Author Topic: 10 Greatest Originals of GSN's time (Read 12963 times)

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #30 on:** July 27, 2006, 01:49:33 PM »

[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'125355\' date=\'Jul 27 2006, 11:58 AM\']
I fail to see the part of that where you prove me wrong. Since I haven't seen any of the old originals, I
have to go on other people's opinions. The consensus is that they're pretty bad and so they are off the list. There's plenty of other originals out that didn't make it, too.
[/quote]
You don't "have" to do anything. You chose to go by other people's opinions, as opposed to making an independent assessment by yourself; which makes your opinion worth very little.

SRIV94 · « **Reply #31 on:** July 27, 2006, 02:01:59 PM »

[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'125355\' date=\'Jul 27 2006, 11:58 AM\']
Considering casino games shouldn't even "belong" on the sports networks, people really don't have an arguement there other than for being purists. Expanding a network's programming is almost always a good thing. However, the main fault of the new GSN early on was that the scale was too far towards their new acquisitions. Now that a better balance has been maintained, with a renewed focus on developing traditional game shows, there's not much of a reason to complain.
[/quote]
I agree with that, although I do think the casino shows have more of a place on ESPN than they do on GSN. It's not pure sports, but many of us tend to lump gambling-related activities with sports (some game shows straddle the line in that regard too).

Doug -- and the countdown to 2100 continues

Jimmy Owen · « **Reply #32 on:** July 27, 2006, 02:03:08 PM »

[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'125355\' date=\'Jul 27 2006, 12:58 PM\']

If you want to blame someone, blame Madison Avenue for continuing to perpetuate the myth that Men 18-34 are the most important demographic.
[/quote]

I don't think Mad Ave is saying that. Women generally make the buying decisions in a household, so it would be more important to reach women. I guess what it comes down to is that some shows on GSN are incompatible with others so it becomes unsatisfactory for all viewers.

Joe Mello · « **Reply #33 on:** July 27, 2006, 02:41:45 PM »

Well, it's actually all of 18-34, but more men than women.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr...+of+18+to+34%22 Interestng read, I'd have had a better link if I was on campus, but this works.

TLEberle · « **Reply #34 on:** July 29, 2006, 04:21:46 AM »

[quote name=\'SRIV94\' post=\'125339\' date=\'Jul 27 2006, 08:00 AM\']Same goes for BALLBREAKERS--competitive pool is not a game show. [/quote]True that, but there's more to "Ballbreakers" than just playing pool. They built a show around it, with the money, the lights, the side betting...I would say that's enough to qualify. For that matter, of the six or seven episodes that I saw, all but one of them were interesting television.

CaseyAbell · « **Reply #35 on:** July 31, 2006, 09:02:06 AM »

Agree that Ballbreakers was a decent show, a lot more entertaining than anything ESPN has ever done with the game. So why did it bomb? The dreadlocks? Too many rules? Pool just ain't as popular as it used to be? Off-putting, trying-too-hard-to-be-hip name?

Dunno. But the show deserved a better fate.

itiparanoid13 · « **Reply #36 on:** July 31, 2006, 09:31:05 AM »

I never thought the day that I agreed with Casey would come. To me, BallBreakers is the best new show GSN has put on since the switch. I think this show would have survived longer if it came out a year before it did, like it was suppose to. I don't know the original title, but I know the prize was suppose to be $100,000. Also to me, this was easily a game show. It looked, felt, played, and acted like one. It had a ton of skill, more than most, which I admired, and took a great sense of intelligence and betting.

clemon79 · « **Reply #37 on:** July 31, 2006, 10:23:59 AM »

[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'125746\' date=\'Jul 31 2006, 06:31 AM\']
Also to me, this was easily a game show. It looked, felt, played, and acted like one. It had a ton of skill, more than most, which I admired, and took a great sense of intelligence and betting.
[/quote]
No argument here. They threw in enough game-showy twists that I would consider this more of one than I would the casino contests.

(Really, it's more of a hybrid. But it's close enough.)

SRIV94 · « **Reply #38 on:** July 31, 2006, 10:43:21 AM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'125751\' date=\'Jul 31 2006, 09:23 AM\']
[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'125746\' date=\'Jul 31 2006, 06:31 AM\']
Also to me, this was easily a game show. It looked, felt, played, and acted like one. It had a ton of skill, more than most, which I admired, and took a great sense of intelligence and betting.
[/quote]
No argument here. They threw in enough game-showy twists that I would consider this more of one than I would the casino contests.

(Really, it's more of a hybrid. But it's close enough.)
[/quote]
In that case, I concede. Hey, I've been wrong before. . .

Doug

Joe Mello · « **Reply #39 on:** July 31, 2006, 01:55:32 PM »

[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' post=\'125742\' date=\'Jul 31 2006, 09:02 AM\']
Agree that Ballbreakers was a decent show, a lot more entertaining than anything ESPN has ever done with the game. So why did it bomb? The dreadlocks? Too many rules? Pool just ain't as popular as it used to be? Off-putting, trying-too-hard-to-be-hip name?

Dunno. But the show deserved a better fate.
[/quote]

I think it was the timing (as Alex noted) and maybe just Sal's association with the X Games putting off some of the more straight-laced Nielsen families. If the latter is true, it really isn't fair, because I thought he was one of the best hosts of the year.

Pool may not be popular but BallBreakers was more dramatic than normal pool. More dramatic than Trick Shot Pool? Not sure, but definitely better than normal pool.

CaseyAbell · « **Reply #40 on:** August 01, 2006, 01:41:16 PM »

Quote

I never thought the day that I agreed with Casey would come.

The day came earlier in this thread, when you mostly agreed with Joe's list, just as I did. I admit I rate Lingo a touch higher than Russian Roulette, but it's close. I like both shows and wish RR was still doing new episodes.

As for Ballbreakers flopping, I still can't figure. Maybe it's just that most people aren't interested in pool anymore. Or at least they're not interested in watching it.

Speedy G · « **Reply #41 on:** August 01, 2006, 08:00:17 PM »

Quote

I think it was the timing (as Alex noted) and maybe just Sal's association with the X Games putting off some of the more straight-laced Nielsen families. If the latter is true, it really isn't fair, because I thought he was one of the best hosts of the year.

I know I've tuned into various portions of the X Games (and wish they would bring back the downhill lay-on-your-back skateboard racing), but the first time I heard the name Sal Masekela was on BallBreakers.

It was an interesting show, that didn't really seem broken to me, which alone is enough to vault far up my listings.

1) Russian Roulette: Two words: Maria Lay. Well, that plus Walberg jumping in the hole at the end of the models' show.
2) Hollywood Showdown: ...was this Todd Newton's first game show?
3) Extreme Dodgeball: I put this up here almost exclusively on the strength(read: amusement) of the announce team. Plus it's fun to watch. Prefer the first format.
4) Lingo: Maybe it's just me, but I think this show moves like molasses. I usually filter out everything but the bonus round.
5) WSoBJ: +5 Insightful into the strategy of blackjack.
6) Celebrity Blackjack: The little twists they threw in made it interesting regardless of who was playing.
7) Ballbreakers: Lots of things going on, and the lively side betting was a plus.

Inquizition: ...is there any other game show in the last decade that's asked nearly as many questions as Jeopardy per show? [INQUIZITOR FOR DOND BANKER 2006-2007]
9) Whammy!: Pales in comparison to the source material, but there were a few exciting games.
10) Anything to Win: I was surprised to find myself drawn to pretty much every story they talked about.

Honorable mention to GSN's IGAS. I'm one of those "lucky" folks on Time Warner who lost GSN (and I haven't got it back) before this show premiered, but every clip I've seen of it has been a riot.

Timsterino · « **Reply #42 on:** August 01, 2006, 09:11:59 PM »

I will disagree with your top 10 with my own top 3:

3. Hollywood Showdown
2. Lingo
1. Russian Roulette

The card games do nothing for me so I can not honestly comment on them as a show. As far as pure GSN Game Show originals go, my favorite is Russian Roulette.

Tim :-)

gsfan85 · « **Reply #43 on:** August 11, 2006, 11:17:06 AM »

Here's my list of top 10 favorites:

10) Russian Roulette
9) Friend or Foe

Jep!
7) Cram
6) Starface
5) Mall Masters at Mall of America
4) Faux Pause
3) I've Got a Secret
2) Hollywood Showdown
1) Chain Reaction

I loved the old version of Chain, and I think the new one is awesome. Contrary to what others think, I also think Dylan is an awesome pick for the show.

Adam

Don Howard · « **Reply #44 on:** August 11, 2006, 11:46:03 AM »

There aren't ten I like, so I'll offer three..........
1.) Hollywood Showdown---why was this discontinued?
2.) Whammy!--why was this discontinued?
3.) Lingo--will the sixth series of shows begin this December? Or next April? Or in 2009?

Author Topic: 10 Greatest Originals of GSN's time (Read 12963 times)

CaseyAbell

CaseyAbell

Timsterino