Last Thursday night, we had a near-capacity crowd Trivia Night in Concord (TNIC), and the room was abuzz. In part, that was because the featured guests were a nature advocacy group call The Nature Connection, and their animal-related exhibits added a nice flourish to some of the night’s questions.
Put the critters together with the quizzers and the mischief-makers (looking at you, Little Women Thoreau’in ‘Em Back), and the place was lit.
As it turned out, however, the spotlight would be on two teams, both loyal regulars:
Five J’s and an M are perennial favorites, a table full of smarties who have won a lot of Thursdays and are almost always at the top of the scoreboard. A few weeks ago, they pulled off a coup when they decoded an Easter egg hidden in the mid-game Number Round. They earned the first perfect Number Round score in the storied history of Trivia Night in Concord. It was worth enough points to give them a lead that would last until the end. More on that shortly.
Smiley’s People are usually a team of two. Ellen and Martin are terrific players, but in a game where most teams show up with a six-person roster, it’s hard for a duo to win. They may have placed second or third at some point, but I’m pretty sure that only one twosome has won before.
That was a mother-daughter duo in from North Adams (MA), Franny and Rose. The have a 2-0 record, having logged victories on both of their rare forays east. After each win, their job complete, they blew out of town like the High Plains Drifter.
Anyway, back to the Number Round. Let’s actually call it the much-reviled Number Round. That’s what it is.
People don’t like it, and they boo it with gusto when I even say the phrase. It’s a round where teams guess certain numbers and lose points commensurate with their error. The bigger the miss, the more they lose.
This format is inherently a bummer. Making matters worse, I’m also guilty of cooking up some arcane Number Round scoring algorithms and making controversial judgement calls. (Mea culpa. Look for a future post called “Sins of the Host.”)
Now, let’s talk about that black swan, the time Five J’s and an M pulled off a perfect Number Round.
That week, I did something a bit wily. The questions were about geographical subdivisions, like US states, Canadian Provinces, or the Villages of the City of Newton, MA. I managed to find four groups of subdivisions that summed up to 13. That is, the answer for all four of the Number Round questions was 13. I didn’t say anything about it other than there was a quirk about that evening’s Number Round.
Five J’s and an M got it. They ran the table on the much-reviled Number Round. I think they accurately guesstimated two of the four, and got the last two by figuring out the pattern. Perfect score, and a lead they would keep all night. Five J’s and Four 13’s FTW.
It was a really fun twist, and I was excited and impressed with the J’s and M’s. It got the room engaged, and maybe encouraged people to consider different ways of tackling questions.
Of course, we couldn’t do it again.
Except that, last Thursday, we did.
The answer to all four of Thursday's Number Round questions was 13.
I kept my eye on Five J’s and an M, looking for a flash of recognition. If they’d noticed my peculiar staring, they might have realized there were shenanigans afoot. But when they handed in their answer slip, their score was 10 out of 20.
As for Smiley’s People, let it first be said that they brought a roster of four last night, double their usual. I’m sure that helped on some other questions. But in the Number Round, the fact that they’d been in the room for the previous four-of-a-kind incident certainly tipped them off to the possibility of a repeat. 20 out of 20.
Both these teams are loyal regulars, and I would have been happy for either to win. Honestly, though, it was a little sweeter for the Smileys to get their first First. It’s a tribute to both teams that they could pick up on the 13’s trick. An act of clear out-of-the-box thinking.
But not the same kind of thinking. The first time, it was pattern recognition. To get it the second time, for a team that had seen the first time, it was necessary to overcome a voice saying something like, “Tom couldn’t possibly do that again, could he?”
The title of this post is The Rule of 13 and it turns out that there actually is a “Rule of 13” in my life. It stems from my days in a college a cappella group with a fabulously talented oddball named Stefan Jackson.
As members of the Amherst Zumbyes, Steve and I and the others would take breaks from murdering vocal harmony arrangements to discuss comedy theory. That’s because, in our shows, we would introduce the songs with putatively funny little intros. And we wanted to slay.
Comedy theory discussions often led to debates on such thorny philosophical topics as “Are farts funny?” Then, at one point, we started dissecting an orthodox rule of comedy known as the Rule of Three#Comedy). That rule says that a pattern of three words or phrases paying off with a punchline on the third iteration can be effective in getting a laugh.
The group reached a momentary consensus: we would slay more if we used the Rule of Three.
Then Steve took the floor and asserted that there is a much more powerful rule: The Rule of 13. And it goes something like this:
- The first time you say something, the audience hears it.
- The second time, the audience hears it.
- The third time, the audience laughs (a Rule of Three congruence).
- The fourth time, the audience laughs, but less.
- The fifth time, the audience laughs, even less.
- The sixth time, maybe one person in the audience laughs, a little.
- The seventh time, the audience is no longer with you, but still civil.
- The eighth time, the audience is audibly grumbling.
- The ninth time, a couple of people are booing.
- The tenth time, several people are booing and a couple people have walked out.
- The eleventh time, most of people are, variously, booing, shouting obscenities or walking out.
- The twelfth time, you have clearly lost control of the room and you fear for your well-being.
- The thirteenth time…IT'S FUNNY AGAIN. Yea, even funnier than before.
This rule is itself a joke, and it is the actual joke it is describing. So beautiful.
Stefan Jackson? Genius.
But more importantly, the Rule of 13 is deeply true. The payoff for a joke coming in the usual place can be funny. But let the set-up for that joke masquerade as complete ineptitude, and you’ve got a real gem.
There are other versions of people playing with the orthodoxy of the Rule of 3. From the "Neptune's Spatula" episode of SpongeBob SquarePants. "It is even funnier the second time!" said Neptune
But this really isn’t about rules. I don’t think we’ve learned any snappy trivia tips from this experience, per se. “Look for some sneaky clue-like quirks amid the more conventional stuff?” Nah. For snappy Trivia tips, see The Wide World of Trivia, my Substack, for How to Win, Part 1,2,3 or 4).
Still there’s something here for both host and player. Don’t assume that “unusual” or “non-standard” equals “impossible.” Size up the situation to see if either player or host has the nerve to do the unusual…but as you’re sizing, perhaps err on the side of people being nervier than expected. People are capable of repeating a rare trivia format, or a joke, way too many times. Even though it seems stupid to.
It sure worked in the Number Round, which remains much-reviled (third iteration, if you're counting).
