Play perfectly, win less?

[SamJ93]

What game shows have situations in which a contestant who plays perfectly actually ends up winning less than a contestant who won but made mistakes?

-Money Game on TPiR
-$20K Pyramid: the only way to win the title prize was to lose your first two Winners Circle appearances

[Brian44]

Pathfinder on TPIR: If you always step to the correct number in the car's price, you never get an opportunity to win the prizes that earn you additional chances.

[Chuck Sutton]

You need to define " playing perfectly "  without going into games involving luck.

For example you first choice Money  Game,  what is a perfect game?   If you know the price of the car wouldn't a "perfect" game picking the three top dollar amounts and then the halves of the car?

Just think, a perfect game of 80s Press Your Luck would go on forever .

[WilliamPorygon]

Super Password: Win the endgame five times, win $25,000.
Miss four times then win on your final go at it, win $25,000 plus up to $3,600 in consolation money.

[That Don Guy]

What game shows have situations in which a contestant who plays perfectly actually ends up winning less than a contestant who won but made mistakes?

-Money Game on TPiR
-$20K Pyramid: the only way to win the title prize was to lose your first two Winners Circle appearances

If $20,000 Pyramid counts, then include Now You See It, as the endgame prize goes up $1000 per unsuccessful attempt. (I would include something like All New Battlestars, but you don't leave the show after an endgame win, so you would win more with consecutive wins than with losses followed a win.)

Also, define "playing perfectly." There are any number of pricing games on The Price is Right where you can be told all of the prices in advance and still lose, while you can make mistakes and win. Examples: Hole in One (at least two people missed from the closest line - okay, this is much harder to do with Hole in One...or Two); 3 Strikes (with the 5-digit version, there is a 5/8 chance of pulling out the three strikes before the five digits, even if you remove every digit when it is pulled out); Let 'Em Roll (you can roll 5 cars with your free roll).

[TLEberle]

You need to define " playing perfectly "  without going into games involving luck.

No, we don’t. I knew what the question was by using my noodle and properly interpreting context clues.

[wdm1219inpenna]

This is a bit of a stretch but for Chuck Henry's Now You See It, during the championship round of play, if one player played perfectly and won each of the first four category board rounds, they would have won with $1,400 since they were worth $200, $300, $400, $500 and the final one if needed was $600, with $1,000 needed to win.  If the first player scored on all 4 of the first rounds they'd end up with $1,400 vs. if they won the first three, lost the fourth board, and won the final board which would mean $1,500.

[WhammyPower]

Super Password: Win the endgame five times, win $25,000.
Miss four times then win on your final go at it, win $25,000 plus up to $3,600 in consolation money.

This is a bit of a stretch but for Chuck Henry's Now You See It, during the championship round of play, if one player played perfectly and won each of the first four category board rounds, they would have won with $1,400 since they were worth $200, $300, $400, $500 and the final one if needed was $600, with $1,000 needed to win.  If the first player scored on all 4 of the first rounds they'd end up with $1,400 vs. if they won the first three, lost the fourth board, and won the final board which would mean $1,500.

Combining these two thoughts for the Super Password main game: win the first three puzzles, you get $600. Win puzzles 1, 2 and 4 and you get $700. Win puzzles 1, 3 and 4 and you get $800.

The Ca$hword opens a whole 'nother bag of worms with that last scenario.

[Marc412]

On Classic Concentration, contestants could stay until they won the car, so someone could throw the bonus game and rack up more prizes in the main game.

[BrandonFG]

On Classic Concentration, contestants could stay until they won the car, so someone could throw the bonus game and rack up more prizes in the main game.

I don't remember his name, but I do recall there being a contestant who intentionally lost the car game because he wanted more prizes. I remember thinking it was silly but different strokes.

[BrandonFG]

If I'm reading this correctly, you could win a couple games of $ale during the shopping era and still only go home with <$1,000. Think of a contestant like Alice Conkright who didn't buy a single Instant Bargain. I would have to dig through Youtube, but I swear I've seen a shopping era episode where a runner-up went home with more loot than the dethroned champion thanks to an IB or Fame Game prize.

Pretty sure there's been a few J! episodes where the champ won less than the $1,000/2,000/3,000 consolation money. There's also Darryl Scott who infamously won with $1, whereas his opponents won some consolation prizes that were obviously worth way more.

[Kevin Prather]

Tic Tac Dough rewards players who fill up the board and produce tie games better than players who make a quick three-in-a-row.

[Mike Tennant]

Tic Tac Dough rewards players who fill up the board and produce tie games better than players who make a quick three-in-a-row.

On the other hand, if both contestants play perfectly, every game ends in a tie (until someone makes a mistake), so in that sense, good play is rewarded.

[Steve Gavazzi]

Weird example from TPIR -- there was a primetime show this season where Cliff Hangers had cash bonuses for winning with the mountain climber stopped on the upper reaches of the mountain, with the largest bonus attached to stopping him exactly on 25.  Playing that perfectly would have won all the prizes but no money.

Depending on how you apply "perfectly" to luck-based formats, you could also make a case for the original format of Punch a Bunch, since the gameplay went to the punchboard every time someone got an item right instead of doing all four items at once.

Balance Game '84 probably fits, as well -- you won every item that you used regardless of the outcome, so while it technically depended on how the game was set up, playing optimally was probably not going to result in winning as much as possible.

On the Spot also qualifies -- it was possible to win as many as four items (possibly more on the last two playings, when they messed with the patterns), but playing perfectly meant you would only win three of them, and even getting four right didn't necessarily mean you'd get the "best" possible group of four.

[SamJ93]

On Classic Concentration, contestants could stay until they won the car, so someone could throw the bonus game and rack up more prizes in the main game.

I don't remember his name, but I do recall there being a contestant who intentionally lost the car game because he wanted more prizes. I remember thinking it was silly but different strokes.

It's definitely a rather off-putting act of bravado, but in the case of a show like Concentration it's somewhat understandable if you honestly think your memory/rebus-solving skills are good enough. It's a much more foolhardy decision on shows involving team play (Pyramid, Password, NYSI)--just way too many variables involved to be assured of a victory.