Universally Challenged
I've been selected for University Challenge twice: once when I was a fresher - we didn't get as far as the televised rounds - and then about four years later, when I was a postgrad. The second time, we were invited to the filming; and, because everyone else refused, I was nominated as captain.

We pootled off to Manchester, found the Granada studios, sat around for a few hours, and then it was our turn to compete.

There was a couple of warmup questions before the filming started in earnest, and we did well. Then the cameras went on... and we got thumped. We just about got into a three-digit score, but the other team won comprehensively. There's a website that records all the scores, and I've just looked at it. The margin of victory is chasmic. I could offer consoling reasons for that. But knowing the answer isn't enough: you have to be first to the buzzer, too. And knowing the answer to the bonus questions is of no use at all if you haven't got the starter.

I'd taken the precaution of not telling anyone I was going to be on, in the hope of minimising possible shame. Sadly, University Challenge is - unsurprisingly - watched by rather a lot of university types; and even though my edition was broadcast before the semester started, which meant that there were fewer people around, there were still plenty of staff and research students knocking about the place. People whom I knew. People like my Head of Department.

"I saw you on telly the other night," he said, cheerily, when we met shortly after the broadcast. "You were crap."
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 19 Aug 2011, 14:45, 2 replies)

It's not just about the questions though, as you say.
It's all about how determined the teams are to get through. I'm sure some contestants work out with the 'biro' method like dedicated pub quiz teams do.

Being old, I seem to remember a team that got through to a high level, possibly the quarter-finals or higher, who all gave daft answers as part of a protest. How very rebellious.

When I saw a team really trounced a few years ago I thought the winners had probably practiced in private for six months or more, whereas the losers were a bunch of mates who'd entered because no-one else could be arsed/stand the possible shame of defeat. So, the winners looked like wankers and the losers were the sports.

That's just me though - I'm very cynical about competition.
(Juan Quar is clinging to her front teeth on, Sat 20 Aug 2011, 9:35, closed)

I did the Oxford Inter College Quiz a couple years back
(the same format at UC, would have been on UC as well if our college wasn't so terrible at paperwork).

In the group stage (groups of 4, first 2 qualify), we won by a hair on the first match (20 points in it), then absolutely tanked in the second (300 to 75). Our last match was the final one of the group, so we knew that we could still qualify if we won it, but there was one problem. It was against Corpus Christi, who were currently destroying everyone in the televised UC (and not allowed to say the final result, but it was pretty clear), due to their captain, Gail Trimble.

We got lucky, the only day before the deadline for the group stages where we could field a team, she wasn't there, and we managed to beat the rest of her team (who, it's fair to say by looking at the scores, were being carried by her). We qualify with a points difference of over 100 against us. And since we beat Corpus, we're actually at the TOP of the group, despite having the (joint) worst points difference.

In the second round, the match goes to a tie break, so we get 3 more questions, of which each team gets one. Then the final break, a single question, which we failed. (the team that beat us then go on to get the largest point difference against them of the competition in the next round)

Not putting this in the main QOTW since it's way too tenuous
( Tedium Alduce me to interlow myself., Sat 20 Aug 2011, 12:48, closed)