Author Topic: Monty Hall says... (Read 11445 times)

JayDLewis · « **Reply #30 on:** March 09, 2009, 06:37:59 PM »

[quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'209879\' date=\'Mar 9 2009, 11:11 AM\']
Now I realize that Monty helped create the game and knew how to run it, and I realize the sneaky car dealer is part of the game. But am I the only one (besides my mother) who doesn't find Monty all that charming or genuine?
[/quote]

Agreed. What did Monty want? Excited contestants or a poetry reading?

"Instead of making deals, I thought we'd view some etchings..."

TLEberle · « **Reply #31 on:** March 09, 2009, 09:58:16 PM »

[quote name=\'bandit_bobby\' post=\'209796\' date=\'Mar 8 2009, 10:20 AM\']If LMAD comes back to primetime, I hope they'll bring back the Super Deal for $1,000,000.[/quote]This is just too funny. If I'm remembering something for real, and not just another internetz rumor or mis-memory, it was no less than Monty Hall himself who said "It's not the amount of money we give away, it's how we do it." If you give someone $500 and say "You can keep that, or trade it for what it's under the box" that's still going to be a tough decision for more than a few people. You can play the game for hundreds or thousands of dollars and still have compelling television, while another game show with Deal in the title manages to not be compelling with hundreds OF thousands of dollars in play.

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'209797\' date=\'Mar 8 2009, 10:21 AM\']What made Monty so great as a host was that he was charming and genuinely cared about the contestants. [/quote]Not to mention he made everyone feel like their choices were real and based on something other than the random vagaries of chance. If the host cannot make people suspend that disbelief that the game is nothing but raw instinct and the possibility of big prizes, then there's really no point.

[quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'209808\' date=\'Mar 8 2009, 12:23 PM\']I didn't think Billy Bush's was so bad--even "spot the transvestite" seems like a decent (or indecent) way to get them past pricing the groceries on the tray. But the successful 21st Century update of LMAD already happened and it's "Deal or No Deal." Monty's trying to bring back "$64,000 Question" after WWTBAM came out.[/quote]They actually had a couple. One was the "higher or lower" game that had players reaching into blacked out jars to see if they won the prize or got a nasty surprise, the other one I can remember had five young ladies trying to sort out five grocery items by cost; each one bearing a product. It's the same thing as what was done on a carrying tray years ago, only with different chrome.

TimK2003 · « **Reply #32 on:** March 09, 2009, 10:53:04 PM »

If & when LMAD does return, one thing I would like to see happen is to increase the risk factor in the Big Deal.

By this I mean that there were a lot of times when people who win a decent amount of cash & prizes (like $2500) and still have the chance to trade for a door at the end of the program as the big car, cash or trip winners would keep what they had.

In my recollections, it seemed that nearly 2/3rds of those trading mid-level prizes would always get a bigger, better prize or be very close in value to what they traded off as all 3 "doors" usually had a value equal to or greater than mid-level prizes. I'd like to see more Big Deal doors have a low-value prize replace one of the two "even trade" doors.

Don Howard · « **Reply #33 on:** March 09, 2009, 11:08:59 PM »

[quote name=\'TimK2003\' post=\'209970\' date=\'Mar 9 2009, 10:53 PM\']
I'd like to see more Big Deal doors have a low-value prize replace one of the two "even trade" doors.
[/quote]
I'd like to see one have a ZONK!

itiparanoid13 · « **Reply #34 on:** March 09, 2009, 11:19:59 PM »

Did Monty specify what country? Australia is taping a pilot of LMAD for Channel 9 soon (along with a new edition of Millionaire called Millionaire: Russian Roulette which is most likely that Italian multiplayer version) and that may be who he was signing with.

chris319 · « **Reply #35 on:** March 09, 2009, 11:34:01 PM »

[quote name=\'geno57\' post=\'209798\' date=\'Mar 8 2009, 10:32 AM\']
The toughest part, of course, is that the host will have to memorize a different flow-chart for every show. He'll need to remember, in an instant, what to do based on contestants' decisions.[/quote]
Monty pulled it off.

Quote

The new host could be outfitted with an IFB device, similar to what most news anchors wear these days. A producer could tell the host, moment-by-moment, what to do next ... or even exactly what to say at any given moment.

Um, no.

clemon79 · « **Reply #36 on:** March 09, 2009, 11:43:32 PM »

[quote name=\'TimK2003\' post=\'209970\' date=\'Mar 9 2009, 07:53 PM\']
In my recollections, it seemed that nearly 2/3rds of those trading mid-level prizes would always get a bigger, better prize or be very close in value to what they traded off as all 3 "doors" usually had a value equal to or greater than mid-level prizes. I'd like to see more Big Deal doors have a low-value prize replace one of the two "even trade" doors.[/quote]
Really? You really want the Big Deal to end on a downer for someone?

All you've done is lower the level of participant. If there is a risk of getting screwed, even fewer people will roll the dice, and now those $2,500 prize winners have turned into $1,000 prize winners. Whee.

geno57 · « **Reply #37 on:** March 10, 2009, 02:17:07 AM »

[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'209974\' date=\'Mar 9 2009, 09:34 PM\']
[quote name=\'geno57\' post=\'209798\' date=\'Mar 8 2009, 10:32 AM\']
The toughest part, of course, is that the host will have to memorize a different flow-chart for every show. He'll need to remember, in an instant, what to do based on contestants' decisions.[/quote]

Monty pulled it off.

Quote

The new host could be outfitted with an IFB device, similar to what most news anchors wear these days. A producer could tell the host, moment-by-moment, what to do next ... or even exactly what to say at any given moment.

Um, no.
[/quote]

I didn't mean that I'd like to see them do it that way. But I could see it happening.

As for "Monty pulled it off" ... Exactly my point. Who else can do it that way?

chris319 · « **Reply #38 on:** March 10, 2009, 03:22:53 AM »

Quote

Who else can do it that way?

Who's alive and under 70? You'd have to hold auditions, but I think you can safely cross Dave Price, Drew Carey, John O'Hurley, Richard Karn and George Hamilton off the list of auditionees.

calliaume · « **Reply #39 on:** March 10, 2009, 08:16:08 AM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'209975\' date=\'Mar 9 2009, 10:43 PM\']
[quote name=\'TimK2003\' post=\'209970\' date=\'Mar 9 2009, 07:53 PM\']
In my recollections, it seemed that nearly 2/3rds of those trading mid-level prizes would always get a bigger, better prize or be very close in value to what they traded off as all 3 "doors" usually had a value equal to or greater than mid-level prizes. I'd like to see more Big Deal doors have a low-value prize replace one of the two "even trade" doors.[/quote]
Really? You really want the Big Deal to end on a downer for someone?

All you've done is lower the level of participant. If there is a risk of getting screwed, even fewer people will roll the dice, and now those $2,500 prize winners have turned into $1,000 prize winners. Whee.
[/quote]
How carefully were the rules of the Big Deal explained to everyone on the trading floor before the show? We all know there were no Zonks for the Big Deal, but was that made crystal clear?

I know there were some downward trades for the Big Deal (car for living room furniture or something like that). I would think people would have thought it out ("We really need the color TV, but we don't need the luggage or the Creamettes... whaddya think?"). I seem to recall the deal before the Big Deal almost never involved big ticket items, giving people an extra couple of minutes to ponder. Maybe a PA or someone would tip them off during the break as well.

Sodboy13 · « **Reply #40 on:** March 10, 2009, 08:48:36 AM »

[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'209973\' date=\'Mar 9 2009, 10:19 PM\']
Did Monty specify what country? Australia is taping a pilot of LMAD for Channel 9 soon (along with a new edition of Millionaire called Millionaire: Russian Roulette which is most likely that Italian multiplayer version) and that may be who he was signing with.
[/quote]

Given Nine's recent show of commitment to new programming, what's the over/under on the lifespan of either of these? Two weeks?

dazztardly · « **Reply #41 on:** March 10, 2009, 11:23:28 AM »

I think the quality of the last LMaD series suffered, mainly in part to the network's creative staff...ala Lin Bolen with Jackpot in the 70's. Hopefully there will be less of those issues, should the show return.

-Dan

Don Howard · « **Reply #42 on:** March 10, 2009, 11:25:58 AM »

[quote name=\'dazztardly\' post=\'209998\' date=\'Mar 10 2009, 11:23 AM\']
I think the quality of the last LMaD series suffered, mainly in part to the network's creative staff
[/quote]
Bouncing the show after only three telecasts didn't help matters much, either. More than a few shows which became ultra-hits (game shows and otherwise) would have been less than footnotes if not given a chance.......among them: Cheers and M*A*S*H.

clemon79 · « **Reply #43 on:** March 10, 2009, 11:48:13 AM »

[quote name=\'calliaume\' post=\'209989\' date=\'Mar 10 2009, 05:16 AM\']
I know there were some downward trades for the Big Deal (car for living room furniture or something like that).[/quote]
Sure, there were trade-downs, but if word gets out that those trade-downs could be trade-REALLY-downs, I have to think that those fringe cases of folks-with-decent-prizes-who-pulled-the-trigger-anyhow are going to go down along with it.

Or maybe I'm overestimating the ability of someone who dressed as a radish in order to get on national television to make an informed and rational decision.

Neumms · « **Reply #44 on:** March 10, 2009, 01:06:30 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'210000\' date=\'Mar 10 2009, 10:48 AM\']
Or maybe I'm underestimating the ability of someone who dressed as a radish in order to get on national television to make an informed and rational decision.
[/quote]

Overestimating. I remember back in '04, our last President was re-elected, not that entire states were dressed as radishes.