The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: weaklink75 on February 02, 2022, 09:16:22 PM
-
https://www.jeopardy.com/jbuzz/news-events/jeopardy-national-college-championship-starts-january-8
-12 quarterfinal games, winners advance., losers get $10k
-4 semifinal games, losers get $20k
Only 3 highest scoring semifinal winners play in final- 4th gets $35k (I don't know if I like this…)
-2 game final, 3rd gets $50k, 2nd gets $100k, winner gets $250k
-
The better solution is that the top semifinal winner gets a free pass and the other three play off for the last two spots. Odd that they couldn’t do a straight 27 player tournament like Super Jeopardy was supposed to be.
-
This is better than the original "team" concept that was announced prior to COVID changing the world, but it's still pretty flawed.
It's funny that we were highly critical of Capital One College Bowl producing a format last summer where it was plausible for a team to win its first-round match and not qualify for the quarters based on total points. At least that wasn't a definite conclusion (and, thankfully, it did not happen) -- J! managed to one-up that flaw and (unless there's a surprise the show's not revealing) guaranteed that one of the semifinal winners won't advance to the finals.
Just make the final Super J! style with four podiums -- it's not that hard.
JD
-
"You win your match in a tournament and MAYBE you get to advance," suggests a lack of comprehension about how tournaments work.
-
Just make the final Super J! style with four podiums -- it's not that hard.
JD
I had a hunch the lowest scoring finalist would be eliminated, or all four would compete ala Super J! For now Harry Eisenberg's (former Associate Producer, who wrote the book(s) alleging some wrongdoings back in the early 1990s) hunch stands; he'd said that after Super J!, you'll probably never see a four-player system again!
-
From your lips to His ears. Two player final would be better.
-
One thing that occurred to me about the player with the lowest semifinal score not progressing is that they will be one of the few adult contestants in the history of the show to have never been beaten.
-
The better solution is that the top semifinal winner gets a free pass and the other three play off for the last two spots. Odd that they couldn’t do a straight 27 player tournament like Super Jeopardy was supposed to be.
I think part of this is they wanted to fit this into 9 eps (18 games)- if they had a 10th ep they could do that playoff.
-
One contestant in the upcoming championship is Jeric Brual. If the name sounds familiar and you played HQ in 2018, he admitted/got caught cheating at it (https://twitter.com/poloshot/status/975551454772592640), and he got kicked out of HQ near the end of a $25,000 winner take all game which nobody won (https://www.yahoo.com/news/apos-hq-trivia-apos-players-141125147.html).
-
Surely they could have found something to stretch a single game to fill an hour (or three games in two episodes) in the same way that the regular show took two episodes for the first-round matches of the tag-team tournament a few years ago.
-
I just thought of an interesting idea in how include the 4th place player:
Give first place a "bye" while 2nd, 3rd, and 4th play one playoff game to determine which two face off against first place. 1st place & top two of the playoff then play three games to determine the winner.
-
Here's a messed-up situation.
Before, you could have a higher score in your semifinal than a finalist did in their semifinal, but you lost your game, so oh well. NOW, that finalist can be the low scorer and be sent home and the low player who remains might STILL have scored less than you, and you STILL get to sit and watch.
-
I just thought of an interesting idea in how include the 4th place player:
Give first place a "bye" while 2nd, 3rd, and 4th play one playoff game to determine which two face off against first place. 1st place & top two of the playoff then play three games to determine the winner.
it is like I’m not even here.
-
I just thought of an interesting idea in how include the 4th place player:
Give first place a "bye" while 2nd, 3rd, and 4th play one playoff game to determine which two face off against first place. 1st place & top two of the playoff then play three games to determine the winner.
it is like I’m not even here.
Wow, I am so sorry. I probably read it and glossed it by, as I tend to do.
-
I just thought of an interesting idea in how include the 4th place player:
Give first place a "bye" while 2nd, 3rd, and 4th play one playoff game to determine which two face off against first place. 1st place & top two of the playoff then play three games to determine the winner.
it is like I’m not even here.
Wow, I am so sorry. I probably read it and glossed it by, as I tend to do.
No worry. It’s more amusing than anything. The one difference where I would quibble is a three game final. I can’t think of a tournament final that was so exciting that it would have been improved by a third game.
-
Alex Jacob brought this flaw up on Twitter re: the semifinal that I hadn’t considered:
It is absolutely plausible for one semi to end with the leader on $20k in a lock game, and the other three semis end with much more competitive games that force aggressive betting that leads to the lock game winner being shut out of the finals.
Essentially, this format forces leaders in lock games to consider putting their lock game in Jeopardy (I know) in order to beef up their score.
-
And if they had to do it this way, at least give 4th place the same $50k as 3rd- losing out of (at least) $15k though no fault of your own (a bad category draw, more competitive opponents) doesn't seem right.
-
Alex Jacob brought this flaw up on Twitter re: the semifinal that I hadn’t considered:
It is absolutely plausible for one semi to end with the leader on $20k in a lock game, and the other three semis end with much more competitive games that force aggressive betting that leads to the lock game winner being shut out of the finals.
Essentially, this format forces leaders in lock games to consider putting their lock game in Jeopardy (I know) in order to beef up their score.
I am guessing that, similar to first-round games in previous TOCs, contestants won't have an idea who won the other games/how much money was accumulated, etc., until the host announces who is advancing to the final.
I'm curious if the decision to eliminate one of the four semifinal winners came from Davies, Sony, or ABC (or a combination, for that matter). It's an enormous flaw that I'm surprised anyone thought was acceptable.
JD
-
Trying to stretch a ten-game format into eighteen games is of course a challenge, but it seems to me they could have come quite a bit closer to the classic format than this.
-
Trying to stretch a ten-game format into eighteen games is of course a challenge, but it seems to me they could have come quite a bit closer to the classic format than this.
Two leg semi-finals, repechage for top scoring semi-final losers where the winner keeps the cash.
-
Trying to stretch a ten-game format into eighteen games is of course a challenge, but it seems to me they could have come quite a bit closer to the classic format than this.
Two leg semi-finals, repechage for top scoring semi-final losers where the winner keeps the cash.
Can’t work under an 18 episode schedule unless you plan on wheeling a fourth podium out there for a round or two. The first 12 are quarterfinals, then you’ve only got six remaining games to figure out a winner from 12 semifinalists. I suppose you could have a six day ladder final, where seeds 10, 11,and 12 compete on Day 1 for the right to move on and play against the 8 and 9 seeds the following day, and so forth…could get interesting if a low seed went on a streak.
-
I mean you play games among early losers where the winner takes home coin to fill the time. An exhibition match if you will.
Personally I wouldn’t have had to relearn the lesson from Teen Reunion week back in the late 1990s where Dana Venator won her heat but took home $7500 for fourth place but nobody asked us. Or Hollywood Squares which had four semi final spots for seven QF winners in their college tournament. The fact that we can point put that they did something dumb just opens the show post-Alex to more criticism—I don’t think they will stop scoring own goals.
-
1. Quarterfinal 1
2. Quarterfinal 2
3. Quarterfinal 3
4. Quarterfinal 4
5. Quarterfinal 5
6. Quarterfinal 6
7. Quarterfinal 7
8. Quarterfinal 8
9. Quarterfinal 9
10. Exhibition game for three highest-scoring non-winners.
11. Semifinal 1a
12. Semifinal 1b
13. Semifinal 2a
14. Semifinal 2b
15. Semifinal 3a
16. Semifinal 3b
17. Final a
18. Final b
Alternatively, the first episode can feature only one game, and pad with campus tour reels and contestant interstitials. There would be 27 contestants to feature after all, and this would eliminate the need for the exhibition game.
-
Essentially that. If you’re playing for $250k the semi-final is more interesting and you won’t be as likely to have drubbings, plus this makes the first round more competitive where everyone is either playing for a spot in the bracket or a chance at some extra cash.
-
9. Quarterfinal 9
10. Exhibition game for three highest-scoring non-winners
I'd eliminate the 9th quarterfinal and make the game with the three highest-scoring non-winners into a competition for the last spot in the semis. Either one game padded to an hour or a two-game match.