The $1 Million Pyramid...

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'170032\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 05:18 PM\']
Reading back through the post history, I believe you were the one that first said that started talking about me and horrible TV. I did not throw the punch in this sir.[/quote]
I did indeed. And how, sir (hey, as long as we're throwing faux-respect around, I might as well get in on the action) does that even remotely imply a denial of your right to an opinion?

You want facts? Here, I'll give you facts: The fact is that you're trying to turn "disagreeing with your opinion" into "telling you you can't have one." And guess what? I get to disagree with you, and there are two things you can do about it: 1) nothing, and 2) like it.

Glad to see you do, given that I don't see anyone compelled enough to make a post that supports your stance any more or less so than mine.

And that's fine, too. That changes nothing about what I said.

Oh, so you actually are admitting to liking Wheel? *Marks date*

Bob, show our contestant what he gets for reading that out of my statement:

http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/8686/failbobbarkerva7.jpg

Oh, and:

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

Good day, "sir."

(And way to pretend that your completely unfounded accusations against me with regard to Donnymid never happened.)

[dzinkin]

[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'169999\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 04:11 PM\']
And I suppose you are in the same position and have the god-given right to be telling others what is good TV and what is not?
[/quote]
Chris does not have a G-d-given right to anything on this board.  He has the same moderator-given right that you have: to express an opinion.  That right comes with certain responsibilities, but agreeing with your opinion is not one of them.

This coming from a person who actually considered Donny Osmond and many other qualities of the most recent Pyramid redeemable.

Please cite examples of Chris's defense of these "many other qualities."  Since there are "many," you should have no trouble coming up with several examples.

Your opinion: fact. My opinion: laughable...

His opinion and your opinion are both just that: opinion.  That said, he has explained the basis for his opinion, while you have chosen to react with anger that he does not agree rather than explain yours.

Plus, any hint I'm detecting that you're trying to use that Wheel, a concept you despise, is my favorite show to try and enhance your argument I do not know good TV is ridiculous, and is only another example of one of your self-filtered "self-perceived facts."

Please demonstrate (1) your evidence that Chris despises Wheel and (2) your evidence that he's basing his argument on the fact that you like it.  I'd like to think you've learned something about evidence since, well, this.

Are you a regular on the GSN boards?  I know it's common practice there to state an opinion and demand that others agree with it in lieu of actually defending it.

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'170032\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 05:18 PM\']Glad to see you do, given that I don't see anyone compelled enough to make a post that supports your stance any more or less so than mine.[/quote]Fine. I will. Your idea is purely awful. Any production company that offers a "$1,000,000 tournament prize" and then reneges on it deserves all of the bad publicity that they are sure to receive. All of your "reasons" for doing so are idiotic, too.
The idea that a game show has to fit into cookie cutter seasons? <bzzt> Sorry, no sale.

To say that a group of contestants who is unable to conquer the pyramid within your predetermined time limit, under the hardest of conditions should then forfeit their chance at the top prize is just silly on its face. The whole point of why the $100,000 tournament is so great is that it could end after ten minutes, or two weeks. You never knew, so you had to keep turning in if you wanted to see who won the money.

Your idea provides the possibility of "Well, that's the last trip to the Winner's Circle of this tournament. None of you win the money, so we're back on Monday with regular games. Make sure to watch American Bandstand this weekend." You don't think that would be a colossal downer, instead of what a tournament final should be, an eight-cylinder adrenaline rush?

Your position is indefensible, which you have proven by arguing points that no one has brought up, instead of saying why your idea would be an improvement.

"What is argument by displacement, Alex?"

[Robert Hutchinson]

I, too, support "don't give away your big announced tournament prize at all = horrible TV".

Didn't Donnymid manage to have a new format for almost every tournament they did? I remember one where the top announced prize of $100,000 required winning two $50K Winner's Circles (and the contestant only won one), and another where the "dramatic" moment was Donny reading off who had climbed the pyramid the fastest. Crap on toast, all of it.

While I'm griping, I have heard it said more than once that Davidson Pyramid somehow ensured that every tournament would end, with a winner, within a week. Is that true?

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'170046\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 07:17 PM\']Didn't Donnymid manage to have a new format for almost every tournament they did? I remember one where the top announced prize of $100,000 required winning two $50K Winner's Circles (and the contestant only won one), and another where the "dramatic" moment was Donny reading off who had climbed the pyramid the fastest. [/quote]Not quite. While they might have had more formats depending on the number of $25,000 winners, we only saw the 4 player and  6 players versions. And you do remember correctly; in the six player tournament, whoever had the fastest time would win the money, and in one case, it was the person waiting offstage to see if her time would hold up. In the other case, winning $25,000 to qualify, $25,000 to get to the finals would mean that a single $50,000 win in the final would create one (or maybe two!) $100,000 winners.

As you said, I shall have the excrement on whole wheat.

[Kevin Prather]

Thanks for the feedback. I've updated the website with new art, which includes the actual winner's circle. As far as I'm concerned, this is a complete set. Of course, I will be tooling with the format over time.

http://www.freewebs.com/themilliondollarpyramid/index.htm

[TonicBH]

The best way to make a million-dollar Pyramid? The $100,000 version (the 1980's version, not Davidson's, and certainly not Donnymid) with mo money syndrome.

There.

To be perfectly honest, I think $100,000 is still big money for syndicated television these days... would anything higher even work? Or would it just look too awkward?

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'TonicBH\' post=\'170088\' date=\'Nov 20 2007, 06:12 AM\']
To be perfectly honest, I think $100,000 is still big money for syndicated television these days... would anything higher even work? Or would it just look too awkward?
[/quote]
It's the Pyramid. If it's done right, it doesn't matter if it's played for 37 cents.

The thing is, though, if you're gonna call it "The $1,000,000 Pyramid", then you'd better give away $1,000,000 on a fairly regular basis, otherwise it smacks of taking advantage of a number without backing it up. (Much like the Weakest Link people loved to do.) The $100K show doing their tournaments on a six-week interval made that work. I think eyebrows would start to raise if that interval climbed above, say, two months.

[wheelloon]

Chris does not have a G-d-given right to anything on this board.  He has the same moderator-given right that you have: to express an opinion.  That right comes with certain responsibilities, but agreeing with your opinion is not one of them.

100% agreed. However, I was not the one who first started flaring insults about the other's opinion. My first reply to Chris, directly after his first post here, was not meant to be taken as criticism towards Chris, but MY EXPLANATION of why I felt that rule would be a viable alternative.

Please cite examples of Chris's defense of these "many other qualities."  Since there are "many," you should have no trouble coming up with several examples.

I've seen him bash the writing (which, most of us agree, was horrible) and how the celebrities were lackluster (again, most agree). However, it is MY opinion that Donny was, himself, reason number 1 it was a bad revival. I believe I also remember lots of support for the 6 answers in 20 secs rule, which I didn't support. I understand why it was done, but it seemed way too awkward, especially with today's caliber of players. However, given the last topic about this was an extended time ago, it's not worth mine or any of our's times to go and search for it. However, I'm not out to say this could've all been fixed, or it was the most horrible revival attempt ever, because surely it was not, IMHO.

His opinion and your opinion are both just that: opinion.  That said, he has explained the basis for his opinion, while you have chosen to react with anger that he does not agree rather than explain yours.

I did not react with anger at all to his disagreement with me. My reaction to him started upon the whole "horrible television" comment, which came out of nowhere. If you recall, Kevin disagreed with some ideas of mine a few posts back, and I respect those opinions. It is HIS revival, he should do it how he wants.

Plus, I DID explain my opinion why a one-week tourney could be an *ALTERNATE* plan (it wouldn't be my first choice either, which is why I called it an alternative). Again, if you read my posts. I said that it would be a way to lock down a certain number of episodes in a season of such a show, so that each season ends evenly. While ideally, many of us would love for all TV shows to run without the confines of seasons, that is currently an ideal opinion and a bit unrealistic, IMHO, and the writer's strike should remind us of that.

Please demonstrate (1) your evidence that Chris despises Wheel and (2) your evidence that he's basing his argument on the fact that you like it.  I'd like to think you've learned something about evidence since, well, this.

I'm not bashing Chris for despising Wheel AT ALL, I have many friends at other online places (not GSN) that vehemently hate the show, but his implication that I do not know good TV is "not a surprise" is obvious what is being implied towards.

Oh, BTW:

http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&a...st&p=168313

Lemme tell ya, it be pretty obvious he more than just dislikes the show! That is actually quite fine, as I'm not exactly wholly happy with the show right now, but I don't go all out and call it "utterly idiotic" which is IMHO quite degrading, even if it was used for a show that is as incredibly disliked around here as "friggin Studs." However, this is not the point of this faceoff or this topic, and I apologize to Kevin that his topic has become this.

As for the update, as I said to ya elsewhere Kevin, I love your set and the concept for your revival, and you're miles ahead of what Donnymid ever got to.

[BrandonFG]

[quote name=\'TonicBH\' post=\'170088\' date=\'Nov 20 2007, 09:12 AM\']
To be perfectly honest, I think $100,000 is still big money for syndicated television these days... would anything higher even work? Or would it just look too awkward?
[/quote]
I won't say awkward, but don't give it away just for the sake of giving it away, and just because you advertise a huge cash prize (*cough*Donnymid*cough*). Make the writers write some compelling, challenging categories, and make the team work for the grand prize, whether it takes two days or two weeks. You cannot rush something like that in three days, then just say "Awww, no one achieved the feat, so...eenie-meenie-miney-mo...random player gets the dough! Kthxbye!!!1!"

$100,000 is still a lot of money, especially in daily syndication, and especially for a show guaranteeing this amount of money every six to eight weeks, that's plenty of money. The difference between Pyramid and shows like Millionaire, daytime Weakest Link, and the upcoming Deal in the Daytime is that the latter three shows OFFER(ED) up to a certain amount of money, but never guaranteed it. That was on the contestant.

One thing, I say just offer a flat $25,000 for non-tourney weeks, and fastest three wins qualify.

/sit down, Lesko.

[dzinkin]

[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'170115\' date=\'Nov 20 2007, 01:10 PM\']
100% agreed. However, I was not the one who first started flaring insults about the other's opinion. My first reply to Chris, directly after his first post here, was not meant to be taken as criticism towards Chris, but MY EXPLANATION of why I felt that rule would be a viable alternative.
[/quote]
Calling your idea "horrible television" is hardly an insult.  Unless, of course, you take disagreement with your opinion to be "insulting" in and of itself (that GSN board mentality again).

Please cite examples of Chris's defense of these "many other qualities."  Since there are "many," you should have no trouble coming up with several examples.

I've seen him bash the writing (which, most of us agree, was horrible) and how the celebrities were lackluster (again, most agree). However, it is MY opinion that Donny was, himself, reason number 1 it was a bad revival.

In other words, your claim that he defended these "many other qualities" was, in a word, false.

Bryan Hayes (BMaurice06) has repeatedly insisted that Temptation is horrible merely because Todd Newton wasn't chosen to host.  Most of us don't agree that Rossi Morreale is the worst part of the show, but that doesn't mean that we're "defending" Temptation; it means that the show has so many other problems that he's the least of them.  Similarly, not agreeing with you that Donny Osmond was the worst part of Pyramid does not amount to a defense of every other part.  

However, given the last topic about this was an extended time ago, it's not worth mine or any of our's times to go and search for it.

No, but it would be worth your time to stop putting words in other members' mouths and start checking your facts before you post.

I did not react with anger at all to his disagreement with me.

This is so flat-out ridiculous, I'm not even sure how to respond.

I'm not bashing Chris for despising Wheel AT ALL,

Straw man.  I never said that you claimed he despised Wheel, I said you claimed that he despised the concept.  Which, by the way, you did.  (And for that matter, I don't ever recall him saying that he "despised" Wheel itself either.  I'm pretty sure that he has more important things to despise than, well, any game show.)

Oh, BTW:

http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&a...st&p=168313

Lemme tell ya, it be pretty obvious he more than just dislikes the show!

Again, he said that the show was idiotic, not the concept of the show.

However, this is not the point of this faceoff or this topic, and I apologize to Kevin that his topic has become this.

You should apologize not only for that, but for not actually reading and comprehending what others write before you comment on it, for making false claims as a result of that failure, and for trying to rewrite history.

Face it.  You were outraged that Chris dared to disagree with you, and in your fury you overreacted, big time.  It happens to all of us at one time for another; you'd do well to simply admit it and apologize.

[Unrealtor]

I will approve of one concept of Wheelloon's - doing the tournaments one front game at a time instead of one day at a time. (Actually, I'd probably change the front game so that contestants can play until they lose their second front game, since I hated the "sure, it took two tiebreaker rounds to come up with a winner, but you weren't it, so goodbye" that would happen on the older episodes and the "Dick Cavett blew that last category in the Winners Circle, so you leave us with $750" of the 80s.)

I think the tournaments are a good idea, because of the guaranteed payout, but doing four a year could be pretty expensive. Maybe something like three mini-tournaments for an extra amount of cash and entry into the big tournament, which starts immediately after the third smaller one?

[Kevin Prather]

[quote name=\'Unrealtor\' post=\'170223\' date=\'Nov 21 2007, 10:37 PM\']
I think the tournaments are a good idea, because of the guaranteed payout, but doing four a year could be pretty expensive. Maybe something like three mini-tournaments for an extra amount of cash and entry into the big tournament, which starts immediately after the third smaller one?
[/quote]
Interesting idea, but what about what Chris said? That the million should be given away MORE often? Is there a happy balance?

[clemon79]

I didn't say *more* often, per se. I said exactly what you did about a happy balance: you can't give it out so often that you blow out your prize budget, but at the same time if you spread it out TOO much, that $1,000,000 you are trumpeting in your title looks disingenuous.

[tpirfan28]

I don't see what's completely wrong with the following system:

- three eight-week tournaments for $100,000
- winners of the tournaments play for $1,000,000
- Two $1,000,000 tournaments a season