Author Topic: Extraneous rules... (Read 8985 times)

gaubster2 · « **Reply #15 on:** November 26, 2006, 04:51:59 AM »

[quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' post=\'138799\' date=\'Nov 25 2006, 07:26 PM\']
One I thought of: I can't ever remember seeing someone take the $1,000 instead of going for the $10,000 on "Grand Game." From the recent shows I've seen, it doesn't even look like the contestants consider the option (as Bob is explaining, they're already pointing to the three remaining products for audience reaction!).

Maybe I don't watch enough TPIR, but is this option ever taken nowadays?

Anthony
[/quote]

I've seen a contestant take the $1,000 in Grand Game many times. I haven't seen it happen lately, though.

Eddie "Chiclets" McGee · « **Reply #16 on:** November 26, 2006, 07:58:34 AM »

I can't believe nobody has said the pointless bonus round double or nothing question in Whoopi's last year of Hollywood Squares!

Also, if you remember the first few playings of Grocery Game on TPiR, Bob would give the player $100 if
(s)he didn't win, but stayed under the $6.75 requirement.

TimK2003 · « **Reply #17 on:** November 26, 2006, 10:16:22 AM »

What I never understood is why TPiR would offer a $1000 extra bonus for winning the Clock Game, yet you really don't earn a bonus if you sweep the Bonus Game (unlike the nearly identical Shell Game in which if you clinch the win, you have a chance for extra $$$ by correctly picking the right shell).

DrBear · « **Reply #18 on:** November 26, 2006, 10:27:44 AM »

As I remember, in the early radio years of T or C, the questions were legit and people answered them - but Ralph Edwards said it was clear early that people WANTED to do the stunts, so the questions became jokes.

Don Howard · « **Reply #19 on:** November 26, 2006, 11:09:13 AM »

I remember a grand total of one person stopping before reaching $1000 during the Beat The Dragon round of Tic Tac Dough.
Sorry, I don't recall the contestant's name or the year.

Mike Tennant · « **Reply #20 on:** November 26, 2006, 11:30:36 AM »

[quote name=\'TimK2003\' post=\'138823\' date=\'Nov 26 2006, 10:16 AM\']
What I never understood is why TPiR would offer a $1000 extra bonus for winning the Clock Game, yet you really don't earn a bonus if you sweep the Bonus Game (unlike the nearly identical Shell Game in which if you clinch the win, you have a chance for extra $$$ by correctly picking the right shell).
[/quote]
I think the difference here is that Clock Game is always played for two prizes worth under $1,000 each, so the maximum a contestant could win in that game is $1,998 in prizes. That seems a little cheap these days, so they give the extra $1K to improve the payout a bit. In Bonus Game and Shell Game, the bonus prize can be much larger, so the extra cash (even though they give it in Shell Game, which does seem a mite unfair to Bonus Game players) isn't "needed."

The Pyramids · « **Reply #21 on:** November 26, 2006, 04:00:40 PM »

[quote name=\'Eddie "Chiclets" McGee\' post=\'138820\' date=\'Nov 26 2006, 08:58 AM\']
I can't believe nobody has said the pointless bonus round double or nothing question in Whoopi's last year of Hollywood Squares!

[/quote]

During the five or so runs the season had on GSN I remember once where the producers made the subject, 'Star Wars', easy enough that the contestant went for it. The question was multiple choice asking the subtitle of the first movie (which is of course 'A New Hope').

Not so much extraneous rules but extraneous reminders were John Daly asking if the contestants were familiar with the scoring system, Peter Marshall remiding contestants the Secreat Sqaure could still be found in lieu of going the win and Louie Anderson, Richard Karn and now John O'Hurley all recaping the rules to Fast Money.

Ian Wallis · « **Reply #22 on:** November 26, 2006, 04:20:46 PM »

Quote

I agree that On Account was used very very rarely, but I thought it provided an interesting twist. Does anyone who watched Wheel in the '70s (I was busy not existing) know if On Account was used more often then?

When Wheel of Fortune first debuted, contestants had no choice but to put the money On Account. The gift certificate option didn't come along until either late in the first year or early in the second year. Even after that happened, I remember several contestants still putting money On Account, although as time went on fewer and fewer of them did. Sometimes if a contestant didn't have enough money to buy a prize they really wanted, they'd put it On Account in one round and then add it to the next round and be able to get a better prize.

Quote

Killing time one day at TPiR I actually talked about that with Barker. He said that if a contestant ever answered the question, he was prepared to say it was a 2-part question and immediately ask another. ;-)

Yes, and I remember seeing that happen at least once.

Adam Nedeff · « **Reply #23 on:** November 26, 2006, 05:34:52 PM »

[quote name=\'PaulD\' post=\'138832\' date=\'Nov 26 2006, 04:00 PM\']
Not so much extraneous rules but extraneous reminders were John Daly asking if the contestants were familiar with the scoring system, Peter Marshall remiding contestants the Secreat Sqaure could still be found in lieu of going the win and Louie Anderson, Richard Karn and now John O'Hurley all recaping the rules to Fast Money.
[/quote]

I don't think reminders like that are extraneous in the least. What if a viewer is tuning in for the first time ever tonight?

TLEberle · « **Reply #24 on:** November 26, 2006, 07:27:04 PM »

After looking through the thread, I have not seen one "extraneous rule". I have seen portions of game play that are rarely employed for one reason or another. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't exist. There's a difference.

pyrfan · « **Reply #25 on:** November 26, 2006, 07:51:00 PM »

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'138838\' date=\'Nov 26 2006, 08:27 PM\']
After looking through the thread, I have not seen one "extraneous rule". I have seen portions of game play that are rarely employed for one reason or another. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't exist. There's a difference.
[/quote]
While the definition of "extraneous" might be stretched a bit in this thread, I can't say that I agree with the last part of the post. If a portion of game play is rarely used, it most likely shouldn't exist, especially when it eats up precious airtime.

To use the "Pyramid" example given earlier, when there's an option in the 7-11 to go for a guaranteed $50 an answer or risk it for the chance at $1,100 for getting all seven answers, if the $50 option is used exactly once in the approximately 250 games that air in a calendar year, I would say that the $50 offer shouldn't exist. And by eliminating the $50 option that almost no one went for, they were able to save probably a good 20 to 30 seconds each show by not having to go through the whole "either/or" speech by Dick Clark.

Brendan

TLEberle · « **Reply #26 on:** November 26, 2006, 08:05:19 PM »

[quote name=\'pyrfan\' post=\'138840\' date=\'Nov 26 2006, 04:51 PM\']While the definition of "extraneous" might be stretched a bit in this thread...[/quote] Nope, it's not stretched, it's flat wrong. Millionaire allows contestants to bail out with $100, but no one does. Does that make the first five questions extraneous? No, they're part of the game. It's not extra at all; because the point of Millionaire is risking what you've won to go farther. Even if that means you're risking $100 to win $200.

The Pyramid example isn't 'extraneous' either, just a 'choice' that almost always favored column A. "Y'know, Dick, my celebrity partner here is a real clod, let's play for $50 a throw." At least they offered the option. And when they figured out that no one was going to get excited over $350 in bonus money, they changed it. The thread title ought to be "Rarely seen/employed game play options".

Steve Gavazzi · « **Reply #27 on:** November 26, 2006, 09:04:42 PM »

[quote name=\'PYLdude\' post=\'138813\' date=\'Nov 26 2006, 12:53 AM\']
I gotta ask this:

In all the playings of Time is Money on TPIR before they took away the $500 bailout option, how many people actually traded the $500 in for the 15 extra seconds?
[/quote]

One out of two.

pyrfan · « **Reply #28 on:** November 26, 2006, 10:06:05 PM »

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'138841\' date=\'Nov 26 2006, 09:05 PM\']
[quote name=\'pyrfan\' post=\'138840\' date=\'Nov 26 2006, 04:51 PM\']While the definition of "extraneous" might be stretched a bit in this thread...[/quote] Nope, it's not stretched, it's flat wrong. Millionaire allows contestants to bail out with $100, but no one does. Does that make the first five questions extraneous? No, they're part of the game. It's not extra at all; because the point of Millionaire is risking what you've won to go farther. Even if that means you're risking $100 to win $200.

The Pyramid example isn't 'extraneous' either, just a 'choice' that almost always favored column A. "Y'know, Dick, my celebrity partner here is a real clod, let's play for $50 a throw." At least they offered the option. And when they figured out that no one was going to get excited over $350 in bonus money, they changed it. The thread title ought to be "Rarely seen/employed game play options".
[/quote]
According to my Funk & Wagnalls (quick hat tip to Dick Martin), the definition of "extraneous" is "not intrinsic or essential to matter under consideration." By that definition, the entire 7-11 itself is extraneous, as the bonus money is not essential in determining who comes back the next day, just like the Ca$hword has nothing to do with who wins the game and goes to the bonus round in "Super Password." Explain to me (and I'm not being a smart aleck about this -- I really want to know what you think) why a very rarely chosen option in the 7-11 doesn't also fall under the heading of "extraneous."

In any case, I'm all for changing the name of the thread if it's more accurate. Words are my biz.

Brendan

SamJ93 · « **Reply #29 on:** November 26, 2006, 10:10:40 PM »

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'138841\' date=\'Nov 26 2006, 08:05 PM\']
.... they changed it. The thread title ought to be "Rarely seen/employed game play options".
[/quote]

An admittedly poor choice of words on my part; mea culpa. Nonetheless, if a gameplay option is rarely used, isn't it usually a sign that it's not worth keeping it? "Millionaire" is an exception, I'll admit.

--Sam