alphabetics question

[toetyper]

if. during alphabetics they buzz a clue for being illegal; then find out its in the dictionary, what happened?  give them the word.  ? redo?  L

[BrandonFG]

Educated guess: if it was the 10th word, the contestant probably wins the jackpot. Otherwise they probably just get the extra $100.

[SRIV94]

Educated guess: if it was the 10th word, the contestant probably wins the jackpot. Otherwise they probably just get the extra $100.

Don't forget, though, the P+ version only docked them $1000 (or appropriate multiplier in the later Kennedy episodes) for an illegal clue.  It didn't go the SP route of forfeiting the jackpot.

That said, you're probably right.

[TLEberle]

if. during alphabetics they buzz a clue for being illegal; then find out its in the dictionary, what happened?  give them the word.  ? redo?  L

The easy solution is you don't buzz a clue for being illegal unless it is illegal.

If I'm running the show, replace the word, call backsies and roll tape.

[BrandonFG]

Educated guess: if it was the 10th word, the contestant probably wins the jackpot. Otherwise they probably just get the extra $100.

Don't forget, though, the P+ version only docked them $1000 (or appropriate multiplier in the later Kennedy episodes) for an illegal clue.  It didn't go the SP route of forfeiting the jackpot.

That said, you're probably right.

Forgot that it was just a 20% penalty...kinda makes it a little more anticlimactic compared to when Pyramid would do a reversal. I could see Allen/Bill/Tom simply saying the contestant gets the full jackpot, cue Mother McKenzie applause (no music or hugs), then the intro of the next opponent...

[cool245]

If you were on the last word and time was running out couldn't you just "accidentally" give an illegal clue and still get four grand.

[TLEberle]

If you were on the last word and time was running out couldn't you just "accidentally" give an illegal clue and still get four grand.

The celebrity could (and did) give the password as the clue, the contestant picked up on it and won $4,000.

[Kevin Prather]

If you were on the last word and time was running out couldn't you just "accidentally" give an illegal clue and still get four grand.

The celebrity could (and did) give the password as the clue, the contestant picked up on it and won $4,000.

That just seems like all sorts of goofy to me. "Whoops! Four thousand dollars!"

[Jeremy Nelson]

'

If you were on the last word and time was running out couldn't you just "accidentally" give an illegal clue and still get four grand.

The celebrity could (and did) give the password as the clue, the contestant picked up on it and won $4,000.

That just seems like all sorts of goofy to me. "Whoops! Four thousand dollars!"

Well, if there are one or two seconds remaining and it doesn't look like your partner is going to get it, then throw the last password and take the reduced cash reward. Granted, if that became a regular thing, then at some point either the rules would have changed so the entire jackpot was forfeited, or they just would not invite celebrities back who exploited the rule. Now I'm actually seeing why the contestant never got to give the clues.

[Kevin Prather]

Well, if there are one or two seconds remaining and it doesn't look like your partner is going to get it, then throw the last password and take the reduced cash reward.

Exactly. Loopholes don't make for good television.

[TLEberle]

Here's the problem I have. I don't like a contestant losing out because a celebrity goofed. I also don't like having people exploit games to get paid because of loopholes. I think a happy compromise is that a goof reduces the jackpot accordingly, but saying the answer or doing something like that in the last five(ish?) seconds of the round disqualifies the game outright.

[Kevin Prather]

Here's the problem I have. I don't like a contestant losing out because a celebrity goofed. I also don't like having people exploit games to get paid because of loopholes. I think a happy compromise is that a goof reduces the jackpot accordingly, but saying the answer or doing something like that in the last five(ish?) seconds of the round disqualifies the game outright.

The problem I have with that is your creating a rule with an exception. "If you do this, then this happens unless you do it this way, then that happens".

[TLEberle]

The problem I have with that is your creating a rule with an exception. "If you do this, then this happens unless you do it this way, then that happens".

That's interesting, because hockey and soccer have yellow/red cards and two/four/five minute minute penalties and nobody is clueless as to why.

[Kevin Prather]

The problem I have with that is your creating a rule with an exception. "If you do this, then this happens unless you do it this way, then that happens".

That's interesting, because hockey and soccer have yellow/red cards and two/four/five minute minute penalties and nobody is clueless as to why.

Tom Kennedy didn't host soccer.

[BrandonFG]

$4,000 was still a lot of coin in 1979. I would've reduced the jackpot by far more, celebrity goof or not. I'm honestly not a fan of making it so that celebs could only give, but again that 20% penalty is not really a penalty. $2,500 is a little more feasible, or if you give the contestant the option to give, it becomes $100 a word regardless.