The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: TLEberle on July 05, 2011, 12:44:54 AM
-
Last week I was listening to the Freakonomics podcast, and in a very special episode the quiz team of St. Paul Academy took on author Steven Leavitt and his family. Things start off innocuously enough with a Quick Ten and the ad break, but after that the material tail-spun into some of the poorest questions I've ever heard. One of the medal winners dealt with the origin of the word Fhqwgads, and then this zinger for ten, paraphrased and ending because one of the teams won the Wild Gunman draw:
Careers were ruined, specifically that of Columbia university professor and Today show regular Charles Van Doren. Scandals involving quiz shows such as 21, $64k Question and Dotto caused public uproar and a ratings downturn. As a result, there were no more big payoffs on shows, and they were not allowed a million-dollar prize until 1999... (presumably it was going to finish "FTP: Name this show hosted by Regis Philbin and Meredith Vieira.")
Answer: Millionaire
The question I have is: who would play material like this? Early "clues" either lead nowhere or are impenetrable, and the questions go out of their way to punish knowledge on the topic when they buzz early. And worse than that, the Millionaire question was factually wrong while being preachy and not getting to the point. It wasn't fun to listen to because I was unable to play along with the material. Do teams actually seek out this format of play, or do they play some of the straight-up material and find it too hard, then hope that they can win the quick draw race when the Big Clue starts?
-
Sounds like a ripoff of "Quicksilver."
-
and they were not allowed a million-dollar prize until 1999
You forgot the $1,000,000 Chance of a Lifetime in 1986.
-
and they were not allowed a million-dollar prize until 1999
You forgot the $1,000,000 Chance of a Lifetime in 1986.
Travis didn't forget a singlet hing.
-
Last week I was listening to the Freakonomics podcast, and in a very special episode...
The question I have is: who would play material like this?
Without knowing anything about the podcast in question, it sounds like this was a quiz bowl game organized and written by people who don't know as much about quiz bowl as they think they do. Anybody with any real experience writing decent material would never have come up with something as bad as your example.
Jimmy's reference to Quicksilver, while typically obtuse, is still rather apt. The "fun" of Quicksilver was the twisting and turning of the question, so that you weren't entirely sure what was being asked until the last moment. Quiz bowl is not supposed to work that way.
Do teams actually seek out this format of play, or do they play some of the straight-up material and find it too hard, then hope that they can win the quick draw race when the Big Clue starts?
I can tell you from experience that "real" quiz bowl players cringe (and worse) at this sort of thing every bit as much as you did.
-
Quiz bowl is not supposed to work that way.
But sadly until the mid-90s, it did.
-
Having zero quiz bowl experience, and admittedly talking out of my ass, the classic Fame Game question format has often struck me as the closest thing to a quiz bowl style question.
-
Having zero quiz bowl experience, and admittedly talking out of my ass, the classic Fame Game question format has often struck me as the closest thing to a quiz bowl style question.
Yes, but the knock is not on the question style itself, the knock is on the ridiculous swerve at the end. The time-released information question is perfectly fine so long as every bit of information in said question does indeed lead to the answer. The above was a really long-winded let's-make-people-listen-to-my-awesome-writing way of getting to "what game show did Regis Philbin and Meredith Vieira host?"
-
I've been a quiz bowl player and a moderator and from both ends of the spectrum, you hate it. As a player, it sucks having to listen to peals of information that are of absolutely no use to you. Either the stuff at the start of the question is too esoteric, or, as is the example here, it's general information that has nothing to do with the actual question ("The Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776, an event commemorated on July 4 each day with Independence Day. Also in July, a holiday once known as Dominion Day...") As a moderator, you grow to hate these questions because, if you care about what you're doing, you'll sit down and practice reading them and preparing for them, and...yeah, it feels like an enormous waste of time.
I will say, for a player, the one redeeming value of them is the "WTF?" reaction you can get from the entire room if you manage to fire off the correct answer quickly. My shining achievement in quiz bowl one day: "After World War II, Captain Jonas Grumby and his friend Willy purchased a..." and I rang in immediately and guessed "Gilligan's Island." Other than that, yeah, screw this question style.
-
The above was a really long-winded let's-make-people-listen-to-my-awesome-writing way of getting to "what game show did Regis Philbin and Meredith Vieira host?"
That specifically is still pretty common in even professional quiz bowl writing. You'd be amazed at the number of questions we get from NAQT with ridiculously arcane and obscure references that then end with "Name this author of Moby Dick". I've gotten to the point that I'll even reference it on air, calling them "jump ball" questions that just come down to reflexes.
The more pressing problem with the "Millionaire" question above is that off the first sentence, a smart player might easily buzz in and say "the quiz show scandals". Once you've started dropping specific references, and certainly by the end of your first complete sentence, you need to be sure that there's only going to be one place that your question is going.
And parliboy, you and your ass are exactly right. A well-written Fame Game question has a lot in common with a well-written quiz bowl toss-up.
-
I will say, for a player, the one redeeming value of them is the "WTF?" reaction you can get from the entire room if you manage to fire off the correct answer quickly. My shining achievement in quiz bowl one day: "After World War II, Captain Jonas Grumby and his friend Willy purchased a..." and I rang in immediately and guessed "Gilligan's Island." Other than that, yeah, screw this question style.
But see, to me that's an example of a good question, or at least a good start to one. There are going to be people who know that reference. In fact, in many formats, a good writer has placed an obscure but still gettable reference at the beginning of the question, and a player scores a "power" bonus for getting the answer correct off that first nugget.
-
But see, to me that's an example of a good question, or at least a good start to one. There are going to be people who know that reference. In fact, in many formats, a good writer has placed an obscure but still gettable reference at the beginning of the question, and a player scores a "power" bonus for getting the answer correct off that first nugget.
I agree completely. The genius of that lead is in the subtlety: if you know Jonas Grumby was the Skipper's real name, and you pick up on the subtlety of them going out of their way not to mention Gilligan by name by using his way-obscure-even-to-a-lot-of-TV-geeks first name, you can logically suss out from just that that they're gonna be looking for the name of the show, and not "Alan Hale" or something like that.
-
But see, to me that's an example of a good question, or at least a good start to one. There are going to be people who know that reference. In fact, in many formats, a good writer has placed an obscure but still gettable reference at the beginning of the question, and a player scores a "power" bonus for getting the answer correct off that first nugget.
I agree completely. The genius of that lead is in the subtlety: if you know Jonas Grumby was the Skipper's real name, and you pick up on the subtlety of them going out of their way not to mention Gilligan by name by using his way-obscure-even-to-a-lot-of-TV-geeks first name, you can logically suss out from just that that they're gonna be looking for the name of the show, and not "Alan Hale" or something like that.
Willie was not really Gilligan's first name, he didn't have one at all. Several years after the end of the run of Gilligan's Island on CBS, the cast was reunited on a talk show (I think Dick Cavett, but I could be wrong on that part) and the question of Gilligan's first name came up.
Bob Denver and Sherwood Shwartz said Gilligan didn't have a first name, but if he did, it would probably have been Willie.
And thus the urban legend began...
-
And thus the urban legend began...
I sit corrected. What fascinates me about it, though, is the attention to detail...you are literally the first person I have seen to use the standardized spelling "Willie," and you're the one debunking the urban myth! Every time I have seen this mentioned in the past, it's ALWAYS with the nonstandard "Willy." Which, at least for me, is part of what cemented it in my head as legit.
-
Bob Denver and Sherwood Shwartz said Gilligan didn't have a first name, but if he did, it would probably have been Willie.
And thus the urban legend began...
I dunno. I usually think of an urban legend as something that is A) wrong and/or B) unsourced. If there's record of the creator of the character and the person who played the character agreeing on a first name, even decades later, I for one would accept that as canonical.
-
Careers were ruined, specifically that of Columbia university professor and Today show regular Charles Van Doren. Scandals involving quiz shows such as 21, $64k Question and Dotto caused public uproar and a ratings downturn. As a result, there were no more big payoffs on shows, and they were not allowed a million-dollar prize until 1999... (presumably it was going to finish "FTP: Name this show hosted by Regis Philbin and Meredith Vieira.")
Answer: Millionaire
In addition to there being no direct correlation b/w "21" and "Millionaire", this line...
As a result, there were no more big payoffs on shows
...is purely subjective, and has no place in the question. "No more big payoffs" according to who? The $10/20/25/50/100,000 offered on Pyramid was a pretty big deal in the 70s and 80s, not to mention other shows who, when you adjust the top prize for inflation, are close to, if not exceed six-figures.
I know I over-analyzed that, but it stands out as another writing no-no IMO.
-
Having zero quiz bowl experience, and admittedly talking out of my ass, the classic Fame Game question format has often struck me as the closest thing to a quiz bowl style question.
You're rigjt...the Fame Game question is basically a more drawn out version of a standard toss up phrased in the first person.
-
And thus the urban legend began...
I sit corrected. What fascinates me about it, though, is the attention to detail...you are literally the first person I have seen to use the standardized spelling "Willie," and you're the one debunking the urban myth! Every time I have seen this mentioned in the past, it's ALWAYS with the nonstandard "Willy." Which, at least for me, is part of what cemented it in my head as legit.
Snopes has more info on the Willy Gilligan thing: http://www.snopes.com/radiotv/tv/gilligan.asp
-
Bob Denver and Sherwood Shwartz said Gilligan didn't have a first name, but if he did, it would probably have been Willie.
And thus the urban legend began...
I dunno. I usually think of an urban legend as something that is A) wrong and/or B) unsourced. If there's record of the creator of the character and the person who played the character agreeing on a first name, even decades later, I for one would accept that as canonical.
ahh, ye of little faith...
I got the information (including the "correct" spelling of Willie) from the man himself, in his own book regarding Gilligan's Island. I guess that makes it canonical.
-
Having zero quiz bowl experience, and admittedly talking out of my ass, the classic Fame Game question format has often struck me as the closest thing to a quiz bowl style question.
Other good examples:
Sports Challenge biography round
If the main game Qs on 70s Double Dare were strung into one question (with some clues thrown out)
The term we used was "reverse pyramid". And rather coincidental that Jonas Grumby is being mentioned. The early NAQT mantra was "make sure the answer is Gilligan, not Jonas Grumby" as a reminder that the answer should be accessible as much as possible.
-
and they were not allowed a million-dollar prize until 1999
You forgot the $1,000,000 Chance of a Lifetime in 1986.
Travis didn't forget a singlet hing.
You keep your own hing in your singlet and stop worrying about Travis'. :)
(This is what happens when you don't read the post before pointing out the obvious error in the question.)
Going back to "fhqwgads" for a second- I know that you might not necessarily think of it as being decent question material, but I think that anyone who has an elementary knowledge of modern pop culture or Internet phenomena would know the answer to that. So I gotta disagree with Travis' assessment of the quality of the question.
(For those that don't know, the Homestar Runner Wiki can help you. (http://"http://hrwiki.org/wiki/fhqwhgadshgnsdhjsdbkhsdabkfabkveybvf"))
-
In Illinois, this year's High School Masonic Tournament, and even to some extent State Sectionals, weren't as well written as I'd expected them to be. There was a lot of information in the questions from both tournaments that made the games sluggish and nearly painful to play [or moderate, in my case]. In Sectionals, it got to the point in some packets where both teams (pretty good teams, at that) would ignore the first couple sentences and then perk up when the FTP came along.
-
There are often debate on the hsquizbowl forums about whether or not math is worthy quiz-bowl canon. I disagree, because more often than not, it comes down to a "who can work out this problem fastest" race between the math-team refugees on each side.