Blockbusters Unfair?

[Jimmy Owen]

Anybody else think it was a little unfair to bring back seasoned players to mow through parades of hapless newbie family pairs?  If anything, with cancellation a fait accompli, there should have been a TofC with the best solo players against the best family pairs to end the run.

[SplitSecond]

How exactly do you propose a tournament would work, keeping each match within the solo player vs. family pair format?

[uncamark]

[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Sep 3 2003, 07:15 PM\']Anybody else think it was a little unfair to bring back seasoned players to mow through parades of hapless newbie family pairs?  If anything, with cancellation a fait accompli, there should have been a TofC with the best solo players against the best family pairs to end the run.[/quote]
If there were any family pairs who'd gone the original limit, I assume that they would've been invited back, as well.

[Fedya]

[quote name=\'uncamark\' date=\'Sep 4 2003, 11:45 AM\'] [quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Sep 3 2003, 07:15 PM\']Anybody else think it was a little unfair to bring back seasoned players to mow through parades of hapless newbie family pairs?  If anything, with cancellation a fait accompli, there should have been a TofC with the best solo players against the best family pairs to end the run.[/quote]
If there were any family pairs who'd gone the original limit, I assume that they would've been invited back, as well. [/quote]
 Of the retired family pairs I recall so far: John Shannon/Kathy Thomas (brother and sister) and twin brothers Jeff/Alan Dennis, I don't think either pair won as much as Hatten (who got the full $60K in his 10 matches) or Leland Yung ($51,100 if memory serves).

Kandi Doyle and Larae Dallman never came back either, right?

[Jimmy Owen]

For a TofC I would consider a round robin tourney, in the manner of the Card Sharks Game Show host weeks, with the top money winners in each categories. Here's a wild thought, while counter to the blood relative family pair concept, wouldn't it be interesting to see John Hatten vs. the team of Gene Visich and Leland Yung for the Ultimate Blockbusters Championship for all the marbles, complete with a hexagon patterned sport jacket(s).

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Sep 5 2003, 06:49 AM\'] Here's a wild thought, while counter to the blood relative family pair concept, wouldn't it be interesting to see John Hatten vs. the team of Gene Visich and Leland Yung for the Ultimate Blockbusters Championship for all the marbles, complete with a hexagon patterned sport jacket(s). [/quote]
 No. Because, as you said, it's counter to the family pair concept.

[Dan Sadro]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Sep 5 2003, 10:26 AM\'] it's counter to the family pair concept. [/quote]
 Not to be picky, but I thought the whole concept was \"Is two heads better than one?\"  I mean, it wouldn't have been detrimental to the quality of the show if the rules allowed me to appear on the show with my roommate, one of my good friends, or my dog.

Now that I think about it, I could at least count on my dog for one answer... \"What R is the covering of a building?\"... although I'd need to train her how to press the buzzer with her snout.

[Fedya]

[quote name=\'Dan Sadro\' date=\'Sep 5 2003, 10:45 AM\'] [quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Sep 5 2003, 10:26 AM\'] it's counter to the family pair concept. [/quote]
Not to be picky, but I thought the whole concept was "Is two heads better than one?"  I mean, it wouldn't have been detrimental to the quality of the show if the rules allowed me to appear on the show with my roommate, one of my good friends, or my dog. [/quote]
 Super Grips, the German version of Blockbusters, had high school students as contestants.  I don't think any of the pairs were relatives.

I'm sure one of our British members can tell us if the student pairs on the British version were related.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Dan Sadro\' date=\'Sep 5 2003, 08:45 AM\'] [quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Sep 5 2003, 10:26 AM\'] it's counter to the family pair concept. [/quote]
Not to be picky, but I thought the whole concept was "Is two heads better than one?" [/quote]
 Point taken.

I stilld don't see what pairing up two solo champions and having them play against a single solo champion proves.

[Dan Sadro]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Sep 5 2003, 01:39 PM\'] I stilld don't see what pairing up two solo champions and having them play against a single solo champion proves. [/quote]
 Probably that two heads demolish one.

[dickoon]

[quote name=\'Fedya\' date=\'Sep 5 2003, 06:49 PM\'] I'm sure one of our British members can tell us if the student pairs on the British version were related. [/quote]
 Only to the extent of \"friends at the same educational establishment\", to the best of my knowledge.

Thomas Scott would be the person to ask, though I'm pretty sure his Blockbusters appearances were as a solo player, not as half of a pair.

[Jay Temple]

[quote name=\'SplitSecond\' date=\'Sep 3 2003, 08:02 PM\'] How exactly do you propose a tournament would work, keeping each match within the solo player vs. family pair format? [/quote]
 Here is the idea I came up with.  Assume that they do this instead of letting 10-game winners come back in regular play.

Top three solo players and top three family pairs
(Seeding:  10-game winners first, ranked by winnings)

Each solo player takes on each family pair exactly once.  Each win earns you $500 and a trip to the Gold Run, which pays the same as normal.

In the finals, the top-winning* solo player and the top-winning family pair play a best of three (or maybe five) match for the top prize.  (There no trips to Gold Run in the finals.)

Two possibilities for the top prize:
1) The winner does not keep the moneys won in the first part of the tournament but gets $100,000.  ($50,000 is less than what two of the participants won in regulation play.)
2) The winner gets whatever they won in the first part, plus $50,000 for winning the match.  This would potentially create a $66,500 winner.

Questions that I leave open:
1) Does the losing finalist get money for any game(s) won in the finals?
2) Is the money real or just score?  If the latter, I would give the losing finalist something like $25,000 and the other seven participants $10,000.

* In the event of a tie, the player/team with the shortest time(s) winning the Gold Run prevail.

A contingency:  If all nine games are won by the solo players or by the family pairs, the top winner wins the tournament without a final.  A tie here would go to the player/team with the shortest times in Gold Run.

[SplitSecond]

So you have a tournament that takes 11 games: 9 preliminary matches, 1 championship, and 1 game's worth of time to explain how the tournament works.