Twenty-One ties

[Kevin Prather]

If it were me, I would have just answered it, especially at $2000 a point. The way I see it, NBC would have had to pay me, or else they would have had to reveal the whole sham. If Herb wasn't so concerned with staying in the public eye, he would have seen that.

The irony is that going along wth it got him OUT of the public eye, at least for a little while.

[TLEberle]

Yep. Stempel had 16, and the Marty question was a fiver.

If it were me, I would have just answered it, especially at $2000 a point. The way I see it, NBC would have had to pay me, or else they would have had to reveal the whole sham. If Herb wasn't so concerned with staying in the public eye, he would have seen that.

If Messrs. Barry-Enright were to go for breach of contract, it would press the issue of "is this legal?" a whole lot sooner.

[chris319]

If Messrs. Barry-Enright were to go for breach of contract, it would press the issue of "is this legal?" a whole lot sooner.

You really think B & E would have sued Herb Stempel, saying in effect "Herb didn't answer the question the way he was instructed to?" They could have refused to pay him the prize money, but if I'm not mistaken, at that point he had signed an agreement that he would receive an amount less than that announced on the air.

[TLEberle]

Remembering a conversation I had moths ago with Chris Lemon about this topic, it goes back to why you would not want to equate "stopping the game" with "I quit!" or why a tie should break in favor of the person who didn't stop:

What if you're on 20? If the other guy has 21 you're cooked anyway and the game will be over. Worst case is a tie at that point. Sure, you could play another round, take your dopey 1 point question, reach 21 and the game would be complete, but that allows your opponent another chance to do the same. You lose zero by calling it good and comparing the scores at that point. You could extend that down to probably 17 or so, because a 4 point question should still be a lay-up, right? At 17 you run the risk of losing, and that risk isn't there at 20.

[Bryce L.]

Since my memory of the Povich run is fuzzy, and I admit to being too lazy to Google it right now, was there a set point, where if so many rounds had been played without either a player ending the game voluntarily or else someone achieving a score of 21, the game would end anyway, with either whoever was leading being declared the winner, or a sudden-death lockout question played if the scores were tied at that moment?

[TLEberle]

Since my memory of the Povich run is fuzzy, and I admit to being too lazy to Google it right now, was there a set point, where if so many rounds had been played without either a player ending the game voluntarily or else someone achieving a score of 21, the game would end anyway, with either whoever was leading being declared the winner, or a sudden-death lockout question played if the scores were tied at that moment?

1) Yes.

2) Five rounds of questioning, or the expiry of time in the episode.

[Bryce L.]

Since my memory of the Povich run is fuzzy, and I admit to being too lazy to Google it right now, was there a set point, where if so many rounds had been played without either a player ending the game voluntarily or else someone achieving a score of 21, the game would end anyway, with either whoever was leading being declared the winner, or a sudden-death lockout question played if the scores were tied at that moment?

1) Yes.

2) Five rounds of questioning, or the expiry of time in the episode.

Thank you Travis, and I am assuming from your response that the producers of the Povich series did not like to have games straddle. Is that correct?

[TLEberle]

Thank you Travis, and I am assuming from your response that the producers of the Povich series did not like to have games straddle. Is that correct?

I don't think liking ever entered into it. They just didn't, and there's at least one really good reason to make sure games don't carry over.

[Bryce L.]

Thank you Travis, and I am assuming from your response that the producers of the Povich series did not like to have games straddle. Is that correct?

I don't think liking ever entered into it. They just didn't, and there's at least one really good reason to make sure games don't carry over.

I am assuming that you mean a viewer missing an episode and wondering why two completely different players are competing, as compared to the last show they watched. Now, if my guess is right, I know that soap operas and professional wrestling can get away with not completely tying up loose ends at the end of every episode, and for many years, game shows could do the same. Why not now?

[SamJ93]

Now, if my guess is right, I know that soap operas and professional wrestling can get away with not completely tying up loose ends at the end of every episode, and for many years, game shows could do the same. Why not now?

I believe the "good reason" Travis referred to had more to do with logistics of production rather than ratings. If they ended an episode in the middle of a game, they would have had to go to the trouble of keeping the contestants ignorant of each other's scores until the next show. Maybe not such an issue when the next episode tapes in 20 minutes, but if it's the last taping of the day, I don't think they would've been allowed to make them sleep in their isolation booths...

[TLEberle]

I believe the "good reason" Travis referred to had more to do with logistics of production rather than ratings. If they ended an episode in the middle of a game, they would have had to go to the trouble of keeping the contestants ignorant of each other's scores until the next show. Maybe not such an issue when the next episode tapes in 20 minutes, but if it's the last taping of the day, I don't think they would've been allowed to make them sleep in their isolation booths...

That was it. You must make 100% sure that neither player finds out what the other's score is. Or isn't. Ending the game after fewer rounds (or stretching/filling elsewhere) is easier.

[Bryce L.]

I believe the "good reason" Travis referred to had more to do with logistics of production rather than ratings. If they ended an episode in the middle of a game, they would have had to go to the trouble of keeping the contestants ignorant of each other's scores until the next show. Maybe not such an issue when the next episode tapes in 20 minutes, but if it's the last taping of the day, I don't think they would've been allowed to make them sleep in their isolation booths...

That was it. You must make 100% sure that neither player finds out what the other's score is. Or isn't. Ending the game after fewer rounds (or stretching/filling elsewhere) is easier.

Ah... I forgot about that unique issue, in Twenty One's case.