Author Topic: Family Feud (Read 6734 times)

Steve McClellan · « **Reply #30 on:** August 07, 2004, 10:09:42 PM »

[quote name=\'Particleman\' date=\'Aug 7 2004, 11:05 AM\'][quote name=\'gameshowsteve\' date=\'Aug 6 2004, 04:34 PM\'] Why help the family with control because they happened to pick the answer in the second position? [/quote]
For the same reason the family that lost the face-off helps the family that won control of the board if lower answers are tied for position.[/quote]
No, the reason that the face-off-losing family helps the winners if lower answers are tied is because they're trying to *beat* the first answer, and have a chance to do so, just like if the first player gives a non-tied #2, and the second happens to give #5.

All I'm saying is that if the top two answers are tied, why should the first answerer's family be helped if he happens to come up with the answer in the second position, but not if gives the answer listed first?

Jay Temple · « **Reply #31 on:** August 09, 2004, 01:28:24 AM »

Or they could just not use questions where #1 and #2 are tied. No, that makes too much sense.

Particleman · « **Reply #32 on:** August 09, 2004, 08:28:57 AM »

[quote name=\'gameshowsteve\' date=\'Aug 7 2004, 09:09 PM\'] [quote name=\'Particleman\' date=\'Aug 7 2004, 11:05 AM\']
No, the reason that the face-off-losing family helps the winners if lower answers are tied is because they're trying to *beat* the first answer, and have a chance to do so, just like if the first player gives a non-tied #2, and the second happens to give #5.

All I'm saying is that if the top two answers are tied, why should the first answerer's family be helped if he happens to come up with the answer in the second position, but not if gives the answer listed first? [/quote]
I understand what you're saying and can see you're very animate about your take on this. I'm just not going to argue over it.

SRIV94 · « **Reply #33 on:** August 09, 2004, 10:46:14 AM »

[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 12:28 AM\'] Or they could just not use questions where #1 and #2 are tied. No, that makes too much sense. [/quote]
Yes, but you could have a question where 1 and 2 are NOT tied but 3 and 4 ARE tied (and it just so happens that both family members peg those two answers on that particular face off). Or pick any two consecutive numbers you like--the same problem could exist. And if you got rid of all questions with ties somewhere, you'd be losing a lot of questions.

It's a trick bag, I tell you.

Doug

zachhoran · « **Reply #34 on:** August 09, 2004, 10:56:01 AM »

[quote name=\'uncamark\' date=\'Aug 6 2004, 10:30 AM\']
Back in the Dawson days, I recall at least once four players missing and having to go to a third player on a team to get an answer on the board.

[/quote]
Today's 9:30AM EST 1981 SYndie Feud airing had a question "Name a type of sandwich recognizable by its smell" that had the first five players(three on one team, two on the other team) getting a strike before someone got it right and won the Face Off.

Steve McClellan · « **Reply #35 on:** August 09, 2004, 03:35:08 PM »

[quote name=\'SRIV94\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 07:46 AM\'][quote name=\'Jay Temple\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 12:28 AM\'] Or they could just not use questions where #1 and #2 are tied. No, that makes too much sense. [/quote]
Yes, but you could have a question where 1 and 2 are NOT tied but 3 and 4 ARE tied (and it just so happens that both family members peg those two answers on that particular face off). Or pick any two consecutive numbers you like--the same problem could exist. And if you got rid of all questions with ties somewhere, you'd be losing a lot of questions.[/quote]
What I think he's saying (and I know I'm saying) is that it's even more awkward when it's the top two. Presumably, they don't want the host to reveal the "#2" answer, then tell the other team they can't win the faceoff. And it seems to me that for the sake of fairness, the second team shouldn't be helping the first when they have no idea that they aren't helping themselves.

At least if the tie is lower, the other team has a chance to win, just as you could have the first player get #3, then have the other try to beat it, but help their opponents by revealing #5 as well. In this case though, they actually had a reason to give an answer.

SRIV94 · « **Reply #36 on:** August 09, 2004, 03:40:58 PM »

In the interest of saving bandwidth, I'll just say: Good point, Gameshowsteve (and apologies to Jay--I didn't realize where you were going).

Doug -- soon to celebrate 600 posts