[quote name=\'rjaguar3\' post=\'175072\' date=\'Jan 15 2008, 10:07 PM\']
PYLdude, you may not have known, but I created the changes based on two premises.
1. If there is a dominant player, that player should win.
2. Good players should win most of the time, but there should be the possibility for another player to earn a comeback.
These two premises go hand-in-hand. On the one hand, if a clearly dominant player doesn't win, it basically makes the game a travesty. On the other hand, if the better player always wins, it makes for a great sporting event, but it's terrible television. So the catch is to straddle the line, so that good players win more often, but there's always a possiblity for a dark horse to make a comeback and win.[/quote]
This much I agree with.
Under the current system, a leader who has answered every clue except the last one could lose the game to a spoiler who only buzzes in once on a clue he happens to know. My system would make such last-second steals far less frequent, even though they wouldn't be eliminated. (I don't think this is a major flaw any more than the fact that a person with $100 in Final Jeopardy! can still win the game if the two leaders tied for the lead bet it all and miss.) Most of the time, a late spoiler will end up anywhere from several hundred dollars to about a thousand dollars behind in a competitive match. That difference must be made up by answering clues, not by making a lucky spoil.
Your solution, while I appreciate the effort you put behind it, is equivalent to turning the spoilers into cardboard cutouts for lack of a better term. Everyone agrees that the last-second spoils are a problem. It bugs me, and I actually am a big fan of the show. But what's the point of having a spoiler system if that can't happen (the way it's set up now, that is)? They're not called the second-bests or the trailers.
To that end, the reason why I got rid of the Crossword Extras was that they made and broke the game more than anything else.
And that's PRECISELY WHAT THEY'RE DESIGNED TO DO. Just like the Daily Doubles on Jeopardy. Would you advocate removing those?
When $3,000 or more is on the line, it's going to make a big impact on the gameplay, either putting a leader into an insurmountable lead or putting a trailer far out of contention.
But a leader typically isn't going to bet enough to where losing money is a problem. If the leader's secure enough in front, he/she is going to play conservatively and not be reckless unless they're uncompromisingly greedy. And maybe a trailer would be put far out of contention, but if you're that far out of the game, wouldn't you try whatever you could to get back in? I mean, if you had $500 and your opponent was more than $2K or $3K ahead, are you going to bet $500 or less, or are you going to try and get back in the game if the situation calls for it?
Getting rid of these makes it harder to catch up, but at the same time, the deficits to be made up are far less.
It still doesn't stop any player from jumping out to a huge lead and rendering the final round moot. Plus you're assuming too much that the trailing player is going to get a decent shot to come back, and that's not guaranteed.
Furthermore, removing the Crossword Extras makes the gameplay better by putting less value on a single clue.
The impact to the gameplay, as far as I'm concerned, would be minimal at best and not enough to judge one way or another.
I don't suggest making each clue worth $50,000, or even $500
Agreed, because that's ridiculous.
but I think doubling the dollar values in Round 3 (like in the one week of shows in December 2007) could make the game closer without sacrificing the quality of play or straining the budget.
I reiterate: it still doesn't stop someone, solver or spoiler, from running away with the game and making the last round of clues moot.
Unfortunately, there is no way to satisfy the two axioms above perfectly. You'll either have unsatisfactory upsets or blowout games. But I think the show could use a little tinkering to come closer to the center of this balance.
You could cut away the unsatisfactory upsets, but in doing so you also negate the role of the Spoiler in a way that's worse than the problem you're trying to solve in doing that. And, hate to beat a dead horse, but the blowouts will always remain.
It needs tinkering, but you need to work with what you have and not change things too radically. I believe your Spoiler idea does that. Your Crossword Extra removal idea doesn't as much, but to me it takes away any hope a player might have of catching up. And to me that's just unfair enough to cause a problem.
