Author Topic: Felsher Facts (Read 14745 times)

zachhoran · « **Reply #15 on:** March 07, 2006, 09:25:44 PM »

[quote name=\'JasonA1\' date=\'Mar 7 2006, 09:16 PM\']
And of course, reserve questions like "name a day..." or questions with all numerical answers for Fast Money as well. The old NES "Feud" didn't have such a filter, and you'd frequently see stuff like "name the time people get up in the morning" in the main game.

[snapback]112173[/snapback]

[/quote]

"Name the month you begin Xmas shopping" was used in the maingame of a Dawson Syndie episode one time, another question better used for Fast Money. Ditto the question with four possible answers "Name a state that begins with the letter A" used as the Double round on a syndie episode.

Ian Wallis · « **Reply #16 on:** March 08, 2006, 09:09:23 AM »

Quote

1. Did they try to create certain situations and avoid others concerning the total value of the answers in the survey? I'd be pissed if, during the $200 era, my team had a clean sweep of the first two questions, not adding to $200, and the other team swept the first double-value question to win the game with exactly $200.

That happened at least once - in an ep from fall 1976, I believe.

Quote

And it seems pretty obvious that they're deliberately leaving answers off the board on Karn "Feud" so Richard doesn't have to stretch through a fourth round's worth of time.

I think they've always done that to a certain extent. As we know, at least 2 people would have to say it for it to make the survey, but there were times were the lowest you saw revealed was 6 or 7. Either that means there were too many lower answers to fit on the board, or they wanted a lower dollar total available in that round and left a bunch off that would have otherwise made it. The host always said "the top X answers", so supposedly they could cut if off anywhere.

Jay Temple · « **Reply #17 on:** March 08, 2006, 11:53:43 AM »

For about three years I saved the questions. (That oughta ratchet up my game show geek standing.) I noticed at least a few times that a question from the show would appear in a home game, and the home game had some answers at the bottom that weren't put on the board. Assuming that the home game results were accurate, that just strikes me as dishonest, not to mention unfair to a player who might have given such an answer.

And, yeah, I figured if they were putting the high-value #1's on the celeb shows, it was for two purposes: to give more time for schmoozing, and also just in case you got two teams' worth of dummies.

clemon79 · « **Reply #18 on:** March 08, 2006, 01:54:06 PM »

[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' date=\'Mar 8 2006, 08:53 AM\']Assuming that the home game results were accurate, that just strikes me as dishonest, not to mention unfair to a player who might have given such an answer.
[/quote]
Why? The host says, quite clearly and in plain English, "We surveyed 100 people, the top X answers are on the board." Nowhere do you hear "we included any answer that at least two people gave." In fact, they have NEVER said that, not specifically. So if you give answer #X+1, it's not in the top X answers. Please show me where "dishonest" or "unfair" falls into any of that.

chris319 · « **Reply #19 on:** March 08, 2006, 03:08:46 PM »

I'm not intimately familiar with the production of FF back in the day, but I know Howard approved all questions before and after polling, and he edited the responses. For example, if some respondents said "sweet potato" and others said "yam", he would meld the two responses and you would sometimes see both answers separated by a slash. Or, he might meld "Oscars" and "Academy Awards" and only "Oscars" would be printed as the answer. If a contestant said "Academy Awards" he would accept it, and when the answer would flip and you would see "Oscars". Cathy Dawson was involved in assembling the material into matches.

All G-T producers selected both material and contestants, avoiding what might be termed "mo' producers syndrome". Did you ever count the number of "producers" Wordplay had?

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #20 on:** March 08, 2006, 03:44:29 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Mar 8 2006, 02:54 PM\'][quote name=\'Jay Temple\' date=\'Mar 8 2006, 08:53 AM\']Assuming that the home game results were accurate, that just strikes me as dishonest, not to mention unfair to a player who might have given such an answer.
[/quote]
Why? The host says, quite clearly and in plain English, "We surveyed 100 people, the top X answers are on the board." Nowhere do you hear "we included any answer that at least two people gave." In fact, they have NEVER said that, not specifically. [/quote]
In the early days, when Richard felt he needed to explain the game more, he would say something like, "At least two people would have needed to give that answer for it to make our survey." I'm not sure how hard and fast a rule that was, or whether their attitude toward it changed over time, or whether the less rigorously-monitored home games just got some extra answers stuffed into them to make them more playable, but the two-response "rule" was specifically mentioned on the show.

Robert Hutchinson · « **Reply #21 on:** March 08, 2006, 04:05:18 PM »

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Mar 8 2006, 09:09 AM\']As we know, at least 2 people would have to say it for it to make the survey, but there were times were the lowest you saw revealed was 6 or 7. Either that means there were too many lower answers to fit on the board, or they wanted a lower dollar total available in that round and left a bunch off that would have otherwise made it. The host always said "the top X answers", so supposedly they could cut if off anywhere.[/quote]

True--but I don't recall this being a *regular* thing on Dawson or Combs Feud. (How often would you say it happened, Jay, roughly?) It happens on Karn Feud any time one team has much more than 100 points going into the Double question, though, and it looks tacky.

Ian Wallis · « **Reply #22 on:** March 08, 2006, 04:20:40 PM »

Quote

It happens on Karn Feud any time one team has much more than 100 points going into the Double question, though, and it looks tacky.

To be honest, I don't watch much of Karn's "Feud" because it's on around noon where I live and I don't bother to tape it.

Isn't that always the case with the third question though? Is it possible that they could just prevent a few bottom-tier answers from showing up on the board of a pre-selected question if there's a chance those answers could add up to a win for someone? I wouldn't think that would happen, but if they really didn't want Karn to stretch for too long, I suppose it could...

MSTieScott · « **Reply #23 on:** March 08, 2006, 05:27:19 PM »

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Mar 8 2006, 04:20 PM\']Isn't that always the case with the third question though? Is it possible that they could just prevent a few bottom-tier answers from showing up on the board of a pre-selected question if there's a chance those answers could add up to a win for someone? I wouldn't think that would happen, but if they really didn't want Karn to stretch for too long, I suppose it could...

[snapback]112250[/snapback]

[/quote]
It most certainly happens. If both teams are under 100 points going into the third round, then the question will total 80 or 90 points. But if one team has more than 100 points, then the third round question will almost never total enough points to give them the win. Which means that you'll sometimes see surveys with a total of only 50 or 60 points on the board.

And since there are only six answer spaces available on the board during round three, it's clear that they have back-up questions with fewer points to prevent a team from winning before the triple round.

--
Scott Robinson

clemon79 · « **Reply #24 on:** March 08, 2006, 06:02:03 PM »

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Mar 8 2006, 12:44 PM\']"At least two people would have needed to give that answer for it to make our survey."
[/quote]
See, to me that's not the same, though I will allow that we're at the point where we're arguing semantics. By the letter of that statement, that says "you'll never see an answer only one person gave on the board", but it's still not a guarantee that if two people gave it, it will. But it's a ticky-tack semantic issue, sure.

And I can easily see them being more likely to "massage" the survey results in the later years.

zachhoran · « **Reply #25 on:** March 08, 2006, 07:11:32 PM »

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Mar 8 2006, 03:44 PM\']
In the early days, when Richard felt he needed to explain the game more, he would say something like, "At least two people would have needed to give that answer for it to make our survey." I'm not sure how hard and fast a rule that was, or whether their attitude toward it changed over time, or whether the less rigorously-monitored home games just got some extra answers stuffed into them to make them more playable, but the two-response "rule" was specifically mentioned on the show.

[snapback]112243[/snapback]

[/quote]

When he did the "At least two people....." bit, it was always during Fast Money as far as I remember. Answers with scores of two-ten, as we've mentioned in this thread, could be taken out of the maingame questions for reasons described above. The 4th edition MB Feud home game has a Fast Money question which has an answer that was worth only one point.

BrandonFG · « **Reply #26 on:** March 08, 2006, 09:38:54 PM »

[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Mar 8 2006, 07:11 PM\']When he did the "At least two people....." bit, it was always during Fast Money as far as I remember.

[snapback]112262[/snapback]

[/quote]
Might've been more common, but I really wanna say when the show was just getting started, Richard would say that it took at least two people to get considered, mainly if someone got a strike.

Don Howard · « **Reply #27 on:** March 09, 2006, 12:43:31 AM »

Speaking of FF, I see the show held their 2006 Tournament Of Champions.....several weeks ago. Did anyone here even know they'd done it already? I didn't even know there was one planned. Nice promotion, Fremantle.

TLEberle · « **Reply #28 on:** March 09, 2006, 01:04:45 AM »

I don't think Family Feud has ever promoted any of their current run tournaments. Not that any of the families were particularly memorable, what with the haphazard way that shows are aired these days.

Don Howard · « **Reply #29 on:** March 09, 2006, 03:24:17 AM »

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' date=\'Mar 9 2006, 01:04 AM\']I don't think Family Feud has ever promoted any of their current run tournaments.

[snapback]112283[/snapback]

[/quote]
I do recall their Family Circle Tournament in 2002 got an ad in my city's TV Guide. But why wouldn't they want their tournaments promoted? As a special event, I would think the production company would be fishing for more eyes.