Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Huge flaw with PW+ alphabetics?  (Read 6505 times)

xibit777

  • Guest
Huge flaw with PW+ alphabetics?
« on: July 01, 2005, 03:38:03 PM »
If a pair are stuck on the last word like today with "quicksand" and time is running out, why can't the celeb just *accidently* say sand and then get the word disqualified and get 4000 bucks for the contestant.   As opposed to keep trying for it and only getting 900 bucks.

This seems like a huge flaw that no one ever really takes advantage of.

TLEberle

  • Member
  • Posts: 14429
  • Game Maven
Huge flaw with PW+ alphabetics?
« Reply #1 on: July 01, 2005, 03:40:05 PM »
It's been done at least once, though maybe not on purpose.

It could be that the celebrities and contestants were good game players and wanted to win the money honestly, or the celebrity doesn't ever see the clock and doesn't know when time is running out.
Travis L. Eberle
Director of Ludic underlings.

chris319

  • Executive Producer
  • Posts: 9643
Huge flaw with PW+ alphabetics?
« Reply #2 on: July 01, 2005, 06:14:07 PM »
[quote name=\'xibit777\' date=\'Jul 1 2005, 12:38 PM\']If a pair are stuck on the last word like today with "quicksand" and time is running out, why can't the celeb just *accidently* say sand and then get the word disqualified and get 4000 bucks for the contestant.   As opposed to keep trying for it and only getting 900 bucks.

This seems like a huge flaw that no one ever really takes advantage of.
[snapback]90582[/snapback]
[/quote]
The contestant is expecting the celebrity not to give part of the password as a clue. If a celeb gave "sand" as a clue the contestant would think the password couldn't be "quicksand" because he just used "sand" as a clue.

clemon79

  • Member
  • Posts: 26799
  • Director of Suck Consolidation
Huge flaw with PW+ alphabetics?
« Reply #3 on: July 01, 2005, 06:18:22 PM »
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Jul 1 2005, 03:14 PM\']The contestant is expecting the celebrity not to give part of the password as a clue. If a celeb gave "sand" as a clue the contestant would think the password couldn't be "quicksand" because he just used "sand" as a clue.
[/quote]
But it doesn't matter, because the second the illegal clue is given, the word goes dark and is out of the round. The contestant doesn't HAVE to guess it. And if that's the last word, that's it.
Chris Lemon, King Fool, Director of Suck Consolidation
http://fredsmythe.com
Email: clemon79@outlook.com  |  Skype, YIM, AIM: FredSmythe

Kevin Prather

  • Member
  • Posts: 5916
Huge flaw with PW+ alphabetics?
« Reply #4 on: July 01, 2005, 06:33:58 PM »
And even if they did have to say it, the celeb could just say "Say quicksand!"

beatlefreak84

  • Member
  • Posts: 491
Huge flaw with PW+ alphabetics?
« Reply #5 on: July 01, 2005, 07:45:41 PM »
Quote
But it doesn't matter, because the second the illegal clue is given, the word goes dark and is out of the round. The contestant doesn't HAVE to guess it. And if that's the last word, that's it.

Actually, Chris, you would be right if we were discussing "Super Password," where an illegal clue on a word does take that word out of play.  However, the situation is considering "Password Plus," where an illegal clue just docks the final jackpot by $1,000.  It does not take the word out of the game, which, IMO, is a really stupid rule and I'm glad that more contestants/celebs didn't try to take advantage of it.

That is really one of the few flaws I find with "Password Plus;" however, in the episodes I've been watching, I'm still waiting to see if anyone actually does use it to their advantage to take home $4,000 (still not a bad hunk of change!).

Anthony
You have da Arm-ee and da Leg-ee!

Temptation Dollars:  the only accepted currency for Lots of Love™

clemon79

  • Member
  • Posts: 26799
  • Director of Suck Consolidation
Huge flaw with PW+ alphabetics?
« Reply #6 on: July 01, 2005, 08:01:02 PM »
[quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' date=\'Jul 1 2005, 04:45 PM\']Actually, Chris, you would be right if we were discussing "Super Password," where an illegal clue on a word does take that word out of play.  However, the situation is considering "Password Plus," where an illegal clue just docks the final jackpot by $1,000.
[/quote]
Yes, thank you, I know what the hell we're talking about.

I could swear that the illegal clue knocked the word out of the round. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I at least know what I _think_ I'm seeing on television.
Chris Lemon, King Fool, Director of Suck Consolidation
http://fredsmythe.com
Email: clemon79@outlook.com  |  Skype, YIM, AIM: FredSmythe

chris319

  • Executive Producer
  • Posts: 9643
Huge flaw with PW+ alphabetics?
« Reply #7 on: July 01, 2005, 08:49:44 PM »
I'm telling ya, all that strategy is going to do is confuse the contestant. It would be an easy flaw to fix anyway; simply enact a rule whereby if a celeb tries to prompt the contestant to say the password other than by giving a clue and elciting a response ("say 'quicksand'"), the award will be $100 per correctly-guessed password (and the celeb would be rewarded with no further bookings on the show).
« Last Edit: July 01, 2005, 08:50:29 PM by chris319 »

snowpeck

  • Member
  • Posts: 1534
Huge flaw with PW+ alphabetics?
« Reply #8 on: July 02, 2005, 06:34:26 AM »
[quote name=\'xibit777\' date=\'Jul 1 2005, 03:38 PM\']If a pair are stuck on the last word like today with "quicksand" and time is running out, why can't the celeb just *accidently* say sand and then get the word disqualified .....
[/quote]


Well for one thing, saying part of the password is perfectly legal.  And the contestant has to actually guess the word after the illegal clue is given.  Saying the password itself will only net the contestant $900.  


Greg
Co-owner, The Daytime TV Schedule Archive
My website: http://www.gregbrobeck.net
My board game collection: http://boardgamegeek.com/collection/user/snowpeck (recently passed the 100 mark!)

chris319

  • Executive Producer
  • Posts: 9643
Huge flaw with PW+ alphabetics?
« Reply #9 on: July 02, 2005, 01:56:17 PM »
Quote
    3.  A legal clue is one which, in the judge's best
determination, is (a) one word, and (b) a legitimate word
in common usage in the English language, and © not a
form of the password which conveys the essence of the password
and (d) a clue which does not involve the use of excessive
physical gestures (e) a clue which is not the opposite of the
password.

Dbacksfan12

  • Member
  • Posts: 5973
Huge flaw with PW+ alphabetics?
« Reply #10 on: July 02, 2005, 02:08:14 PM »
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Jul 1 2005, 07:49 PM\'](and the celeb would be rewarded with no further bookings on the show).
[/quote]
That's akin to what happens in NASCAR commonly--a team finds someway around the rules...and once its discovered--they get nailed for it--something I don't particularly care for.

Why punish someone because the rules that you wrote are weak?
--Mark
John 6:35

clemon79

  • Member
  • Posts: 26799
  • Director of Suck Consolidation
Huge flaw with PW+ alphabetics?
« Reply #11 on: July 02, 2005, 03:01:35 PM »
[quote name=\'Modor\' date=\'Jul 2 2005, 11:08 AM\']Why punish someone because the rules that you wrote are weak?
[/quote]
Because part of your expectations as a paid performer are that you play the game in such a way that doesn't make a travesty of the show. And any celebrity who would think of such a hack for the game and NOT have at least an inkling that maybe it's a little cheesy and should at LEAST be run by the producers is simply not someone you want working for you.
Chris Lemon, King Fool, Director of Suck Consolidation
http://fredsmythe.com
Email: clemon79@outlook.com  |  Skype, YIM, AIM: FredSmythe

Blanquepage

  • Member
  • Posts: 801
Huge flaw with PW+ alphabetics?
« Reply #12 on: July 02, 2005, 09:00:50 PM »
One prime example of this Alphabetics flaw was Debralee Scott accidentally reading the final password "window," after which she was buzzed yet contestant Kandi Doyle (yes, Blockbusters Kandi) exclaimed "Window!"
Kandi was awarded $4,000 since she DID say the correct answer despite Debralee reading it. I'll post the clip one of these days.

--Jamie
« Last Edit: July 02, 2005, 09:04:16 PM by Jimmy Fiono Coyne »
https://www.facebook.com/TvGameShowVault - Content now mostly posted to the Facebook page
http://www.youtube.com/blanquepage -- Game show goodness that still isn't zapped by the owners

TLEberle

  • Member
  • Posts: 14429
  • Game Maven
Huge flaw with PW+ alphabetics?
« Reply #13 on: July 03, 2005, 01:02:18 AM »
That was the one I was remembering, but I didn't want to give away too much information, lest I be thought of as even more geeky than I already appear.
Travis L. Eberle
Director of Ludic underlings.

davemackey

  • Member
  • Posts: 2399
Huge flaw with PW+ alphabetics?
« Reply #14 on: July 03, 2005, 05:03:32 AM »
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Jul 2 2005, 01:56 PM\']
Quote
    3.  A legal clue is one which, in the judge's best
determination, is (a) one word, and (b) a legitimate word
in common usage in the English language, and © not a
form of the password which conveys the essence of the password
and (d) a clue which does not involve the use of excessive
physical gestures (e) a clue which is not the opposite of the
password.
[snapback]90646[/snapback]
[/quote]
Chris, was that pesky "no opposites" rule there from the very beginning of "Password Plus" or was it added later on? Can you give us some background as to why that was?

Was it a big hit with the Luddites?