PYL question

[beatlefreak84]

Hi everyone,

I wish I could take credit for this question, but, actually, it was asked by one of my students, and I didn't have a good answer for it at the time; hence, I turn to the experts....

Anyway, to finish up our unit on statistics, I had them watch an episode of PYL and statistically analyze it.  Afterwards, I asked them if they had noticed any strategies being used; I then mentioned Michael Larson and how he figured out the board had a fixed pattern (that's not the episode we watched).  One of my students then asked how the board worked, and I gave a brief description; another one then immediately asked, "So, why didn't they just make the board random in the first place?  Would it have been more expensive to do so?"

I didn't think so; I figured it was just a gaffe on Bill Carruthers' part, but I figured I'd ask you all before getting back to her.  Anyone have a conclusive answer on this one?

Thanks!

Anthony

[Jimmy Owen]

Had the lights been random, Larson would not have happened.  Anytime a technician has to change something, it costs money, and why incur the expense if nobody noticed?  "Second Chance" (the superior show, IMO) never had this problem because the lights moved too fast to detect a pattern. Anybody ever put the SotC Fame Game board under close scrutiny?

[whewfan]

Jim Peck mentioned to us at GSC8 that they had a similar situation with Second Chance. Someone actually figured out the light pattern on the board and ran away with over $80k. Of course, unlike the PYL board, the dollar figures and prizes remained in the exact same position.

I suppose if they rigged the board so that the slides changed in various patterns instead of all in unison, that would've made the board harder to analyze with the bouncing lights, which also rotated in a fixed pattern.
Only after Larson did they regularly switch the dollar figures, prizes and whammies around, as well as the light patterns. Although, the big money space with the 3k, 4k and 5k spot always remained in its usual spot, and never had a whammy as part of the rotation, an oversight on the producer's part. Another possible thing they could've done was to make the board and lights flash MUCH faster.

I have a theory that Larson hit that first whammy on purpose. He strategically figured out that he didn't have to run away with the board for the first round. Besides, the largest dollar figures did not have a "+ one spin" attached to them in round 1. If he had decided to "clean house" for round 1, the show could've run MUCH longer, and have a whole second round that was yet to be played!

[Jimmy Owen]

I stand corrected on the "Second Chance" situation.  Interesting that it happened there too and Carruthers didn't see a need to make modifications to prevent it from happening again.  How could an unemployed dude like Larson afford a VCR in 1983?

[Don Howard]

[quote name=\'whewfan\' post=\'156508\' date=\'Jul 2 2007, 09:39 AM\']
Jim Peck mentioned to us at GSC8 that they had a similar situation with Second Chance. Someone actually figured out the light pattern on the board and ran away with over $80k.[/quote]
Was there a "+ a spin" feature on this show?
Also, did this player get to keep the whole $80K or was he/she only given $25000?

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' post=\'156506\' date=\'Jul 2 2007, 05:57 AM\']
One of my students then asked how the board worked, and I gave a brief description; another one then immediately asked, "So, why didn't they just make the board random in the first place?  Would it have been more expensive to do so?"
[/quote]
My guess (and this *is* a guess) is that if it were truly random, it wouldn't look as good on TV as it does with a rhythmically bouncing predetermined pattern, which to Joe Sixpack actually looks *more* random than a true random pattern (which could do things like bounce five or six straight times among three adjacent squares, for example). So I'm betting it was an aesthetic choice and they just never thought they hadn't complicated it enough to be hacked.

(And based on how quickly the light bounced on Second Chance, I think I have to call shenanigans on Jim Peck's story.)

[tvrandywest]

Here's how I heard the story:

Bill Carruthers and CBS were aware that there were a finite number of patterns to the board, and it was CBS' informed decision to not proceed with incurring more costs by building the necessary electronics to generate true random selection.

When I was a contestant on episodes #9, 10 and 11 a friend of mine and his wife were in the audience. The show had not yet debuted, so nobody had seen the big board. My friend was a professor at UCLA and a former Jeopardy! champ... a brilliant guy. After watching 5 episodes tape (#6-#10) he explained 3 patterns to me that he had identified. When I returned on a second tape date for episode #11, I was able to clearly see one of the patterns he described, but I was unable to capitalize on that knowledge to any great extent. I won on that third appearance but was retired as my winnings exceeded $25,000 - the rule in effect at that time.


Randy
tvrandywest.com

[Ian Wallis]

Another possible thing they could've done was to make the board and lights flash MUCH faster.

The lights did move a bit faster after a couple of the changes.  If you compare 1986 episodes to the Larson episodes, there's a definate speed difference.  Also, the first pattern change after Larson, the lights seemed to move much slower.

I have a theory that Larson hit that first whammy on purpose. He strategically figured out that he didn't have to run away with the board for the first round.

I don't think that's true.  In one of the interviews he stated he didn't know how quickly the board actually stopped once he hit his plunger.  Once he disocovered it was instantanious, he then went to town.  Actually, he did almost "clean house" in the first round.  His next two spins after that both landed on the top dollar figure.  It's just that in round 1, there were no extra spins there.

[Ian Wallis]

(And based on how quickly the light bounced on Second Chance, I think I have to call shenanigans on Jim Peck's story.)

I have my doubts too.  I think if it really happened, we'd have heard about it from more than one source, and it would have been common knowledge for quite a while.

For the record, I watched PYL almost from the beginning, and a couple of the patterns I deteced after two or three episodes.  Considering they kept those original patterns for so long, maybe it's surprising a Larson-like run didn't happen sooner.

[uncamark]

On "Second Chance," the free spins were only available in the last round--on the "big bucks" space only.  When they started, it was static at $5,000 and later was changed to an egg-crate display flashing $1,000/$2,000/$3,000/$4,000/$5,000.

[Unrealtor]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'156513\' date=\'Jul 2 2007, 10:42 AM\']
[quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' post=\'156506\' date=\'Jul 2 2007, 05:57 AM\']
One of my students then asked how the board worked, and I gave a brief description; another one then immediately asked, "So, why didn't they just make the board random in the first place?  Would it have been more expensive to do so?"
[/quote]
My guess (and this *is* a guess) is that if it were truly random, it wouldn't look as good on TV as it does with a rhythmically bouncing predetermined pattern, which to Joe Sixpack actually looks *more* random than a true random pattern (which could do things like bounce five or six straight times among three adjacent squares, for example). So I'm betting it was an aesthetic choice and they just never thought they hadn't complicated it enough to be hacked.
[/quote]

There is more than one way to do a "random" sequence of lights. As Chris suggested, a random selection from 1 to n for each bounce will look bad, because we humans are wired to notice patterns, to the point of seeing them where no pattern exists. Something more akin to shuffling a deck of cards or the iPod's "random" feature would work better - take every possible outcome, put them in random order, and go through that order without skipping around. Every space gets "hit" exactly once per cycle, but the pattern is long enough to be hard to memorize on the fly. Cycle through three or four different sequences, and you could probably get away with randomizing things once per tape day.

There are some other rules that I could envision being added, like prevening two adjacent squares from being lit up back-to-back, or even employing some kind of probability function to mold the aesthetics of the bounces (weight towards being far away, but slightly against the exact opposite space, for instance,) but the more complicated the program, the more sophisticated the electronics would have to be, and the longer it would take to do the math.

[BrandonFG]

[quote name=\'tvrandywest\' post=\'156514\' date=\'Jul 2 2007, 11:50 AM\']
When I was a contestant on episodes #9, 10 and 11 a friend of mine and his wife were in the audience. The show had not yet debuted, so nobody had seen the big board. My friend was a professor at UCLA and a former Jeopardy! champ... a brilliant guy. After watching 5 episodes tape (#6-#10) he explained 3 patterns to me that he had identified.
[/quote]
There's another guy named Dave Wagner, who appeared around the same time as you, but before Larson. He used the pattern to his advantage, and won a couple of games. In a book he wrote, he makes a reference to Larson winning a nice haul months later.

[CJBojangles]

[quote name=\'tvrandywest\' post=\'156514\' date=\'Jul 2 2007, 11:50 AM\']Bill Carruthers and CBS were aware that there were a finite number of patterns to the board, and it was CBS' informed decision to not proceed with incurring more costs by building the necessary electronics to generate true random selection.
[/quote]

This seems a little backwards to me. Does the era of the technology factor in here? I can fathom how in 1983 it would cost more money to create electronics with a random selection. I would think it would be more costly to make a board with patterns today. (Which probably tells you how much I know about electronics.)

Keep in mind the "big board" on Whammy! was operated by a simple computer. I would assume Gameshow Marathon's board was operated the same way.

[Robert Hutchinson]

Regarding the speeding-up of the board later in PYL's run:

One of the full shows someone put up on YouTube a while back had a contestant who was obviously intending to hit the Big Bucks space simply by hitting the button when he saw that square light up, with the idea that his reflexes were faster than the interval between bounces. Interestingly enough, it worked about half of the time. However, just about every time it didn't work, he hit a Whammy.

[HairMetalLives]

[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'156507\' date=\'Jul 2 2007, 06:37 AM\']Anybody ever put the SotC Fame Game board under close scrutiny?[/quote]

No, but now I want to! I'll get back here when I find something out.

I know the "Small Talk" bonus round video wall was not random. In fact, it's just one pattern and it's not very long. Among the 7 squares, there were only 35 changes from space to the next. Very easy to figure out.