Lingo Adds Rolling Jackpot

[JasonA1]

Maybe make it a best of three matchup.

Oop. Why didn't I think of that? I always figured you play to one card or to a point goal, but this works. Now, do you give both teams a new card after one Lingos, or do you let the losing team keep theirs and have the other work for the second victory off a new board?

-Jason

[BrandonFG]

[quote name=\'JasonA1\' date=\'Dec 14 2005, 04:26 PM\']

Maybe make it a best of three matchup.

Oop. Why didn't I think of that? I always figured you play to one card or to a point goal, but this works. Now, do you give both teams a new card after one Lingos, or do you let the losing team keep theirs and have the other work for the second victory off a new board?

-Jason

[snapback]104751[/snapback]

[/quote]

Hmmm...I think to be fair, sweep the board and have both teams start over. If you were only one ball from a Lingo, oh well what the hell. ;-)

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'JasonA1\' date=\'Dec 14 2005, 01:26 PM\']Oop. Why didn't I think of that? I always figured you play to one card or to a point goal, but this works. Now, do you give both teams a new card after one Lingos, or do you let the losing team keep theirs and have the other work for the second victory off a new board?
[/quote]
The only reason to make it best-of-three is to lengthen the game, right? Wiping the board would make the game, on average, take one length of time, while allowing the "losing" team to keep theirs would take it a different (shorter) amount of time.

So there's no right answer here, save to say that it would depend on how long you want your front game to take. One is a true best-of-three match, and the other is a sprint to two Lingos. Frankly, and with no idea how long either system would take, I like the idea of the sprint to two better, because I think it would keep both teams in the game and competitive longer. And it's easier to hack for time. You need a little longer game? Make it a sprint to three. Playing best-of-X makes it harder to gauge the average length of a game, where I think you will get more meaningful data using a straight sprint system.

[tvwxman]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Dec 14 2005, 03:09 PM\'][quote name=\'tvwxman\' date=\'Dec 14 2005, 10:57 AM\']2. Why doesn't GSN use this business model to create other inexpensive (cheap) productions. Play a game, knock out 65 eps over 10 days, develop a relatively inexpensive prize budget, and program their early evening dayparts with em? [/quote]
When they change the name to "Matt's GSN", you and I can be co-owners because we're on exactly the same page.  That and, you know, the whole "Matt" thing.

[snapback]104742[/snapback]

[/quote]


See...Now we're offseting the costs by splitting them...Any other Matt's out there so that we can go third-sies?

[joshg]

[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Dec 14 2005, 12:54 PM\']While returning champs would please me, if a pair like Ben and Josh were to come along compared to the usual contestant ilk, they'd posssibly go on to break Ian Lygo's winning streak record.

[snapback]104747[/snapback]

[/quote]

Our streak would not have lasted too long... I would of lost the game by spelling "ZESTY"

A smidge off-topic... anyone know why they haven't shown a few episodes yet? But my highly unofficial count, they still have 5 "new shows" to air.

Josh

[TLEberle]

"Lingo" has been fixing non-problems for years, as well as not dealing with the problems it has as a game.  I can understand the latter, since Lingo isn't aimed at people who pay more attention to things like game mechanics and the like.

But what does a progressive jackpot do?  Just like on "Super Password," a team can swoop in one day, claim a $25,000 jackpot, and leave afterward. (And since Lingo doesn't have returning winners, that's precisely what will happen.) The next two teams get to play for $10,000, not having had a chance at the big money.  Additionally, I assume they're basing the jackpot on a one-ball Lingo, which is all about luck, and nothing about skill.  Blech.

They haven't played for cash ever, and they still do the 'scoreboard' overlay, so that doesn't tick me off.  And it's their show, they can put on sorority girls and surfer dudes who will win $400 in the bonus round; obviously that's what GSN's audience wants to see. I just don't get the reasoning behind the jackpot, is all.

[Dbacksfan12]

[quote name=\'matchgame\' date=\'Dec 14 2005, 07:32 PM\']A smidge off-topic... anyone know why they haven't shown a few episodes yet? But my highly unofficial count, they still have 5 "new shows" to air.
[/quote]
Something to do with a promotion/sweepstakes that is Hawaiian based...the original sponsor pulled out on them, so GSN is waiting until something comes through to do it...this was told to me by a reputable source.

[MYosua]

[quote name=\'tvwxman\' date=\'Dec 14 2005, 05:16 PM\']See...Now we're offseting the costs by splitting them...Any other Matt's out there so that we can go third-sies?

[snapback]104762[/snapback]

[/quote]
I'm known more as Matthew, but I can make an exception here.  I'm in! ;-)

[bandit_bobby]

I would have liked to have seen them do another ToC instead, this time for $50,000 in cash. But this suits me just fine.

[sshuffield70]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Dec 14 2005, 05:00 PM\'][quote name=\'JasonA1\' date=\'Dec 14 2005, 01:26 PM\']Oop. Why didn't I think of that? I always figured you play to one card or to a point goal, but this works. Now, do you give both teams a new card after one Lingos, or do you let the losing team keep theirs and have the other work for the second victory off a new board?
[/quote]
The only reason to make it best-of-three is to lengthen the game, right? Wiping the board would make the game, on average, take one length of time, while allowing the "losing" team to keep theirs would take it a different (shorter) amount of time.

So there's no right answer here, save to say that it would depend on how long you want your front game to take. One is a true best-of-three match, and the other is a sprint to two Lingos. Frankly, and with no idea how long either system would take, I like the idea of the sprint to two better, because I think it would keep both teams in the game and competitive longer. And it's easier to hack for time. You need a little longer game? Make it a sprint to three. Playing best-of-X makes it harder to gauge the average length of a game, where I think you will get more meaningful data using a straight sprint system.

[snapback]104756[/snapback]

[/quote]

If they wanted, they could go back to the original format.  

For the uninitiated, they started with 7 covered numbers instead of 10.  That made it a little long there.  Then there's the prize balls.  Takes a little longer.

Worth a thought, anyway.

Okay, back to my post at G&B.

[Don Howard]

[quote name=\'bandit_bobby\' date=\'Dec 14 2005, 11:27 PM\']I would have liked to have seen them do another ToC instead, this time for $50,000 in cash. But this suits me just fine.

[snapback]104793[/snapback]

[/quote]
You should try out. You and your buddy from Brunswick Lanes. I'll warrant you're exactly what they're looking for.

[Craig Karlberg]

To elaberate on the promotional thing, those shows had a Hawiian theme to it.  According to what I saw at buzzerblog.com, 10 episodes from this season were "held over" not 5.  We'll see what happens if & when they decide to show those.

[bandit_bobby]

Actually, I do believe six episodes have yet to be seen in the current season.

[itiparanoid13]

There's either 5 or 10.  There is a special Hawaiian week(s) that are waiting a bit before airing.  They are showing them at the tryouts for series 5, however.