Pyramid

[Fedya]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'142234\' date=\'Jan 5 2007, 12:24 AM\']
[quote name=\'Fedya\' post=\'142232\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 08:51 PM\']
Also, if the first Winner's Circle wasn't won, it pretty much made the whole second half of the show pointless.  There's no competition to see who the "champion" will be, since neither of these contestants can ever come back.
[/quote]
They play a second game, and the winner of that game gets a shot at $10,000.

Where in the HELL is that pointless?
[/quote]
Well, pointless for the viewer (or at least, this viewer).  I would compare it to the few cases where the $100K in the tournament was won in the first half of a show, and the second main game/WC was played by the two losing contestants for a shot at $10K.  Sure, it's nice for them, but I never found it very meaningful for the home audience.

[Dbacksfan12]

[quote name=\'Fedya\' post=\'142264\' date=\'Jan 5 2007, 01:37 PM\']
Well, pointless for the viewer (or at least, this viewer).  I would compare it to the few cases where the $100K in the tournament was won in the first half of a show, and the second main game/WC was played by the two losing contestants for a shot at $10K.  Sure, it's nice for them, but I never found it very meaningful for the home audience.
[/quote]
"You can walk offstage with a bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken, or we'll give you a shot at $10,000."
"I'll take the chicken!"

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Fedya\' post=\'142264\' date=\'Jan 5 2007, 11:37 AM\']
Well, pointless for the viewer (or at least, this viewer).  I would compare it to the few cases where the $100K in the tournament was won in the first half of a show, and the second main game/WC was played by the two losing contestants for a shot at $10K.  Sure, it's nice for them, but I never found it very meaningful for the home audience.
[/quote]
Words fail me.

[jmangin]

[quote name=\'Fedya\' post=\'142264\' date=\'Jan 5 2007, 02:37 PM\']
Well, pointless for the viewer (or at least, this viewer).  I would compare it to the few cases where the $100K in the tournament was won in the first half of a show, and the second main game/WC was played by the two losing contestants for a shot at $10K.  Sure, it's nice for them, but I never found it very meaningful for the home audience.
[/quote]

I don't know how much longer I can stand this symphony of ridiculousness.  You're probably the kind of person who thinks Janice, Dian & Holly should drop by studio 33 for Barker's last show, too.

[uncamark]

The important thing here is that we don't know anything about this incarnation other than it's "Pyramid," Donny's hosting it and it's going to be on the UK equivalent to GSN.  Since the Brits seem to have a better grasp of what makes game shows work these days (the "TPIR" revival aside), this could be a lot better than some of you think.

However, if whoever holds the overseas format rights (Fremantle held the overseas format licensing rights last I saw) only gives the producers the bible and reference tapes of the last U.S. incarnation, then I could see trouble ahead.

[aaron sica]

Although I disagree with the second game being "pointless" if the first game ended in a $100K win, I do see where Fedya is coming from - it always seemed rather anticlimactic to me if the $100K was won during the first game, but in the second game, they play for $10,000, which by itself is great, but compared to $100,000 is not much at all. Equivalent to someone who's 6 ft. tall, who has been regarded as "tall", standing next to someone 7 ft. tall who makes him look short.  In this day and age, $100,000 seems like nothing especially when much higher figures are tossed around, but back in the '80s when I originally watched it, seeing someone win $10,000 vs. $100,000 was a MASSIVE difference.

[Robert Hutchinson]

I'm just having fun thinking of all the game shows we should be turning off early because they've become "pointless to the viewer".

"That guy only got $250 in the Audience Match on MGPM? Well, screw this! What else is on?"

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'aaron sica\' post=\'142281\' date=\'Jan 5 2007, 02:01 PM\']
Although I disagree with the second game being "pointless" if the first game ended in a $100K win, I do see where Fedya is coming from - it always seemed rather anticlimactic to me if the $100K was won during the first game, but in the second game, they play for $10,000, which by itself is great, but compared to $100,000 is not much at all.
[/quote]
Unless you'd rather Dick and the celebrities do a little soft-shoe for the second half of the show, do you have a better idea?

Ted's point, wholesale, was that if there wasn't a chance for someone to win $25,000 on the Osmond show, then the show was pointless, because apparently giving someone the chance to win $10,000 Just Isn't Enough. Which is ridiculous.

[Kevin Prather]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'142286\' date=\'Jan 5 2007, 02:14 PM\']
[quote name=\'aaron sica\' post=\'142281\' date=\'Jan 5 2007, 02:01 PM\']
Although I disagree with the second game being "pointless" if the first game ended in a $100K win, I do see where Fedya is coming from - it always seemed rather anticlimactic to me if the $100K was won during the first game, but in the second game, they play for $10,000, which by itself is great, but compared to $100,000 is not much at all.
[/quote]
Unless you'd rather Dick...
[/quote]
Sounds like a plan to me.

In seriousness, his logic basically says there's no reason to watch the first game because it can only end in $10,000.

[TravisP]

More news from Challenge

They are set to produce 30 X 30 minute episodes to be filmed at Fountain Studios in London (also used for PokerFace, X-Factor and previously the first series of 1 Vs 100). All of the shows will be given a primetime slot on the channel (between 7pm-10pm) and set to run weekdaily from 7th May 2007.

No word on the format though but rumours are going around that its £5,000 for winning the Winners Circle once and £15,000 for winning twice.

[BrandonFG]

[quote name=\'TravisP\' post=\'143893\' date=\'Jan 19 2007, 07:30 PM\']
No word on the format though but rumours are going around that its £5,000 for winning the Winners Circle once and £15,000 for winning twice.
[/quote]
As in the first trip is 5,000 pounds, and the second trip is an extra 10,000, or can you win 20,000 pounds total?

Sorry if that sounds smartassed, but that's a genuinely confusing rule (as it was in the States), and I just wanted to clarify.

/Is it possible to do a pound sign on U.S. computers?

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'143897\' date=\'Jan 19 2007, 04:35 PM\']
/Is it possible to do a pound sign on U.S. computers?
[/quote]
Yeah, two ways: you either install the British keyboard set in Windows (assuming your Keyboard Control Panel will let you - I can't seem to make the IntelliType one do it) and flop back and forth as needed, or you hold down the Alt key and type "0163" on the keypad. (SPECIFICALLY on the keypad.) The latter is probably easier for occasional use.

[Kevin Prather]

Alt+412 works as well.

[TravisP]

It's not exactly certain but given Challenge is on a budget. I suspect it will be £15,000 maximum, also I can't see them doing a big money tournament. As they also have Take It or Leave It returning this year as well (possible £50,000 top prize).

[Brig Bother]

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'143897\' date=\'Jan 20 2007, 12:35 AM\']
[quote name=\'TravisP\' post=\'143893\' date=\'Jan 19 2007, 07:30 PM\']
No word on the format though but rumours are going around that its £5,000 for winning the Winners Circle once and £15,000 for winning twice.
[/quote]
As in the first trip is 5,000 pounds, and the second trip is an extra 10,000, or can you win 20,000 pounds total?

Sorry if that sounds smartassed, but that's a genuinely confusing rule (as it was in the States), and I just wanted to clarify.
[/quote]

Crikey, is that really confusing? The smart money is as Travis says, £5k for one success, £10k for winning it the second time for £15k total. You fail the first time but win the second, you win £5k.