Game show "ironies" (if any)

[TLEberle]

Or put that contestant in a different game. What if someone doesn’t put down game shows as their category but material about the comes up during the main game?

On the other hand it’s a pop culture show and the movie is a cultural touchstone so if everything is put together randomly is that so bad? Idiot Savants had the potential for any of four people to win any day.

[Jamey Greek]

In the episode of Debt that wink’s page posted shortly before learning of his death, there was a question about the tv series Ferris Bueller and the winning contestant’s one question category was the movie Ferris Bueller’s Day Off

That's just bad question stacking. You'd think someone would have gone through and made sure the three expert topics weren't broached in the main game.

Not really the category where the Ferris Bueller TV show category came from was “Good movie bad tv”

[BrandonFG]

I'm pretty sure what Kevin is saying is there shouldn't have been a question about Ferris Bueller the TV show on the same episode where one of your contestants' wheelhouses is Ferris Bueller's Day Off. Even though the show went out of its way to distance itself from the movie, it's still a conflict of interest.

You either a) write a new question, b) put that contestant on a different episode, or c) ask him or her to come up with a new specialty subject. Obviously it's not gonna cause a new Quiz Show Scandal, but it's still curious.

[JasonA1]

You either a) write a new question, b) put that contestant on a different episode, or c) ask him or her to come up with a new specialty subject.

B is fine, but A and C aren't really viable. Based on modern production practices only, I'm guessing each contestant applied to the show with a specialty category (or few) in mind, and the producers had that prepared ahead of their tape date. Then, the contestants and material would be randomly matched the morning of taping. There probably wouldn't be time to write a brand new main game question, especially in the pre-internet days, and you're not supposed to do that once you know who's playing anyway. To the other point, the contestant shouldn't have to switch their expertise because of the show's negligence.

What SHOULD have happened is somebody checking the pool of games ahead of time and flagging that contestant X couldn't play in game Y, and/or the category with the Ferris Bueller question should have had a spare that they subbed in for just such a reason. Perhaps somebody saw it and rolled the dice that said player wouldn't get that main game question (which she ultimately didn't, but it was close).

-Jason

[TLEberle]

I’m sure Kevin and I have discussed this, but it stood out to me hoe the last three questions for Bob House were all strongly related to history. Obviously you’d never plan for a particular contestant to win the qualifier and you still have to get the right, but if the questions were compiled by hand and not retrieved randomly thst feels like a bit of an oversight maybe.

[BrandonFG]

B is fine, but A and C aren't really viable. Based on modern production practices only, I'm guessing each contestant applied to the show with a specialty category (or few) in mind, and the producers had that prepared ahead of their tape date. Then, the contestants and material would be randomly matched the morning of taping. There probably wouldn't be time to write a brand new main game question, especially in the pre-internet days, and you're not supposed to do that once you know who's playing anyway. To the other point, the contestant shouldn't have to switch their expertise because of the show's negligence.

What SHOULD have happened is somebody checking the pool of games ahead of time and flagging that contestant X couldn't play in game Y, and/or the category with the Ferris Bueller question should have had a spare that they subbed in for just such a reason. Perhaps somebody saw it and rolled the dice that said player wouldn't get that main game question (which she ultimately didn't, but it was close).

That makes sense. Reading your first paragraph I wondered was an alternate question possible, but your second paragraph answered that question. I prolly should've said "swap in an alternate" for choice a) but points taken.

[wdm1219inpenna]

During one Joel McHale Card Sharks episode a champion poker player drew three consecutive Aces during the Money Cards.  I thought that would have been a prime opportunity to make mention of that.

During one Super Match on Rayburn's Match Game, a woman spun a double on the wheel to win $10,000 and I forget the celebrity but the question was "Wise Old ____"  and the contestant as a good luck charm had a trinket that was 2 Owls.  She said Owl, the celebrity also said Owl, and that was quite an amazing moment!

On another Joker's Wild episode with the category Holidays & Observances, the art card had a Groundhog on it and the question was Groundhog Day.  The contestant pointed it out but Jack Barry said "No I don't think that's a groundhog, I think that's an otter".  A very odd thing to say, especially since to the best of my knowledge, otters are not really associated with any holiday or observance that I've ever been aware of or witness to during my 58 years of life.  I think Jack was probably embarrassed by that "oversight" especially given his association with the 50's quiz show scandals.

[Eric Paddon]

During one Super Match on Rayburn's Match Game, a woman spun a double on the wheel to win $10,000 and I forget the celebrity but the question was "Wise Old ____"  and the contestant as a good luck charm had a trinket that was 2 Owls.  She said Owl, the celebrity also said Owl, and that was quite an amazing moment!

I remember that episode because the celeb was Barbara Rhoades.   This was early in the syndication run and she ended up revealing just how much of an impression winning big money for a contestant made on her because she prefaced showing her answer by mentioning the last time she won $10,000 for a contestant and mentioned the contestant by name (that had been in the waning days of the CBS run earlier in the year).   I don't think I've ever seen a game show celeb do that before where they can remember the name of someone they won money for months after the fact.

[Joe Mello]

My attempt at an actual irony is how Jeopardy getting cancelled probably ended up being the best thing that could've ever happened to Jeopardy in the long run.

A less serious one: the show was called Password yet you couldn't pass a word in the main game for multiple iterations including the first one.

/you ove in cold food

[Kevin Prather]

My attempt at an actual irony is how Jeopardy getting cancelled probably ended up being the best thing that could've ever happened to Jeopardy in the long run.

I was just reminded of an actual irony also involving Jeopardy. When the current version premiered in 84, critics panned it as not being scholarly anymore.

[whewfan]

Since it was brought up about celeb's deaths preceding a show the celeb appeared on obviously prior to death, I'll keep the maudlin train running with the unfortunate death of Randy Amasia the very same day that his $25000 win arrived at his house, and unfortunately he didn't see it.

Okay, now some happier ones...

On Eubanks' Card Sharks, there was a contestant related to Florence Griffith Joyner, and there was an educated guess question about how many total miles she ran in a week or something like that... he knew the exact number. Bob laughed at the producers' reaction.

Then there's the lady contestant on TPIR, a double amputee, who was playing for a treadmill. (Roger told me a while ago that if something like that happened when he was there, they would've quickly substituted a more suitable prize, but this lady didn't take any offense and kind of thought it was funny.

Not sure if this qualifies, but Bob Barker found it amusing that Patricia Bernard, the lady in the bathroom, was to bid on a waterbed.


On TPIR from the early hour run, a male contestant with a shirt that said "Lover" was playing for a new bed.

[BrandonFG]

Then there's the lady contestant on TPIR, a double amputee, who was playing for a treadmill. (Roger told me a while ago that if something like that happened when he was there, they would've quickly substituted a more suitable prize

He seems to do this a lot: says he would do the polar opposite of what the show did instead. Meanwhile, would this not cause a lengthy stopdown trying to find a new prize?

[Kevin Prather]

Then there's the lady contestant on TPIR, a double amputee, who was playing for a treadmill. (Roger told me a while ago that if something like that happened when he was there, they would've quickly substituted a more suitable prize

He seems to do this a lot: says he would do the polar opposite of what the show did instead. Meanwhile, would this not cause a lengthy stopdown trying to find a new prize?

Not to mention an S&P violation? Isn't altering the game in any way once you know who the player is a Bozo No-No?

[TLEberle]

The standards and practices are whatever the show rules say. If you have a prize that might be adjudicated as wrong by internet provocateurs, stack it early in the game. Or if you have chosen well the contestant will have a good and uplifting reaction that plays well.

MattK: I do not believe you hsve stopped watching the show.

[TLEberle]

Then there's the lady contestant on TPIR, a double amputee, who was playing for a treadmill. (Roger told me a while ago that if something like that happened when he was there, they would've quickly substituted a more suitable prize

He seems to do this a lot: says he would do the polar opposite of what the show did instead. Meanwhile, would this not cause a lengthy stopdown trying to find a new prize?

that depends. I imagine a one bid prize would be trivial to keep around, and make up game specific tags. Not so easy if it’s a car. Better to just roll with it and get through the segment.