pyramid scenario

[toetyper]

Category-- WHAT  OSCAR THE GROUCH MIGHT SAY

giver-- here i am, in my trashcan on sesame street im green and i have a lousy attitude

reciever-- what oscar the grinch would say

giver-- im not a grinch im a...


1  would the accept 'oscar  the grinch'

2  is the givers second clue illegal

[BrandonFG]

[quote name=\'toetyper\' post=\'240348\' date=\'May 4 2010, 05:17 PM\']1  would the accept 'oscar  the grinch'[/quote]
I say {DING!} I've seen some instances where part of the phrase might be off...I think in this instance, the key word is "Oscar", as a proper name. Of course, Donnymid would demand you say the whole name.

2  is the givers second clue illegal

"Give only a list..."
-Dick Clark

Although the "What ___ Would Say" is a little more lenient, giving a clue like that is getting back to the maingame. I'd say that's a {BUZZ!}

[Jimmy Owen]

[quote name=\'toetyper\' post=\'240348\' date=\'May 4 2010, 05:17 PM\']Category-- WHAT  OSCAR THE GROUCH MIGHT SAY

giver-- here i am, in my trashcan on sesame street im green and i have a lousy attitude

reciever-- what oscar the grinch would say

giver-- im not a grinch im a...


1  would the accept 'oscar  the grinch'

2  is the givers second clue illegal[/quote]
I wouldn't because it's not correct.  Would you accept Oscar Meyer?

[toetyper]

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'240349\' date=\'May 4 2010, 05:37 PM\']I say {DING!} I've seen some where part of the phrase might be off...I think in this instance, the key word is "Oscar", as a proper name. Of course, Donnymid would demand you say the whole name.[/quote]

but isnt 'oscar the grouch'  the name  of a fictional character like 'holden caulfield'

they wouldnt accept just holden would they?

[Kevin Prather]

[quote name=\'toetyper\' post=\'240348\' date=\'May 4 2010, 02:17 PM\']giver-- im not a grinch im a...[/quote]
Take off the "I'm a..." at the end, and you might be ok. "I'm not a grinch, I'm something else."

[rjaguar3]

[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'240350\' date=\'May 4 2010, 04:39 PM\']I wouldn't because it's not correct.  Would you accept Oscar Meyer?[/quote]

Correct me if I'm wrong (which I probably am), but unlike other shows, it doesn't matter what incorrect information you say.  Unlike Tic-Tac-Dough, where "Sam Gershwin" would be ruled incorrect for George Gershwin, on Pyramid, it seems to me that if someone were describing George Gershwin and the category did not specifically require first names, then "Sam Gershwin" would be ruled correct, because the receiver said the key word "Gershwin."

[Jimmy Owen]

[quote name=\'rjaguar3\' post=\'240361\' date=\'May 4 2010, 09:09 PM\'][quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'240350\' date=\'May 4 2010, 04:39 PM\']I wouldn't because it's not correct.  Would you accept Oscar Meyer?[/quote]

Correct me if I'm wrong (which I probably am), but unlike other shows, it doesn't matter what incorrect information you say.  Unlike Tic-Tac-Dough, where "Sam Gershwin" would be ruled incorrect for George Gershwin, on Pyramid, it seems to me that if someone were describing George Gershwin and the category did not specifically require first names, then "Sam Gershwin" would be ruled correct, because the receiver said the key word "Gershwin."
[/quote]
Well, then for "Oscar" why not just say, "I'm another name for an Academy Award.." instead of this Sesame Street stuff....

[Kevin Prather]

[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'240362\' date=\'May 4 2010, 06:12 PM\'][quote name=\'rjaguar3\' post=\'240361\' date=\'May 4 2010, 09:09 PM\'][quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'240350\' date=\'May 4 2010, 04:39 PM\']I wouldn't because it's not correct.  Would you accept Oscar Meyer?[/quote]

Correct me if I'm wrong (which I probably am), but unlike other shows, it doesn't matter what incorrect information you say.  Unlike Tic-Tac-Dough, where "Sam Gershwin" would be ruled incorrect for George Gershwin, on Pyramid, it seems to me that if someone were describing George Gershwin and the category did not specifically require first names, then "Sam Gershwin" would be ruled correct, because the receiver said the key word "Gershwin."
[/quote]
Well, then for "Oscar" why not just say, "I'm another name for an Academy Award.." instead of this Sesame Street stuff....
[/quote]
I think the grey area is the difference between inaccurate clues and clues that lead you in another direction. If the category was "Red fruits", you wouldn't get buzzed for saying "a banana." It's a crappy clue, and it's gonna screw you over, but it won't get buzzed. If your partner gets "fruits", but not "red", and you say "a stop sign", THEN you're gonna get buzzed.

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'toetyper\' post=\'240348\' date=\'May 4 2010, 02:17 PM\']1  would the accept 'oscar  the grinch'[/quote] I have no idea. I wouldn't because he isn't "Oscar the Grinch," he is "Oscar the Grouch".

2  is the givers second clue illegal

Is it something Oscar would say? Does it give away the essence of the answer?

[quote name=\'toetyper\' post=\'240351\' date=\'May 4 2010, 02:49 PM\']they wouldnt accept just holden would they?[/quote]When you're watching Pyramid, and Dick reveals that a name category is coming, the players don't squeal with delight saying "Praise be to Gawd, our prayers are answered!" They cower in fear because generally they have to give both the first and last names. If the answer was put up on the screen as "Holden Caulfield," then that's what the receiver has to say.

Pyramid judging isn't an exact science, but it also isn't rocket surgery either. These aren't even really close cases to me.

[Jumpondees]

[quote name=\'toetyper\' post=\'240348\' date=\'May 4 2010, 05:17 PM\']Category-- WHAT  OSCAR THE GROUCH MIGHT SAY

giver-- here i am, in my trashcan on sesame street im green and i have a lousy attitude

reciever-- what oscar the grinch would say

giver-- im not a grinch im a...


1  would the accept 'oscar  the grinch'

2  is the givers second clue illegal[/quote]

1) In order to avoid any ambiguity with the usage of a fictional character the trilon would have to read WHAT "OSCAR" ("THE GROUCH") MIGHT SAY.  Emphasizing that the contestant must correctly identify the character.  

If the receiver says just OSCAR, OSCAR THE GROUCH, or just THE GROUCH in the response "What ____ Would/Might Say", then *Ding*.  If the receiver says OSCAR THE GRINCH, then *no ding*.  The reason I would judge it that way is that the character is referred to on Sesame Street as OSCAR or OSCAR THE GROUCH, and since there is only one GROUCH on Sesame Street, that would be the reason why I would accept just THE GROUCH.

[quote name=\'fostergray82\']"Give only a list..."
-Dick Clark[/quote]

2)  I would *BUZZ* the second clue referencing the above rule quote from Mr. Clark under the pretenses that "I'm not a grinch, I'm a..." is too "descriptive".

[Jay Temple]

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'240366\' date=\'May 4 2010, 09:43 PM\']When you're watching Pyramid, and Dick reveals that a name category is coming, the players don't squeal with delight saying "Praise be to Gawd, our prayers are answered!" They cower in fear because generally they have to give both the first and last names. If the answer was put up on the screen as "Holden Caulfield," then that's what the receiver has to say.[/quote]
Not necessarily. The rule with real people was that the last name is enough, except when Dick's given an instruction to the contrary. The reason people didn't want that category is that even that often proves to be difficult. (Read: One of the people has no idea who some of the folks are.)

At least in the 80's, they tried to write fictional character material in such a way as to make it easier. To wit: The only time you'd see Holden Caulfield is maybe during the Tournament of Champions.

[Jimmy Owen]

[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' post=\'240372\' date=\'May 5 2010, 12:40 AM\']At least in the 80's, they tried to write fictional character material in such a way as to make it easier. To wit: The only time you'd see Holden Caulfield is maybe during the Tournament of Champions.[/quote]
Or if they ever booked Elaine Joyce... *


*J.D. Salinger came out of seclusion to meet Elaine during that decade.

[WarioBarker]

I think in this instance, the key word is "Oscar", as a proper name. Of course, Donnymid would demand you say the whole name.

* Celebrity: "I'm a green Muppet-type monster who hangs out on Sesame Street, and-"
* Contestant: "What Oscar Would Say."
* Celebrity: "...Uh......"I'm grumpy and bad-tempered and I love trash"-"

*time's-up sound; Donny ru-"OH! OH! OH! It's "What Oscar The Grouch Would Say". But you picked up $400 and-"

* Celebrity: "Wait...that should've been taken -- he said "What Oscar Would Say", and on that show they usually call him "Oscar". *turns to judge* He said the essence of the category, so he should get the money."

*illegal clue sound*

* Celebrity: "Okay, then let me tell you a story... A long time ago, back when this show was, you know, actually good (with returning champions, tournament-entry requirements that actually made sense, celebrities picked for their brainpower over their starpower, no categories explicitly designed to screw contestants out of money, and no Mr. Anally-Strict Judge Guy) the essence of the category was all that needed to be said to get credit. There was none of this "You have to say "Things On A Cave Wall", not "Things In A Cave"!" crap or "We can't take "Things From The Wizard of Oz" -- you need to say "Characters From The Wizard of Oz"!" And, of course, there's my personal favorite -- "Colors In The Olympic Rings"! Now that's how you screw contestants!"

* Producer: "You're banned from the show. Get out."

* Celebrity: "Oh, yes, because that's the mature thing to do, isn't it Mr. Producer? "This guy is blasting all the horrible changes we made to a format that didn't need changing in the first place, so instead of taking what he's saying into consideration...we'll just ban him from the show." *thumbs-up* Great job, stupid!"

* Donny: "I need to close the show."
* Celebrity: "Go ahead, I'm not stopping you -- they'll cut this part out, or edit it so I look like a total moron."

[JasonA1]

[quote name=\'Kevin Prather\' post=\'240364\' date=\'May 4 2010, 09:23 PM\']If your partner gets "fruits", but not "red", and you say "a stop sign", THEN you're gonna get buzzed.[/quote]

I think this potential messy situation illustrates why categories with two key words are often a bad idea.

-Jason

[Otm Shank]

I cannot remember the circumstances around it, but there once was an instance where the giver did something just like that: a reactive correction to the receiver's guess on an "X Might Say" category. It was something that would have been clearly illegal as being descriptive on any other category. I do remember the giver having a dreaded reaction waiting for a buzz, but the contestant was given credit for the box. Afterward, Dick Clark mentioned that there is a lot of latitude with X Might Say, and that the perceived illegality was seen as fitting for the category, because the subject person might say something like that.

As for the judging dynamic, there would be no need for "WHAT OSCAR (THE GROUCH) MIGHT SAY". I would presume that (in the 20th Century Pyramid) the judge has the word Oscar underlined, especially since it is a $100-$150 box. The giver is constrained by the text in the box; the receiver is just to the key word (or, rarely, key words).

If the box is, in full "WHAT OSCAR THE GROUCH MIGHT SAY" and the giver says "I'm a golden statue...," that's a buzz. (On the other hand, "I share a name with a golden statue," is okay.) But the receiver is likely to only need Oscar — or, if they were really lenient, Grouch by itself might have been acceptable — however that would be determined by the writers way beforehand.

When parentheses were used, it was to take another common term: "ANNUAL EVENTS (YEARLY)". This would limit the giver from clues like New Year's Day, but either word became a key word for the receiver.