Jackpot and the Super Jackpot

[Neumms]

How often would you guess the target number was hit? IIRC it was incredibly rare, and with riddle amounts in mere $5 increments, it seems calculated. It was the highlight of the show when Geoff announced that a wallet had the right amount to hit the target. If the riddles were in $20 increments, that would happen more often and make it a better show, with far better suspense than just plopping a Super Jackpot riddle in the mix.

[PYLdude]

The point of the show is the build. Sure, it's nice to see a target hit every so often but I think the average viewer isn't really concerned with that. They're just there for the game.

Personally, if you're going to do anything with the Super Jackpot I would figure instead of having it fluctuate in value depending on whatever the determining factor is, just starting out at a set minimum and rolling the pot over after every game like traditional jackpot-employing game shows have is the simplest solution.

[Neumms]

The point of the show is the build. Sure, it's nice to see a target hit every so often but I think the average viewer isn't really concerned with that. They're just there for the game.

Building toward the target number is the point, though. Building the basic jackpot to pretty much $1500 isn't all that interesting on its own. I like the riddles and the contestants, but the game is pretty repetitive, and I think that's why it wasn't a huge success. Risking the jackpot to build it up is cool, but then finding the wallet is anti-climactic. I like your idea of the Super Jackpot being progressive.

[narzo]

I remember running the numbers, as a math geek, in high school and I believe once you are within a $200 range of the target, you stand a constant one in thirty chance, assuming the riddles are worth $50 and $200, on each call for a new riddle.  Once over, there is zero chance until you come within a $200 range again.  The odds to not get better or worse as you get closer, as random numbers have no memory.

Someone with better skills is more than welcome to check my math, and the formula I'm using.

[TLEberle]

How often would you guess the target number was hit? IIRC it was incredibly rare, and with riddle amounts in mere $5 increments, it seems calculated. It was the highlight of the show when Geoff announced that a wallet had the right amount to hit the target. If the riddles were in $20 increments, that would happen more often and make it a better show, with far better suspense than just plopping a Super Jackpot riddle in the mix.

I was a regular viewer of the USA Network version from the mid-80s even though I wasn't well-equipped to handle the material as a primary schooler. Watching an episode this week I don't think I missed more than one or two--it was like an episode of Who's Still Standing but where the question is "What do you add to a stranger to get a strangler?" and nobody falls into ignominy. Derp.

I don't think the fact that the Super Jackpot was more often than not hit by a special riddle detracted from the show--if you enjoyed the riddles/clues and the treasure hunt then you were already in the tent. Do I think that Jackpot could work with $20 multiples to ease the math and a Super Jackpot from $20,000 to $50,000? I guess it could--it certainly vibes with the "don't ask hard questions!" mentality today, but I think that Hollywood Showdown more or less solved whatever problems were extant in the original article.

[Unrealtor]

I had always assumed (perhaps naively) that the target number was always achievable with at least one combination of selections. Even in the days before computers could figure out every possible combination in an instant, it wouldn't have been that hard to randomly pick some envelopes and work out the total.

[Loogaroo]

Not sure how often they did this in the '70s or syndicated versions, but I do remember seeing at least one instance of a Mike Darrow episode where he pointed out that there was a riddle in mix that would bring the Jackpot to a match.

[JakeT]

Not sure how often they did this in the '70s or syndicated versions, but I do remember seeing at least one instance of a Mike Darrow episode where he pointed out that there was a riddle in mix that would bring the Jackpot to a match.

He frequently advised the players when there was a riddle still on the board that would make the jackpot match the target number...

JakeT

[That Don Guy]

Not sure how often they did this in the '70s or syndicated versions, but I do remember seeing at least one instance of a Mike Darrow episode where he pointed out that there was a riddle in mix that would bring the Jackpot to a match.

I vaguely remember Geoff mentioning it on the NBC version every now and then - but not always; I think it was only when it was a relatively small number, like $30. The smallest riddle I remember seeing was $15.

[Joe Mello]

Not sure how often they did this in the '70s or syndicated versions, but I do remember seeing at least one instance of a Mike Darrow episode where he pointed out that there was a riddle in mix that would bring the Jackpot to a match.

IIRC the one 70's clip that's passed around just had a wallet that said "Super Jackpot," not even an Instant Target Match.

[Unrealtor]

I remember running the numbers, as a math geek, in high school and I believe once you are within a $200 range of the target, you stand a constant one in thirty chance, assuming the riddles are worth $50 and $200, on each call for a new riddle.  Once over, there is zero chance until you come within a $200 range again.  The odds to not get better or worse as you get closer, as random numbers have no memory.

Someone with better skills is more than welcome to check my math, and the formula I'm using.

The idea of 1/number of values seems a little too convenient to be right to me, but maybe a bunch of things cancel out in the long run. (There are 31 multiples of 5 that are at least 50 and no more than 200, so I think it should probably 1/31 rather than 1/30.)

In my mind, the probability for any given pick is the probability that the right value is out there (ie, that it went into the game in the first place and wasn't already removed) and you pick the person with the right value. Also, if the same value can't appear more than once, that would result in a smaller pool of possibilities as you get further into a game.

[Neumms]

The idea of 1/number of values seems a little too convenient to be right to me, but maybe a bunch of things cancel out in the long run. (There are 31 multiples of 5 that are at least 50 and no more than 200, so I think it should probably 1/31 rather than 1/30.)

If they played a game and a half per episode, it's hit about once a month. That's more often than they played for the million on WWTBAM, but not very often.

[Loogaroo]

It's unlikely that anyone has ever done a deep dive analysis on the riddle value distribution, but it wouldn't be surprising if it followed some manner of bell curve, which would make certain target distances easier to hit than others. (i.e. You're more likely to hit a target that's $85 away than $60 or $140 away because the mean riddle value is $90 or some such)