Author Topic: Greatest Hosts of All Time - Results Thread (Read 110972 times)

WhammyPower · « **Reply #270 on:** October 26, 2006, 05:44:49 PM »

[quote name=\'DrBear\' post=\'135663\' date=\'Oct 26 2006, 09:48 AM\'] And for the first time in this whole frapping list,my ranking and the group's ranking...

matches. (sound of 10,000 votes and card flips over to say MATCH) [/quote]
How ~~ironic~~coincidental, I matched here, too. And I can also say "I matched with Richard Dawson."

cweaver · « **Reply #271 on:** October 26, 2006, 05:48:36 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'135622\' date=\'Oct 25 2006, 08:51 PM\']
I think you're making an _awful_ lot of assumptions. You may end up being right, but I certainly don't think it's a foregone conclusion.
[/quote]

I don't think he'll be #1 either but I predicted he'd make the top three (specifically #2) and got heavily pummelled (in another thread) for being ridiculous enough to put him anywhere near that high. I'm sure now that we know he *did* place close to that high there's going to be some gnashing of teeth, perhaps even rioting from those who were so heavily disagreeable before.

clemon79 · « **Reply #272 on:** October 26, 2006, 06:00:41 PM »

[quote name=\'cweaver\' post=\'135705\' date=\'Oct 26 2006, 02:48 PM\']
I don't think he'll be #1 either but I predicted he'd make the top three (specifically #2) and got heavily pummelled (in another thread) for being ridiculous enough to put him anywhere near that high. I'm sure now that we know he *did* place close to that high there's going to be some gnashing of teeth, perhaps even rioting from those who were so heavily disagreeable before.
[/quote]
Well, I didn't get a ballot in, so I certainly have no right to complain about the results, but I can say with certainty that there is no-way-no-how that I would have put the WGMC in my top three, and maybe not in my top 5. If the question had been asked in 1990, I probably would have, but I think his reputation has dimished a great deal in the last 10-15 years or so, with the advent of things like the Internet that facilitate communication and make it much harder to hide negative personality traits.

So, yeah. The whole Voltaire thing: disagree with what you say, absolutely defend your right to say it.

wheelloon · « **Reply #273 on:** October 26, 2006, 06:17:40 PM »

[quote name=\'Stripey\' post=\'135688\' date=\'Oct 26 2006, 03:45 PM\']
In all fairness, while I, too, don't think "word game" when I think of Classic Concentration, a rebus puzzle is a type of word game. So I don't think wheelloon was that far off.
[/quote]

Not taking such big words as CAR and TAKE into account, I thank you for understanding what I was trying to get at and backing me a bit on it.

Exactly as to what kind of game show Classic Concentration would best fit (could be word, could be memory, could be luck) is another discussion for another time, but my main point still remains. Trebek has done a wide range of shows, with a wide range of formats, during his career and he did them very well, IMHO...

Gene, though primarily known for one show, did it so well that he does deserve a spot in the top 10, I believe. I would also like to believe that his stylings could've worked well for many other games, as well, and that we never really got to see all of what he had to offer to the GS world.

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #274 on:** October 26, 2006, 06:31:24 PM »

[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'135710\' date=\'Oct 26 2006, 06:17 PM\']Exactly as to what kind of game show Classic Concentration would best fit (could be word, could be memory, could be luck) is another discussion for another time[/quote]
Puzzle game. "The object of the game is to solve the puzzle." Just like Wheel of Fortune. Neither are word games.

Anything else I can arbitrarily decide for you?

chris319 · « **Reply #275 on:** October 26, 2006, 07:39:36 PM »

Quote

there is no-way-no-how that I would have put the WGMC in my top three, and maybe not in my top 5. If the question had been asked in 1990, I probably would have, but I think his reputation has dimished a great deal in the last 10-15 years

Then you're not judging him as an emcee. WGMC is among the best. Barker the executive producer is a monster, IMVHO, who will hopefully get his come-uppance in the next life.

clemon79 · « **Reply #276 on:** October 26, 2006, 07:43:32 PM »

[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'135717\' date=\'Oct 26 2006, 04:39 PM\']
Then you're not judging him as an emcee. WGMC is among the best. Barker the executive producer is a monster, IMVHO, who will hopefully get his come-uppance in the next life.
[/quote]
Fair enough, but did you not do the same with Allen Ludden? Honestly, if I didn't hear the stories from you, I would have no idea he was an asshole.

EDIT: You did say your personal feelings for him didn't enter into your ranking. Mea culpa.

Nonetheless, I think it's perfectly valid to take into account how a host gets along with their coworkers, as that is absolutely part of the job, yes?

JasonA1 · « **Reply #277 on:** October 26, 2006, 08:38:16 PM »

Quote

Nonetheless, I think it's perfectly valid to take into account how a host gets along with their coworkers, as that is absolutely part of the job, yes?

Not on the air, it isn't. On the air, everything's peachy keen. Even Mr. Clementson has said in past posts he respects Barker's work as an emcee, but doesn't care for him personally.

-Jason

clemon79 · « **Reply #278 on:** October 26, 2006, 08:42:29 PM »

[quote name=\'JasonA1\' post=\'135727\' date=\'Oct 26 2006, 05:38 PM\']
Not on the air, it isn't. On the air, everything's peachy keen. Even Mr. Clementson has said in past posts he respects Barker's work as an emcee, but doesn't care for him personally.
[/quote]
That's not my point. My point is that the definition of what constitutes "being an emcee" is subjective. Someone wants to consider it only the part that the viewer sees, they're welcome to do that, but I think it's no less valid of an opinion to consider all aspects of the job.

DrBear · « **Reply #279 on:** October 26, 2006, 09:29:41 PM »

Perhaps - but that's not an option for the vast majority of us. We aren't backstage; we don't get to see temper tantrums or star ego exhibitions; we aren't the ones getting yelled at. We hear rumors in entertainment reports or tell-all books; that's hearsay evidence. All we can go by is what's on the screen.

clemon79 · « **Reply #280 on:** October 26, 2006, 09:36:52 PM »

[quote name=\'DrBear\' post=\'135729\' date=\'Oct 26 2006, 06:29 PM\']
Perhaps - but that's not an option for the vast majority of us. We aren't backstage; we don't get to see temper tantrums or star ego exhibitions; we aren't the ones getting yelled at. We hear rumors in entertainment reports or tell-all books; that's hearsay evidence. All we can go by is what's on the screen.
[/quote]
Well, and that's your opinion. I'm just saying there are others.

TLEberle · « **Reply #281 on:** October 26, 2006, 11:21:41 PM »

Bob Barker didn't get any points on my ballot mainly because his hosting has degenerated so far over the past decade or so. From the "A game went kablooey? You win the prize anyway!" to his oh-so-predictable bit of "It's funny because I said I'm going to push the reveal button, but really I'm going to pull back an inch from it," that I really don't like. If he were to have retired in...say 1995 or so, he'd probably be way at the top of the list for me.

Here's an interesting bit. For years and years, I've loathed Bob Eubanks for a whole list of reasons. Being at the parents's house, I stayed to watch an episode of Bob's Card Sharks. And as far as being the host, he fits perfectly. Maybe it was selective memory on my part, but for that episode, he was genial, in control of the game, cognizant of the rules, able to read the questions properly...he nailed it on all cylinders. Every complaint I ever had about the guy was absent in that half hour. Sure, he's no Jim Perry, and I still like Bill Rafferty better in that role, but Bob's stock went up a little bit yesterday.

chris319 · « **Reply #282 on:** October 27, 2006, 01:09:10 AM »

Quote

I think it's perfectly valid to take into account how a host gets along with their coworkers, as that is absolutely part of the job, yes?

Absolutely, but it isn't Barker the emcee who is alleged to have fired staffers and cast members because they wouldn't perjure themselves for him in a deposition or because they called a radio show in support of Holly Hallstrom. It is Barker the executive producer who is alleged to have done those things.

If you want an emcee who is a total jackass off camera and on, look for one who walks out of tapings, who quibbles with the producer both off camera and on, who has people banned from the set, who has no regard for bringing a show in on time, and whom no producer in his right mind would ever hire IMO. I think you know who I'm talking about.

Ian Wallis · « **Reply #283 on:** October 27, 2006, 08:54:08 AM »

Quote

If you want an emcee who is a total jackass off camera and on, look for one who walks out of tapings, who quibbles with the producer both off camera and on, who has people banned from the set, who has no regard for bringing a show in on time, and whom no producer in his right mind would ever hire IMO. I think you know who I'm talking about.

Yes...and that's why that particular person didn't make my list!

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #284 on:** October 27, 2006, 10:12:15 AM »

[color=\"#009900\"]3 Tom Kennedy[/color] (896, 61/68, including three first-place votes)
50 Grand Slam
Body Language
Break the Bank
Doctor I.Q.
It's Your Bet
Name That Tune
Password Plus
The Price Is Right
Split Second
To Say the Least
Whew!
Wordplay
You Don't Say

I have to say this was a pleasant surprise for me. In the early stages of the voting, it even looked like he had a chance at #2. Outside of our group, he's hardly a household name, and even in the forum we don't really talk about him all that much. Still, he's second only to Cullen in the number of our top-50 shows he's been associated with.