking drink out of an ice sculpture of Alan Carr's face (? or somesuch) at some point, which I just happened to catch the other day. The close-up of her sucking at this tube while gazing upwards really was... well, quite something.
The incredible my left peg of the football365 forum has saved me the trouble:

Image

Image
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13215
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Graeme Cole wrote:I seem to recall that if the host stumbles when asking the question they add on a bit of time to compensate. I remember Magnus Magnusson once cocked up a question so asked for the watch to be stopped while he repeated it.
What they could do is not actually time the question-asking, but just add a set amount onto the time for them.
User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7822
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Rachel on Celebrity Mastermind

Post by Matt Morrison »

Haha those gifs are magnificent.
Post Reply