Author Topic: Playing for Points (Read 10864 times)

clemon79 · « **Reply #30 on:** August 12, 2004, 11:31:24 AM »

[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 05:51 AM\'] It's always nice when the players are more familiar with the rules than the host. [/quote]
"John, don't I have to earn that X myself?"

"Oh, yeah!"

gsnstooge · « **Reply #31 on:** August 12, 2004, 12:34:39 PM »

[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Aug 6 2004, 06:53 PM\'] [quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Aug 6 2004, 01:18 PM\']

Part of the problem with some scoring systems is that they just don't work. I know this has been brought up before, but on "Go", for example, the rounds went 250-500-750-1250. In order to fit the game into a half hour, they couldn't play five rounds, but I'm just not comfortable with those kind of scoring systems.

Also, on "Super Password", the $100 puzzle was meaningless - it didn't affect the outcome of the game at all. It might sound silly, but if I was rooting for a particular contestant, I was always hoping they'd MISS the $100 puzzle! [/quote]
The first two $100 puzzles on Body Language also had no bearing on the outcome of the game. [/quote]
The scoring systems on shows like Go!, Body Language, Password Plus, and Super Password are more comfortable with me than the bluffs and not winning by default on Hollywood Squares and Battlestars, not that I want to keep giving away cash and prizes though.

clemon79 · « **Reply #32 on:** August 12, 2004, 12:53:50 PM »

[quote name=\'gsnstooge\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 09:34 AM\'] The scoring systems on shows like Go!, Body Language, Password Plus, and Super Password are more comfortable with me than the bluffs and not winning by default on Hollywood Squares and Battlestars, not that I want to keep giving away cash and prizes though. [/quote]
I don't follow. You're saying you prefer a scoring system that renders entire portions of the game irrelevant over the "can't put an X there, you have to earn that yourself" rule, and feeding celebs bluffs (even though it has no impact on the outcome of the game) on HSq, and the "must capture a triangle with a right answer" rule on Battlestars?

I just want to give you a chance to clarify if I'm wrong, before I dismiss you as being COMPLETELY high....

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #33 on:** August 12, 2004, 12:56:05 PM »

[quote name=\'gsnstooge\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 11:34 AM\'] The scoring systems on shows like Go!, Body Language, Password Plus, and Super Password are more comfortable with me than the bluffs and not winning by default on Hollywood Squares and Battlestars, not that I want to keep giving away cash and prizes though. [/quote]
What exactly do you plan to give away, then? A trip to the Battan death march?

gsnstooge · « **Reply #34 on:** August 12, 2004, 01:22:36 PM »

[quote name=\'Dsmith\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 11:56 AM\'] [quote name=\'gsnstooge\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 11:34 AM\'] The scoring systems on shows like Go!, Body Language, Password Plus, and Super Password are more comfortable with me than the bluffs and not winning by default on Hollywood Squares and Battlestars, not that I want to keep giving away cash and prizes though. [/quote]
What exactly do you plan to give away, then? A trip to the Battan death march? [/quote]
No, but I should mention that on H2 and Battlestars maybe a maximum of two times that you should not be alloweed to win by default per match.

sshuffield70 · « **Reply #35 on:** August 12, 2004, 02:17:29 PM »

Maybe I'm missing something here.......(wouldn't be the first time).....but how did the "GO" scoring system get in this thread? In that game, all rounds mattered in some form of fashion. BL and SP were kind of flawed for the reasons already stated.

Steve Gavazzi · « **Reply #36 on:** August 12, 2004, 02:20:59 PM »

[quote name=\'gsnstooge\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 01:22 PM\'] [quote name=\'Dsmith\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 11:56 AM\'] [quote name=\'gsnstooge\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 11:34 AM\'] The scoring systems on shows like Go!, Body Language, Password Plus, and Super Password are more comfortable with me than the bluffs and not winning by default on Hollywood Squares and Battlestars, not that I want to keep giving away cash and prizes though. [/quote]
What exactly do you plan to give away, then? A trip to the Battan death march? [/quote]
No, but I should mention that on H2 and Battlestars maybe a maximum of two times that you should not be alloweed to win by default per match. [/quote]
Yeah, that's really what you want to do -- make the viewers wonder, "why did he get the victory for doing that this time when he didn't three minutes ago?"

clemon79 · « **Reply #37 on:** August 12, 2004, 03:35:37 PM »

[quote name=\'sshuffield70\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 11:17 AM\'] Maybe I'm missing something here.......(wouldn't be the first time).....but how did the "GO" scoring system get in this thread? In that game, all rounds mattered in some form of fashion. [/quote]
Not hardly. If the two teams split the first two rounds, the 750-point round was completely moot, the game was gonna be won by whoever took the 1250-point round.

clemon79 · « **Reply #38 on:** August 12, 2004, 03:37:44 PM »

[quote name=\'gsnstooge\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 10:22 AM\'] No, but I should mention that on H2 and Battlestars maybe a maximum of two times that you should not be alloweed to win by default per match. [/quote]
That is an utterly horrible idea, and Steve nailed it on the head as to why.

sshuffield70 · « **Reply #39 on:** August 12, 2004, 04:34:38 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 02:35 PM\'] [quote name=\'sshuffield70\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 11:17 AM\'] Maybe I'm missing something here.......(wouldn't be the first time).....but how did the "GO" scoring system get in this thread? In that game, all rounds mattered in some form of fashion. [/quote]
Not hardly. If the two teams split the first two rounds, the 750-point round was completely moot, the game was gonna be won by whoever took the 1250-point round. [/quote]
Well, you're correct in that regard but reconsider.......

remember that the four rounds were 250, 500, 750, 1250......game at 1500.

the first three added up to 1500, thereby making the Double Jackpot round possible. Otherwise, your statement is indeed correct. If there was a split somewhere, then yes it would not matter. Most games went four rounds anyway.

gsnstooge · « **Reply #40 on:** August 12, 2004, 06:31:05 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 02:37 PM\'] [quote name=\'gsnstooge\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 10:22 AM\'] No, but I should mention that on H2 and Battlestars maybe a maximum of two times that you should not be alloweed to win by default per match. [/quote]
That is an utterly horrible idea, and Steve nailed it on the head as to why. [/quote]
On the first episode of MG-HS, there were only 11 questions asked on HS. That is why I think there should be a maximum of two no-win-by-defaults and the point as I said in an earlier post is faster gameplay, also bluffs DO NOT make me laugh 99.99% of the time. I have gotten more laughs from Jon Bauman on MG-HS.

Steve Gavazzi · « **Reply #41 on:** August 12, 2004, 09:35:20 PM »

[quote name=\'gsnstooge\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 06:31 PM\'] [quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 02:37 PM\'] [quote name=\'gsnstooge\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 10:22 AM\'] No, but I should mention that on H2 and Battlestars maybe a maximum of two times that you should not be alloweed to win by default per match. [/quote]
That is an utterly horrible idea, and Steve nailed it on the head as to why. [/quote]
On the first episode of MG-HS, there were only 11 questions asked on HS. That is why I think there should be a maximum of two no-win-by-defaults and the point as I said in an earlier post is faster gameplay, also bluffs DO NOT make me laugh 99.99% of the time. I have gotten more laughs from Jon Bauman on MG-HS. [/quote]
A response that does absolutely nothing to counter our point that your proposal would confuse people.

clemon79 · « **Reply #42 on:** August 12, 2004, 10:36:03 PM »

[quote name=\'sshuffield70\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 01:34 PM\'] [quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 02:35 PM\'] [quote name=\'sshuffield70\' date=\'Aug 12 2004, 11:17 AM\'] Maybe I'm missing something here.......(wouldn't be the first time).....but how did the "GO" scoring system get in this thread? In that game, all rounds mattered in some form of fashion. [/quote]
Not hardly. If the two teams split the first two rounds, the 750-point round was completely moot, the game was gonna be won by whoever took the 1250-point round. [/quote]
Well, you're correct in that regard but reconsider.......

remember that the four rounds were 250, 500, 750, 1250......game at 1500.

the first three added up to 1500, thereby making the Double Jackpot round possible. Otherwise, your statement is indeed correct. If there was a split somewhere, then yes it would not matter. Most games went four rounds anyway. [/quote]
There is no "otherwise". My statement remains entirely correct.

It's no knock on Go, Go still remains one of my absolute favorite shows. My point is that the scoring system allowed for a not at all uncommon occurance that made a round irrelevant, and that your claim that "all rounds mattered in some form or fashion" was often false.

Robert Hutchinson · « **Reply #43 on:** August 12, 2004, 11:29:53 PM »

It's the difference between a round or rounds always having no impact on a win (Body Language, Super Password) and a round often becoming meaningless during the game (Go, Family Feud a la Anderson). At least on Wheel of Fortune, as Pat never fails to point out, "there's still money to be made." Although I suppose that's technically true for BL and SP as well--bah, humbug.

Now, back to my crusade against progressive jackpots . . .

Jay Temple · « **Reply #44 on:** August 12, 2004, 11:41:15 PM »

I may have missed it somewhere, but it's important not to be distracted: The OP concerns points versus money. You can have meaningless rounds regardless of which way you play. About the only advantage to a monetary score is that rounds that would otherwise be meaningless can at least have some importance. Case in point: Rock & Roll Jeopardy. In its first season, score was kept in points, and the winner got $5,000 regardless of score. Predictably, this led to at least one FJ round where nothing mattered to anyone once the leader made a 0 wager. In the second season, the producers apparently saw the problem this created and had them play for dollars, as on the regular show.