Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: "$100,000 Pyramid" primetime this summer on ABC  (Read 280454 times)

Fedya

  • Member
  • Posts: 2114
Re: "$100,000 Pyramid" primetime this summer on ABC
« Reply #585 on: August 29, 2016, 04:55:41 AM »
Using the same word in two different front-game categories in the same round?

[shakes head dolefully]
-- Ted Schuerzinger, now blogging at <a href=\"http://justacineast.blogspot.com/\" target=\"_blank\">http://justacineast.blogspot.com/[/url]

No Fark slashes were harmed in the making of this post

chrisholland03

  • Member
  • Posts: 1543
Re: "$100,000 Pyramid" primetime this summer on ABC
« Reply #586 on: August 29, 2016, 08:13:42 AM »
Turkey?


Chief-O

  • Member
  • Posts: 1626
  • Light the lamp, not the rat!!!
Re: "$100,000 Pyramid" primetime this summer on ABC
« Reply #587 on: August 29, 2016, 08:29:50 AM »
Last night, one of the categories was "You Got Served", and one of the items in that category was Serena Williams.

Am I the only one who thought the judges should not have let just "Williams" be accepted, given that Serena has a sister who's as popular in the sport as she is?
There are three things I've learned never to discuss with people: Religion, politics, and the proper wrapping of microphone cables.

Unrealtor

  • Member
  • Posts: 815
Re: "$100,000 Pyramid" primetime this summer on ABC
« Reply #588 on: August 29, 2016, 08:50:26 AM »
Meh. It's a word game, not a trivia contest. I have no problem with sticking to a rule that says that just the last name is acceptable unless the common thread defined by the category somehow makes the first name relevant to the answer (like every name having the same initials.)
"It's for £50,000. If you want to, you may remove your trousers."

chad1m

  • Member
  • Posts: 2883
Re: "$100,000 Pyramid" primetime this summer on ABC
« Reply #589 on: August 29, 2016, 11:51:27 AM »
Am I the only one who thought the judges should not have let just "Williams" be accepted, given that Serena has a sister who's as popular in the sport as she is?
I have a vivid memory of the '80s judges taking "Joan Collins" for "Jackie Collins" or vice-versa with a Dick Clark explanation afterwards. There's precedent.

Jay Temple

  • Member
  • Posts: 2227
Re: "$100,000 Pyramid" primetime this summer on ABC
« Reply #590 on: August 29, 2016, 02:18:48 PM »
Turkey?
It was "bones" in one category (slang words for money) and "bone" in another. Not just the same half-hour, but the actual set of six categories. I shook my head too.
Protecting idiots from themselves just leads to more idiots.

Fedya

  • Member
  • Posts: 2114
Re: "$100,000 Pyramid" primetime this summer on ABC
« Reply #591 on: August 29, 2016, 03:30:42 PM »
Yes; bones/bone was the one I had in mind.

And they absolutely should have accepted just Williams for Serena Williams.  (Now if they were playing Password....)
-- Ted Schuerzinger, now blogging at <a href=\"http://justacineast.blogspot.com/\" target=\"_blank\">http://justacineast.blogspot.com/[/url]

No Fark slashes were harmed in the making of this post

Kevin Prather

  • Member
  • Posts: 6789
Re: "$100,000 Pyramid" primetime this summer on ABC
« Reply #592 on: August 29, 2016, 05:49:54 PM »
During the final WC, "milk" and "orange juice" were accepted for "Parts of a refrigerator". Is that a correct ruling, or could it be that the judge was being charitable since the round was going poorly anyway?

chad1m

  • Member
  • Posts: 2883
Re: "$100,000 Pyramid" primetime this summer on ABC
« Reply #593 on: August 29, 2016, 06:27:49 PM »
Is that a correct ruling
Since the '80s, "parts" have been accepted for things that aren't actual vital components in making the object function, like "the music" for "parts of a guitar."

JasonA1

  • Executive Producer
  • Posts: 3157
Re: "$100,000 Pyramid" primetime this summer on ABC
« Reply #594 on: August 29, 2016, 06:43:26 PM »
My gut tells me "clothes" would be allowed for "parts of a washing machine" in the 80s as well. That sort of clue doesn't violate the letter of the rules, so far as I can tell. It veers near that unwritten rule (but later written, as I understand it) where you couldn't get too "cute" for lack of a better term (see: Thomas for Things You Doubt).  A lot of people go down this road of buzzing things that don't fit the spirit of the category, but if that were the case, the Why You/Might Say boxes wouldn't play well at all.

-Jason
Game Show Forum Muckety-Muck

Loogaroo

  • Member
  • Posts: 732
Re: "$100,000 Pyramid" primetime this summer on ABC
« Reply #595 on: August 30, 2016, 04:04:38 AM »
Methinks that this was the producers throwing the contestant a $4000 bone, seeing as boxes 2 through 4 had already gone wanting. I think the judges are willing to err on the side of generosity as long as it doesn't trigger a full win or upset the game balance (which is immaterial once you get to the WC anyway).

Did anyone keep track of the win percentage over the course of the summer? If I had to guess I'd say it was in the neighborhood of about 30%.
You're in a room. You're wearing a silly hat.
There are letters on the floor. They spell "NOPE".

GameShowGuru

  • Member
  • Posts: 207
Re: "$100,000 Pyramid" primetime this summer on ABC
« Reply #596 on: September 12, 2016, 05:30:36 PM »

Here's the official rule for what constitutes a synonym: It must fall into the same lexical category for it to be a synonym (nouns for nouns, verbs for verbs, etc.).

Official based on who? Because if that's the rules Pyramid actually plays under, I'll eat my hat.

Official based on anyone who is a lexicologist, who would most likely same something similar, if not identical.  As for Bob Stewart, he would most likely contact a relevant professor at UCLA or USC if a contestant was to challenge what constitutes a synonym, as it is common practice when a ruling is challenged based on the accuracy of the judging. 

mxc0427

  • Member
  • Posts: 93
Re: "$100,000 Pyramid" primetime this summer on ABC
« Reply #597 on: September 12, 2016, 05:57:07 PM »
A factual error does not necessarily translate into an illegal clue. For the box "U.S. PRESIDENTS," if I said "Benjamin Franklin" and my partner said "U.S. Presidents," we'll still get the box. Pyramid isn't a trivia game. It's all about the conveyance of words. 

clemon79

  • Member
  • Posts: 27693
  • Director of Suck Consolidation
Re: "$100,000 Pyramid" primetime this summer on ABC
« Reply #598 on: September 12, 2016, 06:33:35 PM »
A factual error does not necessarily translate into an illegal clue. For the box "U.S. PRESIDENTS," if I said "Benjamin Franklin" and my partner said "U.S. Presidents," we'll still get the box. Pyramid isn't a trivia game. It's all about the conveyance of words.

"Give a list of clues that fit the subject."
Chris Lemon, King Fool, Director of Suck Consolidation
http://fredsmythe.com
Email: clemon79@outlook.com  |  Skype: FredSmythe

Casey

  • Member
  • Posts: 483
Re: "$100,000 Pyramid" primetime this summer on ABC
« Reply #599 on: September 12, 2016, 06:39:07 PM »
A factual error does not necessarily translate into an illegal clue. For the box "U.S. PRESIDENTS," if I said "Benjamin Franklin" and my partner said "U.S. Presidents," we'll still get the box. Pyramid isn't a trivia game. It's all about the conveyance of words.
Not so much....