DoND Ideal board?

[J.R.]

I notice many people here complain about the incredibly top heavy board. I do agree with the feelings somewhat. So, with nothing to do at the moment, I decided to create my own and get your thoughts and feelings on it. If you don't like it, think it's still too top heavy, think I'm a crazed fanboi and such, please don't hold back because I appreciate honesty. Thank you.

Here it is:

  1 - $0.01
  2 - $0.10
  3 - $0.25
  4 - $1
  5 - $5
  6 - $10
  7 - $20
  8 - $50
  9 - $100
10 - $250
11 - $500
12 - $750
13 - $1,000

14 - $2,500
15 - $5,000
16 - $10,000
17 - $15,000
18 - $20,000
19 - $30,000
20 - $40,000
21 - $50,000
22 - $100,000
23 - $200,000
24 - $350,000
25 - $500,000
26 - $1,000,000

-Joe R.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'JRaygor\' post=\'121982\' date=\'Jun 20 2006, 11:06 PM\']
  1 - $0.01
26 - $1,000,000
[/quote]
'Nuff said. Topheavy.

Hint: find an episode of the Australian version. Look at that board. Do that. So long as you insist on a million-dollar board and the Top 6 being six digits, your board is topheavy.

[J.R.]

Fair enough. I didn't think the definition of "top heavy" included the top prize. So, here is a readjusted board with the top prize reduced to $500,000:

1 - $0.01
2 - $0.10
3 - $0.25
4 - $1
5 - $5
6 - $10
7 - $20
8 - $50
9 - $100
10 - $250
11 - $500
12 - $750
13 - $1,000

14 - $2,500
15 - $5,000
16 - $7,500
17 - $10,000
18 - $15,000
19 - $20,000
20 - $30,000
21 - $40,000
22 - $50,000
23 - $100,000
24 - $150,000
25 - $250,000
26 - $500,000

Again, comments are welcome.
-Joe R.

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'JRaygor\' post=\'121984\' date=\'Jun 20 2006, 11:20 PM\']
Fair enough. I didn't think the definition of "top heavy" included the top prize. [/quote]It does when you consider that the top seven prizes are more than $10,000. The Australian show has four 'green' prizes; if the US version were to go that way, the final four boxes would be $250,000-$375,000-$500,000-$1 million. And even that seems excessive. The British show has five 'top prizes' on the right side (though GBP 20,000 isn't anything to sneeze at). If the point of the game is to "keep the big ones in play," as the hosts tell their players, the impact of removing a $100k or more prize is lessened. When you only have four of 'em, losing even $75,000 is a big hit.

If the show were to have more prizes between $1,000 and $10,000, more prizes between $10,000 and $100,000; and fewer prizes from $100,000 to $1 million, it would improve my interest level greatly.

[Jeremy Nelson]

You know there's a problem with the board when someone uncovers the $100,000 prize and says "That's OK!"

[Casey Buck]

How does this board sound? There's only 4 amounts between $100K and $1M, and there's some shades of the UK Deal board amounts on here as well.

1- .01¢
2- .10¢
3- .50¢
4- $1
5- $5
6- $10
7- $25
8- $50
9- $100
10- $250
11- $500
12- $750
13- $1,000

14- $2,000
15- $3,000
16- $5,000
17- $7,500
18- $10,000
19- $20,000
20- $35,000
21- $50,000
22- $75,000
23- $100,000
24- $250,000
25- $500,000
26- $1,000,000

[Dbacksfan12]

Something in which the house advantage is always above the player's.  However, I don't have a strong mathematical aptitude.  That said, I guess I would propose this board:

1-Nothing
2-25¢
3-$1
4-$10
5-$25
6-$50
7-$100
8-$250
9-$500
10-$750
11-$1000
12-$1500
13-$2000
14-$2500
15-$3500
16-$5000
17-$6000
18-$7000
19-$10,000
20-$25,000
21-$50,000
22-$70,000
23-$100,000
24-$250,001
25-$400,000
26-$750,000

[aaron sica]

[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'122000\' date=\'Jun 21 2006, 11:26 AM\']
Something in which the house advantage is always above the player's.  However, I don't have a strong mathematical aptitude.  That said, I guess I would propose this board:

1-Nothing

*other values snipped*
[/quote]

Man, I really like that idea.

"You could leave with $X amount, or with NOTHING..."

[TLEberle]

I'm not so sold on "nothing." I like the idea of multiple cases having less than a dollar, and a few more less than $10, but you should always be able to win *something*. And then there's the possibility of having a Penny Club. Winning "nothing" isn't as funny to me as winning one cent.

I'll have a go:
BLUE
$0.01
$0.10
$0.25
$0.50
$1
$2
$5
$10
$25
$50
$100
$200
$500

RED
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$25,000
$50,000

GREEN
$75,000
$100,000
$250,000
$1 million

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'122000\' date=\'Jun 21 2006, 08:26 AM\']
Something in which the house advantage is always above the player's.  [/quote] How is there a 'house' advantage? "Deal" isn't a banking game. They're giving money away.

However, I don't have a strong mathematical aptitude.  That said, I guess I would propose this board:

I'm not sure how that would apply. It's clear the mathematics of the game was the furthest thing from the minds of the suits at NBC when they crafted the board.

[clemon79]

Travis and RC87 both Get It.

[TLEberle]

The producers of the US game clearly have one thing in mind: making the show a three-ring circus. The game is almost secondary to the other goings-on. It is hard to be interested at all in the first three rounds because the offers are artificially low. No one is going to take $15,000 when there's $30,000 or $75,000 just down the pike.

The board, as Chris says, is insanely top heavy. All but four games ended in wins of $1,000 or more. Those four games were very out-of-the-ordinary, but there's no reason for me to invest myself emotionally when the player is almost 100% guaranteed to win $10,000, and stands a better-than-mediocre chance at $100,000.

The UK and Australian shows do it right. The board is setup so that big payoffs are there, but it takes an extraordinary game to get there. Most wins are in the $5,000-$20,000 range, with precious few going into the stratosphere. There are ALSo games where everything blows apart and the box opens to reveal pennies. The game needs for that tightrope situation to be there, where you get down to 10 cents, $5,000 and $75,000. That's where the real tension lies; not in having six other big prizes getting whittled away.

[Brig Bother]

But it's not just the board, you also need to consider the banker's attitude. The US banker is rather boringly staid in this regard. when the watching the US show, after about round four it always seems to be top prize/divided by the amount of boxes left as a rough estimate in my experience. The Brit Banker is much more aggressive in terms of playing on contestant's fears, especially as they've been there filming for a few weeks, and whilst they cover hotel and travel, they don't cover loss of earnings. "I came with nothing..." isn't really the correct attitude to take.

[uncamark]

[quote name=\'Brig Bother\' post=\'122013\' date=\'Jun 21 2006, 02:18 PM\']
But it's not just the board, you also need to consider the banker's attitude. The US banker is rather boringly staid in this regard. when the watching the US show, after about round four it always seems to be top prize/divided by the amount of boxes left as a rough estimate in my experience. The Brit Banker is much more aggressive in terms of playing on contestant's fears, especially as they've been there filming for a few weeks, and whilst they cover hotel and travel, they don't cover loss of earnings. "I came with nothing..." isn't really the correct attitude to take.
[/quote]

How many shows do they usually tape in a day?  Is it the usual for the U.S. five-a-day (or six-a-day, if that's how many days a week they're on) or is it less than that?

[J.R.]

Thanks for all your comments regarding my proposal boards everyone!

(See kids, when people say non-agreeing stuff about your idea: Don't whine and moan, just accept it!)

-Joe R.