TPiR Season 37 changes

[dale_grass]

[quote name=\'DrJWJustice\' post=\'192260\' date=\'Jul 27 2008, 04:59 PM\']
As Chris Lemon said (among others), it is a simple game of third-grade math:  Figure out what the price of the prize is, and then write a check that will raise the prize package value to somewhere between $6,000 and $7,000, inclusive.
[/quote]

The game (as pointed out earlier) is nothing more that guessing the price of the prize.  Getting the prize/check combo into the range is a formality and the check amount stems directly from the contestant's guess.  So, it boils down to the contestant guessing the price of the prize within $1000 without going over.  As the price of the prize increases, that window becomes relatively smaller (see above posts).

[tpirfan28]

Since this has apparently turned into an exercise in futile mathematics for some, it needs to be in the record that the range is actually $1,001, as both  $5,000 AND $6,000 $7,000 AND $8,000 are winning scores.

See here:  http://youtube.com/watch?v=zdCCjpR1q_w

[dale_grass]

[quote name=\'tpirfan28\' post=\'192269\' date=\'Jul 27 2008, 05:45 PM\']
Since this has apparently turned into an exercise in futilen mathematics for some,
[/quote]

Fixed that for ya.

[DrBear]

I was told there would be no math.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'dale_grass\' post=\'192268\' date=\'Jul 27 2008, 03:41 PM\']
As the price of the prize increases, that window becomes relatively smaller (see above posts).
[/quote]
If the range increased from $5,000-$6,000 to $90,000-$91,000, I would absolutely concede your point.

It didn't.

[tpirfan28]

[quote name=\'DrBear\' post=\'192273\' date=\'Jul 27 2008, 06:54 PM\']
I was told there would be no math.
[/quote]
Sadly, that's what 99.9% of TPIR contestants think.  'Twas the downfall of Hit Me.

/The one that ends in zero, dammit.

[DrJWJustice]

[quote name=\'dale_grass\' post=\'192268\' date=\'Jul 27 2008, 05:41 PM\']
The game (as pointed out earlier) is nothing more that guessing the price of the prize.  Getting the prize/check combo into the range is a formality and the check amount stems directly from the contestant's guess.  So, it boils down to the contestant guessing the price of the prize within $1000 without going over.  As the price of the prize increases, that window becomes relatively smaller (see above posts).
[/quote]

Right, I understood you completely in your first post.  I find myself in agreement with Chris and others that we did not experience a massive adjustment in where the range falls.  If we had, this relative margin of error you described might make a difference.  With an increase of $2,000 on both the high and low ends, I don't think there will be a statistically significant difference to the overall results.  Again, I'd love to see a full run-down on prior game stats for comparison.  

Put another way, let's say I'm doing research on European voting patterns pre-1980, and I include all democracies west of the Iron Curtain.  Then I do a follow-up a few years later that takes into account that Spain and Portugal are no longer dictatorships and that includes all other countries I used before.  There would be an increase in the number of cases being studied, but the odds of my overall results changing from before is extremely low.   I raise this because this has been done before.  

Back to the Check Game, I'm certainly not attacking the math proper, but rather the statistical implications, as you invited earlier.  PYLdude did not state his intentions in the way that he wanted the rest of the board to understand them, and then he got all defensive when we tried to let him know that the way he put it was both confusing at best and off-base at worst.  I'm not going play board mod here, but I do hope he learns from this and won't repeat it.

[dale_grass]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'192274\' date=\'Jul 27 2008, 05:55 PM\']
[quote name=\'dale_grass\' post=\'192268\' date=\'Jul 27 2008, 03:41 PM\']
As the price of the prize increases, that window becomes relatively smaller (see above posts).
[/quote]
If the range increased from $5,000-$6,000 to $90,000-$91,000, I would absolutely concede your point.

It didn't.
[/quote]

Our earlier conversation discussed prize values, not ranges.  This is also based on the presumption that the ranges are increasing to compensate for rising prize values.  A prize of $6000 with the $90,000-$91,000 range ($1000 window) is a lot easier to win than an $85,000 prize with the same range (still a $1000 window).  Again, the range itself doesn't play into the math.  The size of the window and value of the prize are the only two things to consider with relative error.

[dale_grass]

[quote name=\'DrJWJustice\' post=\'192278\' date=\'Jul 27 2008, 06:00 PM\']
[quote name=\'dale_grass\' post=\'192268\' date=\'Jul 27 2008, 05:41 PM\']
The game (as pointed out earlier) is nothing more that guessing the price of the prize.  Getting the prize/check combo into the range is a formality and the check amount stems directly from the contestant's guess.  So, it boils down to the contestant guessing the price of the prize within $1000 without going over.  As the price of the prize increases, that window becomes relatively smaller (see above posts).
[/quote]

Right, I understood you completely in your first post.  I find myself in agreement with Chris and others that we did not experience a massive adjustment in where the range falls.  Again, I'd love to see a full run-down on prior game stats for comparison.  

I'm certainly not attacking the math proper, but rather the statistical implications, as you invited earlier.
[/quote]

I don't know what the statistical implications are.  I think the question floating in the mist is "Will there be fewer Check Game wins as the result of the new range?" That I can't answer.  Looking at past shows and what the actual difference between the contestant's total and $6000 would be a start.

\Someone want to get on that?

[dale_grass]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'192274\' date=\'Jul 27 2008, 05:55 PM\']
[quote name=\'dale_grass\' post=\'192268\' date=\'Jul 27 2008, 03:41 PM\']
As the price of the prize increases, that window becomes relatively smaller (see above posts).
[/quote]
If the range increased from $5,000-$6,000 to $90,000-$91,000, I would absolutely concede your point.

It didn't.
[/quote]
Hang on, wait a minute.  I think I see your point now.  I got that one-track mind thing going on.  From a math point, the numbers make a difference.  But yeah, if the prize is a $6000 treadmill or a $7500 pepper grinder, the contestant will probably do just as well on either one.

\Is that it?

[DrJWJustice]

[quote name=\'dale_grass\' post=\'192281\' date=\'Jul 27 2008, 06:04 PM\']
I don't know what the statistical implications are.  I think the question floating in the mist is "Will there be fewer Check Game wins as the result of the new range?" That I can't answer.  Looking at past shows and what the actual difference between the contestant's total and $6000 would be a start.

\Someone want to get on that?
[/quote]
Answering that now is about as useful as asking when the video wall is going to appear (ducking!).  We'll just have to watch it and see.

[ClockGameJohn]

[quote name=\'dale_grass\' post=\'192281\' date=\'Jul 27 2008, 07:04 PM\']I think the question floating in the mist is "Will there be fewer Check Game wins as the result of the new range?" That I can't answer.
[/quote]

That I think is what started this entire mess.  My theory (which seems to be supported somewhere deep inside this thread) is that contestants will have more difficulty winning the game now, and this change was rather 'spontaneous' and not well thought through.

Thus the point of my post which some felt I needed to "get over."

[Steve Gavazzi]

[quote name=\'DrJWJustice\' post=\'192260\' date=\'Jul 27 2008, 05:59 PM\']I wish someone had all-time win/loss statistics on this game so that we could run the numbers, and I do know that this is not the first time that this game has seen a change in the value of its prizes.  That would help to settle this.[/quote]
I love when a question like this comes up and I actually have the resources to answer it.

Based on records that I would say are as close to accurate as you're gonna get when you're dealing with a 36-year run, Check Game has been played on the daytime show 554 times.  It's been won 257 times and lost 300 times.  (...yes, I know that doesn't add up.  I'm working off of two different sets of stats here, at least one of which evidently has some mistakes.  I'd bet the 554 count is more accurate than the 557, but I wouldn't know whether to take those three playings out of the wins or the losses.)

Anyway, the win range was $3,000-$3,500 up through the middle of Season 17.  The game had a record of 15-17 that season, and I don't know which wins or losses fall under which range.  It was 85-119 in Seasons 10 through 16 and 157-164 in Seasons 18 through 36.

EDIT:  Come to think of it, if I shoot off an e-mail, I can probably get the records for Season 17 cleared up, too.

[tpirfan28]

[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'192288\' date=\'Jul 27 2008, 07:58 PM\']
It's been won 257 times and lost 300 times.[/quote]You know, for all the back and forth in the Barker era about people not understanding how to play the game (whether made up lack of understanding or not), that's a pretty good record for the game.

[DrJWJustice]

[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'192288\' date=\'Jul 27 2008, 06:58 PM\']
Based on records that I would say are as close to accurate as you're gonna get when you're dealing with a 36-year run, Check Game has been played on the daytime show 554 times.  It's been won 257 times and lost 300 times.
.
[/quote]

That's an N big enough to run the numbers, regardless as to the accuracy.  Since we've been arguing about this to this length, I'm really tempted to run the stats.  It will be interesting to see what will happen, once the new numbers begin to come into play.  I will say it will probably take a couple of seasons worth of stats under the revised range to get anything useful.