The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: Dbacksfan12 on July 07, 2024, 02:56:01 PM
-
If you could control things…
Would you rather be called down as the last contestant, or come back another day and hope to get called again?
If you knew the price of something, but the next pricing game was undesirable, or would you forego the chance to go on stage in the hopes of something better?
-
Something to keep in my mind: They no longer use the slate that listed the pricing games in order played on the show. That significantly changes the contestants' strategies for those "in the know."
In the old days, yeah, it would kinda suck if you were called last and you knew the last pricing game was something like Credit Card or Take Two. But nowadays, even if they've already played a car game and a grocery/SP game in the second half, they could still play a quickie game like Range Game or Safe Crackers for a car.
-
Would you rather be called down as the last contestant, or come back another day and hope to get called again?
You’re kidding, right?
Called down vs *maybe* be called down?
If you’re that concerned about an “undesirable” prize, let the rangefinder hit the top of the scale or bid $650 on a $20 flashlight in Cliffhangers. You’re still gonna spin for a grand (or 25) and possibly get to the showcase.
You take the call-down every time, is what I’m saying. You figure out what to do with the catamaran or the trampoline later.
-
You play to win. You don’t play just to play it. You can always redeem winning a lousy prize package for cash on the wheel and the showcase. I never considered deliberately throwing my one bid either time I’ve been on the show just because I knew there was no chance at winning a car or a boatload of cash in the potential pricing game to be played.
-
Basically, yeah what the other guys said.
Plus, nowadays, instead of consolation prizes, the CNAOS receive $300 cash, which should pay for (much of) your plane ticket or hotel stay.
-
If you’re that concerned about an “undesirable” prize, let the rangefinder hit the top of the scale or bid $650 on a $20 flashlight in Cliffhangers. You’re still gonna spin for a grand (or 25) and possibly get to the showcase.
You can also forfeit any and all prizes, which would be a more civil, less potentially embarrassing way to say thanks but no thanks. :D
-
You take the call-down every time, is what I’m saying. You figure out what to do with the catamaran or the trampoline later.
I think the question boils down to "do I care about what I win or the game I play" or "do I want to be a part of the longest running game show in American history and have a memory I can share with loads of people and remember forever?"
Would I rather not play Double Prices for a bedroom set or outdoor barbecue? Sure, but the game's the thing, and ostensibly if I'm picked it is because the production team thinks I would be additive to their production.
This says nothing of coming back to see the show whether or not I'm eligible and just for fun. If I get one chance to bid and say hello to Drew then so be it, it wasn't meant to be anything more.
-
You’re kidding, right?
Called down vs *maybe* be called down?
If you’re that concerned about an “undesirable” prize, let the rangefinder hit the top of the scale or bid $650 on a $20 flashlight in Cliffhangers. You’re still gonna spin for a grand (or 25) and possibly get to the showcase.
You take the call-down every time, is what I’m saying. You figure out what to do with the catamaran or the trampoline later.
It was intended to be two separate questions, not a two-parter.
Would you rather have just one chance at getting on stage? Or come back another day and maybe have five or six shots to get on stage.
Something to keep in my mind: They no longer use the slate that listed the pricing games in order played on the show. That significantly changes the contestants' strategies for those "in the know.'
I'll admit I didn't know this was gone. Which basically diffuses the second question.
-
To answer the second question, I’m taking my $500 bonus for knowing the IUFB, and hoping like hell for a great SCSD spin. Even with something like a hot tub that I have no use for, it’s a cool story to tell the kids.
And because it’s my hypothetical I win $26K on the Big Wheel and a DSW. :P
-
This sounds like the situation on Classic Concentration where some guy blew the bonus game so that he could attempt to win more prizes in the main game (but lost the next game)
-
Would you rather be called down as the last contestant, or come back another day and hope to get called again?
If called, there's a reason it was last and not first, and they're not likely to be called first the next time they show up. Take the call down FWIW and have something fun to talk about later in life, whatever the outcome.
-
Would you rather be called down as the last contestant, or come back another day and hope to get called again?
If called, there's a reason it was last and not first, and they're not likely to be called first the next time they show up. Take the call down FWIW and have something fun to talk about later in life, whatever the outcome.
One thing to remember is the order in which the contestants are called down is not random. The producers put the nine contestants in the order they want for various reasons. And in all likelihood, if they thought you were a #9 on one day, they would on another too... or not even one of the nine.
-
One thing to remember is the order in which the contestants are called down is not random. The producers put the nine contestants in the order they want for various reasons. And in all likelihood, if they thought you were a #9 on one day, they would on another too... or not even one of the nine.
This is a very astute point. Mark's hypothetical made a tiny bit of sense to me, until you reminded me of this. Getting called ninth isn't a bad random draw -- it's a sign of your chances to get called at all.
-Jason
-
Doesn’t Price have standby’s just in case the people who have been selected lose their enthusiasm?
-
My wife was the called down as the 9th "one-shot" contestant.
Yes she was at a disadvantage because you pretty much had to hit the IUFB price on the nose as any of the other 3 players can bid $1 more or wind up with a larger price range (bid vs ARP).
The one advantage is that we'll always know what game and what prize she could have played for (Dice Game/car).
And her parting gifts retailed at appx $800, which theoretically could be more in the end than someone who wins a $450 IUFB but loses their pricing game and SCSD spin.
-
Something to factor in to the equation is that Price changed their rules to allow players to come back after ten years. So if you get called down last, that's not necessarily your only bite at the apple.
-
Something to factor in to the equation is that Price changed their rules to allow players to come back after ten years. So if you get called down last, that's not necessarily your only bite at the apple.
And the only reason why they instituted this rule in the first place was because of the fear (real or imagined) that audiences would be smaller when Drew took over.
I’m surprised the rule is still in place, but I guess there was no going back
-
I’m surprised the rule is still in place, but I guess there was no going back
Honestly I think it's a good idea and wish more game shows would adopt the practice. They still have discretion on who they pick, after all.
-
Personally, I'm OK with return contestants coming back to a show in their own pool -- i.e. what Jeopardy! has done with tournaments, and if Price did an alumni day. But it would really take the wind out of my sails to think I didn't get on stage because somebody who was already on just 10 years ago with Drew got to do it all over again. I could also see some producers deciding to bet on a sure thing (i.e. someone who's already been on the show) vs. an unknown, if all things are equal.
-Jason
-
I’m surprised the rule is still in place, but I guess there was no going back
Honestly I think it's a good idea and wish more game shows would adopt the practice. They still have discretion on who they pick, after all.
One cool thing about the new PYL is that Tomarken-era contestants have returned for the current version. I love "Where are they now?"-type interviews, so this is always fun IMO.
-
I’m surprised the rule is still in place, but I guess there was no going back
Honestly I think it's a good idea and wish more game shows would adopt the practice. They still have discretion on who they pick, after all.
I don’t like it because previous contestants that try again have a huge advantage. They were picked previously for a reason. If they liked them before enough to choose them, they’ll likely be liked again. Why not give an opportunity to someone who has never been on vs one who has?
I’d be curious to see the numbers (impossible to get I’m sure) of people who were contestants previously, decide to try again, and didn’t get picked.
-
Returning contestants don't bother me when it feels like a different "era" of the show -- to make up examples, I wouldn't mind if a Jeopardy! contestant's story was that they competed when Art Fleming was the host, or if a Wheel of Fortune contestant said that they had been on the show when Chuck Woolery hosted. Those feel far enough apart.
However, it would feel weird if a contestant told Ken Jennings that they were a contestant when Alex Trebek was the host, especially if it was only ten years ago -- Jeopardy! hasn't appreciably changed in that time. Once Drew took over as host of The Price Is Right, the vibe of the show changed just enough (it helps that they refaced the entire set) that seeing contestants who had been on Barker's version in the '90s felt fine.
But now that Drew's been hosting for 17 seasons and he's welcoming back people he saw a decade ago? While I'm happy for the hardcore fans who have gotten to play the game twice (congrats to the recent contestant who made his second chance pay off in a big way), as a viewer, it feels weird to see repeat contestants. Especially when they're returning after having won tens of thousands of dollars in prizes during their first appearance.
Of course, you can't regulate based on a gut feeling. "A contestant can only come back if they didn't get out of Contestants' Row" isn't fair to somebody who got screwed over by immediately drawing all the strikes in Three Strikes and then spinning two nickels on the wheel.
Meanwhile, the eligibility requirements for Let's Make a Deal (https://fremantle.formstack.com/forms/fremantle_gameshow_2024) say that contestants can return after just three years. Granted, the majority of Let's Make a Deal contestants can only win one mid-tier prize, but when I see a contestant introduce themselves with "I was here three years ago," that feels wrong somehow.
-
Especially when they're returning after having won tens of thousands of dollars in prizes during their first appearance.
That I agree with. I guess I had hoped that the contestants getting a second chance would tend to be those who lost the first time. Hence why I mentioned producers' discretion. I guess that's not the case.
Of course, you can't regulate based on a gut feeling. "A contestant can only come back if they didn't get out of Contestants' Row" isn't fair to somebody who got screwed over by immediately drawing all the strikes in Three Strikes and then spinning two nickels on the wheel.
Not winning anything more than small prizes on stage would probably be a good place to draw the line. Lose your pricing game, lose your showcase, no money on the wheel.
-
Regardless of the rules regarding coming back, I’m reminded of something someone said awhile ago regarding high school football in New Jersey. Our playoff brackets at the time had teams playing for eight spots in the section, with the rest of the teams playing what the state called “consolation games”.
This person said, since as the first team out you’re guaranteed at least one more home game for the season, wouldn’t it be better to have that game at home instead of traveling to play the top seed in the section in the playoffs? I pointed out that those games are called the Toilet Bowl by players for a reason, and that I would rather make the playoffs than not.
Same thing here. I’d rather get called down to Contestants’ Row than not, because how many more chances am I going to have to even be a part of the proceedings? You’re not guaranteed anything, so make the best of what you got, right?
-
But now that Drew's been hosting for 17 seasons and he's welcoming back people he saw a decade ago? While I'm happy for the hardcore fans who have gotten to play the game twice (congrats to the recent contestant who made his second chance pay off in a big way)
Thanks! :D
Of course, you can't regulate based on a gut feeling. "A contestant can only come back if they didn't get out of Contestants' Row" isn't fair to somebody who got screwed over by immediately drawing all the strikes in Three Strikes and then spinning two nickels on the wheel.
I feel like if you're going to draw a line regarding future eligibility, they should maybe bring back something similar to the old network winnings caps. For example: you can be a contestant again after ten years if you won less than $10,000 in prizes; otherwise, no longer eligible. That'd be pretty fair - it would cover most One Bid winners that won their pricing games, won big on the wheel, or won their showcase.
I reasonably believe that I don't have another shot at being on the show again in my lifetime. Yeah, I've joked about going back in 10 years and achieving a DSW, but I've had my fun and I did about as good as you can do without a bit of luck and knowing the price of a 19' party barge - I don't expect to get picked a third time.
-
Meanwhile, the eligibility requirements for Let's Make a Deal (https://fremantle.formstack.com/forms/fremantle_gameshow_2024) say that contestants can return after just three years. Granted, the majority of Let's Make a Deal contestants can only win one mid-tier prize, but when I see a contestant introduce themselves with "I was here three years ago," that feels wrong somehow.
The biggest part of this that seems wrong to me is that, if the show is being so generous to welcome back repeat contestants so soon, then their audience (and portion of that audience that will actually make the trek out to LA to see the show in person) is simply not big enough. I understand that Let's Make a Deal is so far past its prime that you'll never face a year-long waitlist for tickets the way people did in the '70s, but you want to be attracting enough people coming even once that you don't have to pick repeat contestants.
Same goes for Price. I know things were a bit slow at the start of the season just ended, but it seems by the end they were filling up each day with no need for paid seat-fillers, though they are working with half the studio audience they used to. If anyone happens to know, what's the situation over at Let's Make a Deal? How was their attendance over the past year, and how often did they need to pay seat fillers?
-
Is there still a CBS Standards and Practices rep at tapings of LMAD and TPIR? I believe there is a Sullivan Compliance rep at J! and WOF.
I know how they used to check eligibility for TPIR but have never posted it here.
-
If anyone happens to know, what's the situation over at Let's Make a Deal? How was their attendance over the past year, and how often did they need to pay seat fillers?
I don't know the situation at Deal, but I do think it is interesting that they never went back to pre-COVID seating: we still have the pods. Maybe that's because the demand for tickets isn't there?
-
Meanwhile, the eligibility requirements for Let's Make a Deal (https://fremantle.formstack.com/forms/fremantle_gameshow_2024) say that contestants can return after just three years. Granted, the majority of Let's Make a Deal contestants can only win one mid-tier prize, but when I see a contestant introduce themselves with "I was here three years ago," that feels wrong somehow.
The biggest part of this that seems wrong to me is that, if the show is being so generous to welcome back repeat contestants so soon, then their audience (and portion of that audience that will actually make the trek out to LA to see the show in person) is simply not big enough. I understand that Let's Make a Deal is so far past its prime that you'll never face a year-long waitlist for tickets the way people did in the '70s, but you want to be attracting enough people coming even once that you don't have to pick repeat contestants.
Same goes for Price. I know things were a bit slow at the start of the season just ended, but it seems by the end they were filling up each day with no need for paid seat-fillers, though they are working with half the studio audience they used to. If anyone happens to know, what's the situation over at Let's Make a Deal? How was their attendance over the past year, and how often did they need to pay seat fillers?
If anyone happens to know, what's the situation over at Let's Make a Deal? How was their attendance over the past year, and how often did they need to pay seat fillers?
I don't know the situation at Deal, but I do think it is interesting that they never went back to pre-COVID seating: we still have the pods. Maybe that's because the demand for tickets isn't there?
Keep in mind that in the Monty Hall-hosted LMADs of the 60's, 70s and 80s, the bulk of the audience came to the show to SEE the show and not to be a potential contestant -- hence the lack of costumed contestants above the trading floor. Occasionally, you would see a overflow of costumed contestants who were not picked for the trading floor and would sit up close in the "upper level" seating.
Taking the non-costumed audience equation out of the show, you don't have as many seat fillers as you did in Monty's era.
BTW, in the Monty years, what were the eligibility rules if you made it to the trading floor seating and either A) didn't participate in a main game deal or B) if you got to play a quickie deal at the show's end? Were you able to return as a potential contestant on future episodes until picked?
-
If anyone happens to know, what's the situation over at Let's Make a Deal? How was their attendance over the past year, and how often did they need to pay seat fillers?
I don't know the situation at Deal, but I do think it is interesting that they never went back to pre-COVID seating: we still have the pods. Maybe that's because the demand for tickets isn't there?
Re-sharing what I wrote in a similar thread a few months ago...
Hollywood's COVID protocols ended in early May 2023, IIRC, and I believe the current season of LMaD started taping around that time or slightly beforehand. It was probably easier for them to choose this current setup (pods, but with more people) as a solution and stick with it for continuity purposes for the entire season.
They were still doing the COVID-era pre-screening for this entire season, as well - only those who went through that process were invited to the studio. No general audience tickets.
-
I’m surprised the rule is still in place, but I guess there was no going back
Honestly I think it's a good idea and wish more game shows would adopt the practice. They still have discretion on who they pick, after all.
One cool thing about the new PYL is that Tomarken-era contestants have returned for the current version. I love "Where are they now?"-type interviews, so this is always fun IMO.
Joel McHale's Card Sharks did that too I believe at least a couple of times.
As for the original question, I would rather be called down 9th than not at all.
Win or lose, to have the joy and thrill of being on national TV and something that could be shared with family and friends would be awesome.
When opportunity knocks, answer, because it may never come a knockin' again.
And I too would try my best to make a good bid to get up on stage, regardless of the pricing game or prize involved as I'd get to spin the wheel and maybe win some bonus cash and a crack at one or even two showcases of prizes as well.