Author Topic: Changes you'd like to see (Read 44151 times)

TLEberle · « **Reply #105 on:** July 30, 2007, 09:29:52 PM »

[quote name=\'MSTieScott\' post=\'159143\' date=\'Jul 30 2007, 06:25 PM\']And while it seems like there's only a small chance of that happening, what do you do if contestants start realizing that if they all just "secretly" bid $1, then they each win the prizes?[/quote]Granted, this is giving the current contestant crop far too much credit, but if it was me:

"We both win on a $1 bid, so Joe Twelve-pack over there is going to bid $1. I'll just bid $10,001."

Every good thing (added time to use up) has a massive unintended downside (one-dollar ties).

chris319 · « **Reply #106 on:** July 31, 2007, 08:33:25 AM »

Quote

what do you do if contestants start realizing that if they all just "secretly" bid $1, then they each win the prizes?

The "420" bidders would love that. All of a sudden every showcase is $420.

To answer your question, you institute a rule saying that if both bids are identical, nobody wins. Then run for your life as the audience rushes the stage in revolt over what would be a very unpopular rule.

urbanpreppie05 · « **Reply #107 on:** July 31, 2007, 10:12:18 AM »

Quote

I don't know if this has been suggested, but I'd like to see a change to the Showcase in which both contestants bid on the SAME prize package. They could write down their guesses during the final commercial break (a la "Jeopardy") and Drew could reveal them afterwards. Obviously there would no longer be double showcase winners, but you'd gain at least a minute for game play.

When I hosted a College version of TPIR in 05, we did this exact thing. In the event of them both going over, they would have to bid again, ala the one bid. The big problem with this is it pretty much guarantees a showcase win...and the sick sadistic part of me likes to see an occasional loss.

Quote

Hopefully the idea is, now that Barker is gone, they STOP PICKING THOSE PEOPLE.

...or at the very least cut back on them.

Quote

Reduce the number of pricing games and One Bids from 6 to 4, and keep the two Showcase Showdowns, with 2 players instead of 3.

Didn't Australia do this during the Mega $500,000 showcase days?

clemon79 · « **Reply #108 on:** July 31, 2007, 11:35:17 AM »

[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'159179\' date=\'Jul 31 2007, 05:33 AM\']
To answer your question, you institute a rule saying that if both bids are identical, nobody wins.
[/quote]
That would RULE.

And you bring Willy Wonka in as your guest-host:

http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/673/hairaftersk5.jpg

Steve Gavazzi · « **Reply #109 on:** July 31, 2007, 11:55:55 AM »

[quote name=\'urbanpreppie05\' post=\'159183\' date=\'Jul 31 2007, 10:12 AM\']

Quote

Reduce the number of pricing games and One Bids from 6 to 4, and keep the two Showcase Showdowns, with 2 players instead of 3.

Didn't Australia do this during the Mega $500,000 showcase days?
[/quote]

The Australian version didn't have six games to begin with.

Ian Wallis · « **Reply #110 on:** July 31, 2007, 12:42:19 PM »

Quote

It is not feasible to keep one audience for more than one show. They need to load in prizes and games and do blocking before each show.

Just out of curiousity, in the '70s when the show was regularly a half-hour, did they tape multiple episodes in a day? If so, didn't they keep the same audience for several shows in those days?

tvwxman · « **Reply #111 on:** July 31, 2007, 12:51:19 PM »

[quote name=\'Casey Buck\' post=\'159086\' date=\'Jul 30 2007, 03:38 PM\']
TPiR's format right now has been squeezed to the bone, because of increased commercial time (including a 30-second increase a few years ago). Something's going to have to give eventually, unless Drew operates in Super Rush mode all the time.
[/quote]
Well, they could shave minutes off of the sow if Rich Fields would cut some extraneous vowels from the words A New Caaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

That would leave plenty room for Drew to do his schtick...

urbanpreppie05 · « **Reply #112 on:** July 31, 2007, 03:07:28 PM »

[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'159191\' date=\'Jul 31 2007, 11:55 AM\']
[quote name=\'urbanpreppie05\' post=\'159183\' date=\'Jul 31 2007, 10:12 AM\']

Quote

Reduce the number of pricing games and One Bids from 6 to 4, and keep the two Showcase Showdowns, with 2 players instead of 3.

Didn't Australia do this during the Mega $500,000 showcase days?
[/quote]

The Australian version didn't have six games to begin with.
[/quote]

My mistake...I meant the 2PG's-SS-2PG's-SS-Showcase format that was proposed. I knew they didnt have 6.

chris319 · « **Reply #113 on:** July 31, 2007, 03:09:26 PM »

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'159195\' date=\'Jul 31 2007, 09:42 AM\']

Quote

It is not feasible to keep one audience for more than one show. They need to load in prizes and games and do blocking before each show.

Just out of curiousity, in the '70s when the show was regularly a half-hour, did they tape multiple episodes in a day? If so, didn't they keep the same audience for several shows in those days?
[/quote]
They did, but those were half-hour shows. The one-hour format changed all that.

Steve Gavazzi · « **Reply #114 on:** July 31, 2007, 05:20:14 PM »

[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'159216\' date=\'Jul 31 2007, 03:09 PM\']
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'159195\' date=\'Jul 31 2007, 09:42 AM\']

Quote

It is not feasible to keep one audience for more than one show. They need to load in prizes and games and do blocking before each show.

Just out of curiousity, in the '70s when the show was regularly a half-hour, did they tape multiple episodes in a day? If so, didn't they keep the same audience for several shows in those days?
[/quote]
They did, but those were half-hour shows. The one-hour format changed all that.
[/quote]

Actually, I was looking through some data I have on the beginning of Season 5 last night, and at that time, they were taping three hour shows every Monday and Tuesday.

byrd62 · « **Reply #115 on:** July 31, 2007, 07:14:28 PM »

If the format stays as is, I think The Price is Right will end up being more heavily-edited and rushed, hurry-up offense style, than it has been. That's why I think the show can, in effect, do away with one "Showcase Showdown", as well as one fewer pricing game, and convert the "Showcase" into a solo player format, as I'll explain below when I divide what I would call The Drew Price is Right into 8 segments.

The first five of those would be the traditional IUFB/pricing-game pattern, which could be broken down into two car games [like "3 Strikes", "Pathfinder", or "Any Number"], a cash game ["1/2 Off", the Punchboard, or everyone's favorite, "Plinko"], a medium-prize game [like "Cliffhangers" or "Grocery Game"], and a quickie game [like "Squeeze Play" or "Clock Game"]. The quickie game can be the 4th segment, leading into the station break at the half-hour.

The sixth segment would be the "Showcase Showdown", which could involve either the Top 3 contestants, or all 5, with the same rules applying as before, and the winner going on to what would become a solo-player "Showcase".

That "Showcase" would be the seventh segment, and is patterned, I believe, after the "Showcase" on the British PiR during the Bruce Forsyth era in the 1990's. The winner from the "Showcase Showdown" picks one of several price tags that will indicate how close that player must come to the ARP of the "Showcase" without going over. Then come all the prizes, followed by the player giving his bid.

The eighth and final segment will be the "reveal". If the player's bid is within the range he chose, of course, he wins the showcase. If the bid is $250 or less away from the ARP, he also gets a cash bonus of some kind, like $25,000 [alarm and siren]. And on the rarest of occasions when a player is exactly right, which has never happened on daytime Price, he would win an even bigger cash bonus, like $100,000.

CBS could save some money when there's no guarantee that the "Showcase" will be won every day, I would think. And the format change could free up some time for Drew to interact a bit longer with the contestants, hopefully without overpowering them or the show.

Steve Gavazzi · « **Reply #116 on:** July 31, 2007, 07:32:36 PM »

Time concerns aside (and frankly, I don't think the show's actually anywhere near the point of having to do this), I really can't understand why anyone would want to use the European Showcase format. All it is is a glorified, dumbed-down Card Game.

BrandonFG · « **Reply #117 on:** July 31, 2007, 07:54:50 PM »

Solo Showcase, IMO, is just as bad as dropping the one-bids. And both helped contribute to the 1994 version's demise.

Some things can be altered without a problem, i.e. going from six games to four, basically leaving one contestant from each Showcase Showdown. It's a minor change that changes up the game without royally FUBAR'g it.

Dropping the item up for bids or a showcase format that worked for 35 years is crazy.

clemon79 · « **Reply #118 on:** July 31, 2007, 08:00:08 PM »

[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'159238\' date=\'Jul 31 2007, 04:32 PM\']
Time concerns aside (and frankly, I don't think the show's actually anywhere near the point of having to do this), I really can't understand why anyone would want to use the European Showcase format.
[/quote]
It's quick, it's simple, and it involved pricing.

Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing them pull the Range Game endgame from the Davidson version out of the mothballs.

Either way, turning the Showcase into an endgame is NOT the worst idea in the world. (Doing the Showcase Showdown with five contestants, on the other hand, is up there with turning Plinko into its own full show.)

tpirfan28 · « **Reply #119 on:** July 31, 2007, 08:11:13 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'159241\' date=\'Jul 31 2007, 08:00 PM\']
...on the other hand, is up there with turning Plinko into its own full show.)
[/quote]
I just threw up in my mouth a little.