[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'236037\' date=\'Feb 17 2010, 12:44 PM\'][quote name=\'BillCullen1\' post=\'236023\' date=\'Feb 17 2010, 03:04 AM\']I don't think she was "helped" in any way with the answers since that would be considered "rigging" which would not make S&P happy.[/quote]Why? Its still the contestant choice to wager and bet, is it not?[/quote]
I can see a theoretical difference, though. On
Hollywood Squares, it doesn't much matter whether the celebrity was given the correct answer or not, since the responsibility of
knowing is up to the contestant by agreeing or disagreeing with whatever was provided. On
Celebrity Sweepstakes, the game as presented is different. A contestant is supposed to guess whether or not a given celebrity is smart enough to know the answer to a trivia question. If certain celebrities were given answers that they wouldn't otherwise know, it changes the entire complexion of the game since the contestants have no way of knowing which celebrities were being fed answers.
Doesn't make the game "rigged" since the contestants are all equally in the dark, but it does make the central conceit of the show less relevant.
Also, turns out we once had a member here who
claimed to have been told that celebrities were fed answers, but that the process eventually stopped. On the other hand, Curt Alliaume
spoke to both Jim MacKrell and producer Ralph Andrews who insisted that celebs weren't getting help. Still (on the other other hand), if the first story is to be believed, it sounds like Ralph Andrews ran the show on the up-and-up and that Sugarman was the one feeding answers. MacKrell wouldn't really have been in a position to know for sure one way or the other.
I remain convinced that Mrs. Sugarman wanted to show she was more than a dumb blonde, whether that was actually true or not, and hubby helped make that happen.