The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: whewfan on April 02, 2019, 08:12:13 AM
-
What do you believe were the dumbest strategies used by contestants in terms of playing the game? I'll give a couple examples...
Classic Concentration- A contestant named Ben won a game, but not many prizes in the main game. In the bonus game, he had one more match to make to win the car, and plenty of time to do so. He declares "I've got to win more prizes!" and purposely lets time run out and loses the car! This was late in the run when winning a car meant retiring as champion. As I recall, this move did not work in his favor and he lost the next match.
TPIR- The few contestants chosen both during Bob's run and Drew's run that purposely made awkward bids just to be on television and not necessarily win any prizes. (One of the drawbacks of social media... some people just want to be on YouTube as well, and that's also evident on Family Feud... too many "YouTube" moments to count!)
Wheel of Fortune- I guess I shouldn't call this a "dumb" strategy, especially considering why this contestant did what she did, but it's otherwise not the best way to win... There was a lady that played the game fairly well, then during the speed round, she starts calling out letters that couldn't possibly be in the puzzle, and also stalling to call letters! Granted, she had a nice lead and might've won anyway, but as it turns out, this lady wanted the other players to get a chance to win some money.
-
That word. It does not mean what you think it means.
-
TLEberle, autistic doesn't mean stupid...
A strategy is a plan made to achieve a goal... the examples I listed are the opposite, so they are DUMB strategies. Why not just contribute something relevant to the topic instead?
-
I said nothing about autism--you did.
You could conceivably say that the contestant from Concentration had a strategy to win as much as possible and it just didn't work. I don't think "giving nonsensical" bids is a strategy at all. And pertaining to the lady from Wheel of Fortune, the idea one of our members came up with is that she had enough money to win the day so she decided to give one of her panel-mates the chance to win the speed-up round. So you could argue that what she did was dumb from whatever point you want, but her end goal of sharing the wealth was achieved, so her strategy worked.
-
Why not just contribute something relevant to the topic instead?
I'm not even sure what the topic is.
-
Okay TLEberle, I was in error and I thought what I posted made some sense, even if I didn't quite have the right word. I interpreted what you said as a shot at me, because you only said "you don't know what that word means" without giving the further explanation as you just did. I now realize I misinterpreted what you said and I apologize for the misinterpretation. So let me rephrase what I was trying to ask.... Can you think of any moments, like the ones I listed, where we would expect a contestant to want to "win it all", only to find they had other motivations?
For me, I don't watch game shows to see a contestant lose a car on purpose. Okay, it's kind of funny, but what if a contestant on TPIR did the same thing playing a pricing game? "I don't want to win that second prize on Clock Game, so I'll just give off the wall bids and let the time run out." This sort of ties in with the other example about contestants giving purposely bad bids in contestant's row... Maybe this contestant just wanted to be on TV, maybe he wanted to make it on YouTube... at least during the Barker era, they tried to pick contestants that wanted to win ANYTHING, or at least APPEAR that they want to win something.
Regarding Wheel, yes the lady won anyway, but if we didn't have the knowledge in advance that she just had a good heart and wanted the other players to win some money too, I'd have the same look that Pat Sajak had when he pointed out to her that "she called out some weird letters." Pat was likely thinking "Why, after doing so well, did you suddenly have what appeared to be a "brain fart" and play the game so badly?
-
Matt. My name is "Travis". Not TLEberle. If you want me to be respectful towards you it would be a good idea to use my given name, which is displayed at the bottom of every post that I upload.
My joke was a reference to The Princess Bride. No, I don't think that contestants get on a game show with the motivations of looking like a giant toolbag or losing everything. (I remember Skyler from Dog Eat Dog--he's the exception.) No, I don't recall anyone torpedoing a Winner's Circle because $10,000 just wasn't enough and he or she wanted a crack at $15,000.
Pertaining to the Wheel episode, we didn't have the knowledge in advance. We postulated that as part of a Veterans Week that she was a soldier doing a solid to other soldiers. It's not like betting $22,000 on three people who have never been in my kitchen because that's a sitcom episode and not real.
-
Travis,
Sorry, I didn't see your name before, but now I know. I can be bad at names. At my new job, I forget to look at everyone's name tag and then when someone asks me "who trained you to do this?" I don't remember!
-
No worry--I have horrible facial blindness and it's a thing I work on all the time. That's all we can do; just improve every day and try to be the best we can.
As to the main question, the thing about TPIR is that you don't have contestant coordinators running the prospective contestants through their paces all day before tape starts rolling--you basically have people who are chosen after the briefest of interviews or indeed a headshot. (At various times I would say the contestants chosen were less inspiring than other times.)
One thing that seems to never change is Jeopardy contestants who spend weeks or months studying for their big day but totally ignore wagering--such as betting everything save a dollar or five from third place. (Don't do that!) There are several Millionaire contestants who do things that I wouldn't, but I can't really chalk that up to a dumb strategy--I think it is silly to bail with $7,000 (and $10,000 is still early days at that), but if they're risk averse or the marginal utility of that money is worthwhile, that's their right to stop.
-
Classic Concentration- A contestant named Ben won a game, but not many prizes in the main game. In the bonus game, he had one more match to make to win the car, and plenty of time to do so. He declares "I've got to win more prizes!" and purposely lets time run out and loses the car! This was late in the run when winning a car meant retiring as champion. As I recall, this move did not work in his favor and he lost the next match.
I will add a questionable strategy a contestant used on a recent Buzzr rerun. Woman could've made two matches--made one, knew she could solve the puzzle (and a win would've knocked out the current champ and given her a car round with a ton of time). Opted not to because she could make the one more match, but she didn't count on the bell signaling "interrupted game" happening at that moment. Needless to say he beat her to the buzzer, solved the puzzle, and won a car.
Now, to be fair, she did win the next match but got to the car round with only the base time, and didn't win. She did eventually retire as a 5-time champ and did win a car in (I think) her fourth try. Still think it was questionable.
-
For me, I don't watch game shows to see a contestant lose a car on purpose. Okay, it's kind of funny, but what if a contestant on TPIR did the same thing playing a pricing game? "I don't want to win that second prize on Clock Game, so I'll just give off the wall bids and let the time run out." This sort of ties in with the other example about contestants giving purposely bad bids in contestant's row... Maybe this contestant just wanted to be on TV, maybe he wanted to make it on YouTube... at least during the Barker era, they tried to pick contestants that wanted to win ANYTHING, or at least APPEAR that they want to win something.
Your comparison of that "Classic Concentration" contestant with your oddball "Clock Game" scenario isn't even slightly valid...the CC contestant knew that, while risky, he would play the main game again by throwing the bonus round, giving him the potential to win more prizes and still possibly win the car, next time with even more time on the clock...a contestant playing "Clock Game" knows that it is a one-and-done deal...letting the time run out in this case could provide them with NO possible reward by doing so...
JakeT
-
Okay, it's kind of funny, but what if a contestant on TPIR did the same thing playing a pricing game? "I don't want to win that second prize on Clock Game, so I'll just give off the wall bids and let the time run out."
Forfeiting a prize you don't want is always an option. Still play to win the prize, because it may give you the better position at the Big Wheel.
-
Okay, it's kind of funny, but what if a contestant on TPIR did the same thing playing a pricing game? "I don't want to win that second prize on Clock Game, so I'll just give off the wall bids and let the time run out."
Forfeiting a prize you don't want is always an option. Still play to win the prize, because it may give you the better position at the Big Wheel.
Not only that. By throwing Clock Game, you're costing yourself the bonus prize on offer, which perhaps you might want more than the two smaller prizes you have to bid on.
-
Although it wouldn't be dumb in all cases, I remember seeing a contestant hit bankrupt on the wheel, and then redeemed their free spin card, just to solve the puzzle, with no money! Of course, you'd earn the house minimum (which at the time was $200, and is $1,000 now).
I'd say if trying to protect your lead in the game, than it would be a good strategy.
Another WOF strategy I couldn't understand, was in the prize shopping days, when some contestants would place some of their money "ON ACCOUNT." They would usually place less than $100 on account, which didn't help much toward building a high enough figure to buy a car, or other high priced item. Don't forget, the money "on account," would be lost if you landed on Bankrupt, as well as earnings for that particular puzzle.
-
Having read through this, I'm struggling with defining a strategy as 'dumb'. Some of the examples given are better defined as 'unusual' and may have had unintended results (which are always obvious after the fact).
Deliberately tanking a modern Clock Game playing would fit 'dumb' in my opinion.
-
A more recent example, if Million Dollar Mile counts; a contestant completing two obstacles, then going to the "exit obstacle" to win $25,000 or nothing, instead of going to a different third obstacle, which would lock in $50,000 if successful.
-
If the runner is either tapped or has exhausted their head start it isn't that dumb.
-
If the runner is either tapped or has exhausted their head start it isn't that dumb.
Let me clarify the choices:
Finish the exit obstacle before the other person: $25,000
Finish any other obstacle before the other person: $50,000 - you don't have to finish the exit obstacle, or any other obstacle, before the other person in order to get the $50,000; it's the "consolation prize" for getting through three obstacles before the exit.
-
As million dollar mile CBS adopted the strategy of going for the exit after two rounds.
-
Wasting your Phone-A-Friend to just call your dad on national TV to say -- oh, wait. :)
-
Wasting your Phone-A-Friend to just call your dad on national TV to say -- oh, wait. :)
I dunno. He got the question right...I think it’s only a bad strategy had he answered incorrectly.
-
I dunno. He got the question right...I think it’s only a bad strategy had he answered incorrectly.
I would argue that--stipulated that he knows the answer because he's been a citizen of Earth--that using that lifeline that was was the best thing he could have done both for himself and for the show as well.
-
I thought that was clever and funny myself... why not use a phone a friend to call someone and say "Hey, I'm about to win a million dollars!"
-
Although it wouldn't be dumb in all cases, I remember seeing a contestant hit bankrupt on the wheel, and then redeemed their free spin card, just to solve the puzzle, with no money! Of course, you'd earn the house minimum (which at the time was $200, and is $1,000 now).
I hesitate to call any sort of risk/reward proposition "dumb" just because you or I don't like the relative value of the reward for the risk taken. I can see the point of spinning again as long as you have a Free Spin, since you're still guaranteed the house minimum in the worst case (as opposed to potentially spinning and getting nothing without one).
-
I dunno. He got the question right...I think it’s only a bad strategy had he answered incorrectly.
I would argue that--stipulated that he knows the answer because he's been a citizen of Earth--that using that lifeline that was was the best thing he could have done both for himself and for the show as well.
I remember Ed Toutant commenting it was "irresponsible" for him to not use his 50:50, even if he thought he was 100% sure.