Thoughts on Lingo

[dmota104]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Mar 29 2005, 08:36 PM\']We're all entitled to our opinions, and I can certainly think of many perfectly good reasons why you might not like the No Lingo Round.  But I don't understand why you say it would make "no sense whatsoever".  Why would it make any more or less "sense" on the GSN game than on the original, except for the issue of straddling which I already brought up?

[snapback]79847[/snapback]

[/quote]

Personally, I'd never seen the NLR -- but it just looks good "on paper".  Only way I could see this used in the current version is play only three words and make the first portion of the NLR worth $5000, the second $10K and if the team goes through all three phases without making a lingo, the payoff is $20K.   Well short of a dramatic $64K payoff -- but that's the only compromise I can think off.

[gameshowguy2000]

The reason it makes no sense, is because, like most game shows, the format of the front game should also be used in the end game (like the Money Cards, you go higher or lower with each card; and Gold Rush, you have to make a path from one side to the other, and must identify what word begins with each letter of the answer).

Does this make sense?

[GameShowFan]

Say what you want about the Series 3 set (I liked it) or Stacy (useless bimbo), but nobody has mentioed what I feel is a serious hole in the rules:

A team lost control after Turn 5, no matter who started. This can be exploited when, if a team did not find any letters after 4 turns could let the last turn pass (on a time-out) and hope the forced letter doesn't give the word away to the opponents.

Think it never happened? It did. The contestants were mostly too stupid to realize this hole, and never tried to take advantage of it. The ones who did were usually champions.

'Brian

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Mar 31 2005, 05:32 PM\']The reason it makes no sense, is because, like most game shows, the format of the front game should also be used in the end game

[snapback]80099[/snapback]

[/quote]
Or, the endgame is often the OPPOSITE of the front game. For example, Pyramid, where the front game involves guessing a list of items given a subject, and the endgame, which involves guessing a subject given a list of items.

So what's the difference between that and the No Lingo Round?

[Jimmy Owen]

Then there are shows where the end game had little to do with the front.  "Big Showdown," "Chain Reaction," "Hot Potato," "Pitfall," etc.

[Robert Hutchinson]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Mar 31 2005, 07:51 PM\']Or, the endgame is often the OPPOSITE of the front game. For example, Pyramid, where the front game involves guessing a list of items given a subject, and the endgame, which involves guessing a subject given a list of items.[/quote]

Not that I'm trying to be disagreeable . . . but what other notable examples are there besides Pyramid and Lingo?

[dzinkin]

[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' date=\'Mar 31 2005, 08:17 PM\'][quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Mar 31 2005, 07:51 PM\']Or, the endgame is often the OPPOSITE of the front game. For example, Pyramid, where the front game involves guessing a list of items given a subject, and the endgame, which involves guessing a subject given a list of items.[/quote]

Not that I'm trying to be disagreeable . . . but what other notable examples are there besides Pyramid and Lingo?

[snapback]80108[/snapback]

[/quote]
Whether it fits the definition of "notable" is debatable, but TJW90 qualifies.  The main game had contestants giving definitions; in the bonus round, they were given the definitions and asked to provide the word.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' date=\'Mar 31 2005, 06:17 PM\'][quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Mar 31 2005, 07:51 PM\']Or, the endgame is often the OPPOSITE of the front game. For example, Pyramid, where the front game involves guessing a list of items given a subject, and the endgame, which involves guessing a subject given a list of items.[/quote]

Not that I'm trying to be disagreeable . . . but what other notable examples are there besides Pyramid and Lingo?

[snapback]80108[/snapback]

[/quote]
Child's Play, in particular the version of the bonus where they would have to explain the words to the kids and get them to say them.

The Double Definition Round on Wordplay: in the front game you are guessing the definition of a word, in the endgame you are guessing words from their definitions.

But my point with Pyramid was, when GSG2K was making the uninformed comment that the No Lingo round flew in the face of conventional wisdom, there is a VERY NOTABLE example, indeed considered by many to be the Gold Standard by which endgames are judged, that contradicts him.

[Robert Hutchinson]

That's fine. I was just trying to remember some other examples, and failing. I didn't doubt they existed somewhere.