The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: PPatters on February 25, 2019, 01:18:06 PM
-
I have few details, but I received an e-mail today that Card Sharks is casting! An application is available at https://29framesent.formstack.com/forms/card_subs
-
Interesting that this website looks much less formal than the PYL casting site.....
Tyshaun
-
The casting note comes from Paul Gordon Casting. They handle casting for "America Says."
JD
-
The casting note comes from Paul Gordon Casting. They handle casting for "America Says."
JD
They also do Child Support (for ABC).
-
The casting note comes from Paul Gordon Casting. They handle casting for "America Says."
JD
Makes me wonder if GSN might be working on this- they've done pretty well on their original programming lately, and CS seems like something that could work there if done right (like Catch 21- and that show ended up getting 300 episodes)
-
I don't think GSN's going to put up the money that Card Sharks necessitates. IMO the Money Cards is the hallmark of the show, and the $32,000 top prize is still too lofty for GSN. I'm willing to bet it's going to ABC, since Gong Show, Match Game and Child Support are looking like they're not coming back.
-
True, though it would be rarely if ever given away.
-
I think $32,000 CS is perfect for GSN. The average win was probably, what, $7,500 in the Eubanks series? I’m more afraid as to how they’ll keep episodes from straddling. Lengthen out the front game or retry one of the Pat Bullard formats (*shudder*)?
-
I think $32,000 CS is perfect for GSN. The average win was probably, what, $7,500 in the Eubanks series? I’m more afraid as to how they’ll keep episodes from straddling. Lengthen out the front game or retry one of the Pat Bullard formats (*shudder*)?
Old episodes of the British version, Play Your Cards Right with the late, great Bruce Forsyth, were also self-contained. I'm thinking the trick would have been with the interview edits.
-
I think $32,000 CS is perfect for GSN. The average win was probably, what, $7,500 in the Eubanks series? I’m more afraid as to how they’ll keep episodes from straddling. Lengthen out the front game or retry one of the Pat Bullard formats (*shudder*)?
Bullard's formatting wasn't that bad, and would work here, except use regular survey questions and give both players an individual rows of cards.
Round 1 features two contestants; round 2 features two more. The winners of those two rounds play each other in a championship round for the right to play the Money Cards.
Wiki says each round of the 2001 version was best of three. I don't know if the amount of content per half hour has gone down in 18 years, but I see no reason to stray from that. Pay $500 for winning a round.
-
I'm willing to bet it's going to ABC, since Gong Show, Match Game and Child Support are looking like they're not coming back.
Per Mr. West on Facebook, this indeed is for ABC.
Tyshaun
-
I think the 2001 version was best-of-3 in the two preliminary games, paying $500/win, and the championship was one game for $1,100.
-
I think $32,000 CS is perfect for GSN. The average win was probably, what, $7,500 in the Eubanks series?
If the average win was $7500, and you have one money cards in an episode, that's $37,500 a week. Multiply that times 13 weeks for a 65 episode order, and you have a prize budget of $487,500 in the bonus round alone. Seems mighty high for a game on cable with factors well outside your control.
-
I think $32,000 CS is perfect for GSN. The average win was probably, what, $7,500 in the Eubanks series?
If the average win was $7500, and you have one money cards in an episode, that's $37,500 a week. Multiply that times 13 weeks for a 65 episode order, and you have a prize budget of $487,500 in the bonus round alone. Seems mighty high for a game on cable with factors well outside your control.
GSN could always use standard decks for the main game, and switch to a Pinochle deck for the Money Cards with no pushes. <ducking>
-
I think the 2001 version was best-of-3 in the two preliminary games, paying $500/win, and the championship was one game for $1,100.
That sounds about right. The champ took $2,100 to the Money Cards ($1,000 from winning two rounds+$1,100 championship game), split along the three levels. This caused a bit of an outcry on ATGS, as contestants were basically gambling their front game winnings on a "bonus round".
/Don't do that on CS19
-
Bullard's formatting wasn't that bad, and would work here, except use regular survey questions and give both players an individual rows of cards.
In other words, throw out the entire Bullard format, right?
JakeT
-
Bullard's formatting wasn't that bad, and would work here, except use regular survey questions and give both players an individual rows of cards.
In other words, throw out the entire Bullard format, right?
Ummm...no. The structure I described later in that post would be one thing I'd keep, in order to maintain a self-contained show. Everything else would be like the original versions (surveys over "Chip Clips", individual rows).
-
Just my own--as stupid dumb as the format was generally I get annoyed when contestants are brought on to play one segment then if they lose they're done. (moreso on CS because that's all about luck anyway).
If it were for GSN, I would love for the show to allow games to breathe and edit to finish up cleanly on Friday. If each episode has be self-contained, throw all questions over to a group of ten people, and talk to some of them after the question and edit as appropriate. I think that letting players play as many games as possible in an episode and whichever contestant wins more goes to the Money Cards is preferable to escalating values.
-
Thinking about this and Brandon bringing up the idea of using the 2001 playoff-style format to keep the show self-contained, I'm wondering if this is a viable option to fit in 42 minutes of network airtime:
2 semifinal matches, each best-of-3, classic CS format.
Each semifinal winner plays the Money Cards, with base values of $500 and $1,000.
The two semi winners face off in a one-game final. Maybe you make it a 7-card board for each player to emphasize that this is the bigger game, and to lower the odds that someone runs the board off the first question, just for the sake of timing the show
Champion goes back to the Money Cards, now with base values of $1,000 and $2,000.
I doubt TPTB would go for this, because there's always going to be some time variances when you're playing best-of-3, and all of the reboots seem dedicated to getting their blocked timed out as consistently as possible. Just look at the lengths Match Game goes to to ensure two rounds, four questions, every single week. ABC also seems to prefer each hour show to be two self-contained half-hours, and my idea violates that. But Good Card Sharks was always a straddling show, and I don't know how you get around that without bending the structure of the game to the point of breaking it, or by padding the hell out of it, Bruce Forsyth-style.
-
With recent history as precident, I would wager the end result will look and feel familiar to what we know and love.
-
Thinking about this and Brandon bringing up the idea of using the 2001 playoff-style format to keep the show self-contained, I'm wondering if this is a viable option to fit in 42 minutes of network airtime:
2 semifinal matches, each best-of-3, classic CS format.
Each semifinal winner plays the Money Cards, with base values of $500 and $1,000.
The two semi winners face off in a one-game final. Maybe you make it a 7-card board for each player to emphasize that this is the bigger game, and to lower the odds that someone runs the board off the first question, just for the sake of timing the show
Champion goes back to the Money Cards, now with base values of $1,000 and $2,000.
I doubt TPTB would go for this, because there's always going to be some time variances when you're playing best-of-3, and all of the reboots seem dedicated to getting their blocked timed out as consistently as possible. Just look at the lengths Match Game goes to to ensure two rounds, four questions, every single week. ABC also seems to prefer each hour show to be two self-contained half-hours, and my idea violates that. But Good Card Sharks was always a straddling show, and I don't know how you get around that without bending the structure of the game to the point of breaking it, or by padding the hell out of it, Bruce Forsyth-style.
You could always do what the nighttime Marshall Squares did. As you recall, they threw out the daytime best 2 out of 3 rule and just kept playing games until the buzzer sounded. You could do the same thing with CS, except when time runs out for regular game play, the next questions becomes sudden death. Determine the winner of that game, who won more games, and if the match is still tied, do a quick 3 card sudden death to break the tie. Then winner goes onto the Money Cards.
-
See reply #18.
-
ABC also seems to prefer each hour show to be two self-contained half-hours, and my idea violates that.
Match Game PM, $100,000 Pyramid and the Feud always ended on the half-hour, though, so there wasn't reason to change. ABC's TTTT and Gong Show aren't two distinct half-hours. It'd make sense for Card Sharks to run the whole hour so odds are better that short and long games and matches balance out.
I'd play single games with a longer board. It'd make it harder to run the board (as noted above), eliminate rubber games of matches, and you'd get to the Money Cards more often. They could play a set number of games, then the top two money winners play a final game for the chance at Big Money Cards.
-
Questions for the group:
Would you--or will they--have single players or couples a la Brucie?
Do you work the car game in somewhere, presumably with a more impressive model than an 80s Renault? (I didn't like it tacked on to Money Cards, but maybe there's a place for it.)
And who hosts? Craigy Ferg may be available.
-
Would you--or will they--have single players or couples a la Brucie?
For the most part, ABC's games have stayed faithful to the original (or more familiar, in the case of Match Game). I see no reason why they would deviate from single players here.
Do you work the car game in somewhere, presumably with a more impressive model than an 80s Renault? (I didn't like it tacked on to Money Cards, but maybe there's a place for it.)
I probably wouldn't. It felt out of place in Eubanks's version, although the second format fit better than Pick 1-7.
-
I'd play single games with a longer board. It'd make it harder to run the board (as noted above), eliminate rubber games of matches, and you'd get to the Money Cards more often. They could play a set number of games, then the top two money winners play a final game for the chance at Big Money Cards.
How about a set number of questions, say 8, and you can clear the board as many times as you can. Probably should be a provision to eliminate freezes after the ~5th question to avoid the prevent defense strategy, or permit the opponent an opportunity after those late freezes. It's a half-cooked idea, because then you'd have to consider that 52 cards would not always be enough. There would also need to be a tiebreaker provision, but maybe it is only 1 or 2 short questions on a 3-card board.
-
Would you--or will they--have single players or couples a la Brucie?
For the most part, ABC's games have stayed faithful to the original (or more familiar, in the case of Match Game). I see no reason why they would deviate from single players here.
Do you work the car game in somewhere, presumably with a more impressive model than an 80s Renault? (I didn't like it tacked on to Money Cards, but maybe there's a place for it.)
I probably wouldn't. It felt out of place in Eubanks's version, although the second format fit better than Pick 1-7.
Outside of the TPiR Primetime Specials, what was the last primetime network game show to give away a car??? Exactly! Ergo, I don't think there will be any car game to worry about.
-
Greed.
-
Outside of the TPiR Primetime Specials, what was the last primetime network game show to give away a car??? Exactly! Ergo, I don't think there will be any car game to worry about.
Off the top of my head, Billy Bush’s LMAD...more than 15 years ago. :P
-
Outside of the TPiR Primetime Specials, what was the last primetime network game show to give away a car??? Exactly! Ergo, I don't think there will be any car game to worry about.
National Bingo Night
-
April 8, 2019
ABC STACKS THE DECK WITH JOEL MCHALE AS HOST OF
‘CARD SHARKS,’ PREMIERING THIS SUMMER ON ABC
ABC Entertainment and Fremantle announced today that actor and comedian Joel McHale is set to host “Card Sharks,” the suspenseful game where a fortune can be won on the turn of a single playing card! The show is slated to air this summer on The ABC Television Network.
“I’m very excited to be hosting ‘Card Sharks,’” said Joel McHale. “Game winners can win tens of thousands of dollars and in an updated twist – losers will be fed to a pen of adult Tiger Sharks.”
The road to glory and riches begins with two players facing off in a head-to-head elimination race where the winning player claims a $10,000 cash prize and a chance to turn that amount into a life-changing payday. The anticipation builds as the winning contestant risks their prize on predicting seven final cards. The player leaves the game with whatever amount of money they have in their bank after their prediction, and results are revealed on the flip of their seventh and final card.
Joel McHale was most recently seen in “The Happy Time Murders,” as well as Netflix’s “A Futile and Stupid Gesture,” opposite Will Forte. McHale also recently hosted “The Joel McHale Show with Joel McHale” on Netflix, a half-hour topical series that took a sharp, absurdist look at pop culture and news from across the globe. In 2015, McHale wrapped the 12th and final season of E! Network’s “The Soup,” in which he satirized pop culture and current events. He is best known for his starring role on the hit comedy series “Community.” Other starring feature roles include the Jerry Bruckheimer-produced, supernatural thriller “Deliver Us from Evil”; the Warner Bros’ romantic comedy “Blended,” alongside Adam Sandler and Drew Barrymore; Seth MacFarlane’s comedy smash “Ted”; Steven Soderbergh’s “The Informant”; as well as “What’s Your Number?,” starring Chris Evans and Anna Faris. In 2014, McHale hosted the annual White House Correspondents’ Association dinner in Washington D.C. He also hosted “The 2015 ESPYS” on ABC. In the fall of 2016, McHale released his first book through Putnam Penguin, “Thanks for the Money: How to Use My Life Story to Become the Best Joel McHale You Can Be,” which is part memoir, part self-help guide. McHale is repped by UTA and Ziffren Brittenham LLP.
“Card Sharks” is produced by Fremantle. Scott St. John is showrunner and executive producer, and Jack Martin and Jennifer Mullin are also executive producers.
-
And your host will be Joel McHale ...
https://deadline.com/2019/04/card-sharks-deals-joel-mchale-as-host-of-revived-game-show-bowing-this-summer-1202590934/
JD
-
He may not be bad at this (or he may treat this as a paycheck and nothing more - his quote in the Deadline story isn't encouraging).
Interesting that his 2017-2018 one-season sitcom on CBS, The Great Indoors, isn't mentioned in the press release.
-
The road to glory and riches begins with two players facing off in a head-to-head elimination race where the winning player claims a $10,000 cash prize and a chance to turn that amount into a life-changing payday. The anticipation builds as the winning contestant risks their prize on predicting seven final cards. The player leaves the game with whatever amount of money they have in their bank after their prediction, and results are revealed on the flip of their seventh and final card.
Somewhat awkwardly worded, but this does seem to be the traditional Money Cards format we know and love.
-
Assuming they take your $10K from the front game and split it between the two bottom rows, that's a potential top prize of $720,000.
-
They could get away with the payout matrix from Gameshow Marathon, but I suppose the new run of Deal or No Deal proves that there are indeed people who will risk $85,000 lower than a Jack.
-
It seems like the Money Cards are restructured that you don't bet per-card, but rather make a big bet on a run of 7 cards?
-
It seems like the Money Cards are restructured that you don't bet per-card, but rather make a big bet on a run of 7 cards?
I imagine that's one interpretation of what I originally said was a badly worded description. Still, I think logic and recent history would suggest that Fremantle has learned to stick with what worked originally. We'll know soon enough, but there's nothing in this description that leads me to believe they're going to radically change the bonus round.
-
I was at a taping of The $100,000 Pyramid last Friday. Joel McHale was one of the celeb guests and Michael Strahan did introduce him as "host of the new Card Sharks." Now we wait and see who they get to host Press Your Luck.
-
Interesting that his 2017-2018 one-season sitcom on CBS, The Great Indoors, isn't mentioned in the press release.
I think that's called "damage control"...
JakeT
-
He may not be bad at this (or he may treat this as a paycheck and nothing more - his quote in the Deadline story isn't encouraging).
That same quote was used in the ABC press release (http://www.gameshowforum.org/index.php/topic,30962.0.html). When I wrote press releases during my brief marketing stint, we had to come up with a quote, then attach the relevant name. I'm guessing the firm representing ABC (if not ABC's PR folks) did the same here.
/The "I'm/We're very excited to blah blah blah" was a common quote starter
-
Yes, I should have considered that. (Although it did sound like something McHale would say.)
Back in 1992, the advertising agency I worked for was charged with doing some of the writing for its primary client, trading card company SkyBox - including the "Magic [Johnson]'s All-Rookie Team," which meant two of us had to write card backs as if Magic had said them. I drew Shaquille O'Neal, and my copy read "The Shaq is going to terrorize the NBA. Maybe not this season, maybe not next, but he will do it." (I wish in retrospect I hadn't used the word "terrorize," but it was 1992.) It didn't occur to me until after I saw the card in print that "What if he's a bust? That's going to make Magic look stupid." Fortunately, that wasn't the case.
-
Assuming they take your $10K from the front game and split it between the two bottom rows, that's a potential top prize of $720,000.
If they give you $7,500 on the first row and $2,500 on the second row, the top prize is $1 million on the nose.
-
Tickets are now available on OCA. (http://on-camera-audiences.com/shows/Card_Sharks)
If you're in the LA area, it'll be at TVC all next weekend.
-
I like what they did with the logo.
-
I like what they did with the logo.
Me too. Although the only thing we've seen is the logo (and host), that tells me it's getting the same (good) treatment as the other revivals that have preceded it - same formulas that made the show great, but made to fit into the 21st century.
-
As long as they don't follow the format of the 2001 version with Pat Bullard, everything should be fine.
-
As long as they don't follow the format of the 2001 version with Pat Bullard, everything should be fine.
And no cartoon shark graphics going across the screen either. That was about as unnecessary the % sign that zipped across the screen on Play The Percentages.
-
But the % had a cute little syntho-zipper noise to go with it!
-
And no cartoon shark graphics going across the screen either. That was about as unnecessary the % sign that zipped across the screen on Play The Percentages.
I disagree!!!I thought the little shark animation was the high point of the half hour.
/maybe the shark needs to have an accompanying smaller one.
//perhaps a Baby Card Shark.
-
That could be an interesting side game - each player picks a suit, each time that suit is revealed in either hand, $ goes into a pot that is won with a exact guess on a survey question. Call it the Baby Card Shark.
(I'm channeling my inner Mimi O'Brien)
-
And no cartoon shark graphics going across the screen either. That was about as unnecessary the % sign that zipped across the screen on Play The Percentages.
I disagree!!!I thought the little shark animation was the high point of the half hour.
/maybe the shark needs to have an accompanying smaller one.
//perhaps a Baby Card Shark.
♫ Baby Card Shark, doo doo doo doo doo doo... ♫ (C'mon, ya'll we're thinking it!)
-
Perhaps we all were thinking it because the joke had already been made by someone who was not you.
-
Thank you Chris L-factorial.
-
Perhaps we all were thinking it because the joke had already been made by someone who was not you.
We're just having fun, Chris. I wasn't trying to be a Berle of a person. There's no need to be uptight.
/(Everything's Alright)
-
Indeed. At one point in his life Milton Berle was funny.
/Still can't report posts to the moderators. How about that deal.
-
Perhaps we all were thinking it because the joke had already been made by someone who was not you.
We're just having fun, Chris. I wasn't trying to be a Berle of a person. There's no need to be uptight.
/(Everything's Alright)
I think you want to reassess your position here.
-
Indeed. At one point in his life Milton Berle was funny.
Every inch a gentleman.
-
Indeed. At one point in his life Milton Berle was funny.
Every inch a gentleman.
Even Forrest Tucker agreed.
-
Tickets are now available on OCA. (http://on-camera-audiences.com/shows/Card_Sharks)
If you're in the LA area, it'll be at TVC all next weekend.
A friend of mine in L.A. got tickets for the Friday taping. I'll get back to him over the weekend.
-
I went to the first taping Friday. I posted a longer review on Facebook, but let's just say that...
Although the only thing we've seen is the logo (and host), that tells me it's getting the same (good) treatment as the other revivals that have preceded it - same formulas that made the show great, but made to fit into the 21st century.
...Aaron is a perceptive person.
-
I went to the first taping Friday. I posted a longer review on Facebook, but let's just say that...
Although the only thing we've seen is the logo (and host), that tells me it's getting the same (good) treatment as the other revivals that have preceded it - same formulas that made the show great, but made to fit into the 21st century.
...Aaron is a perceptive person.
Can you share here for those that can’t see your Facebook review?
-
From reading the same thing I'm not exactly whelmed. It doesn't read like the game's the thing but I'm not the laser-focused hyper-narrow target they're after either.
-
Alex has a more detailed explanation on Twitter (buzzerblog)
-
And yet not one single link to bring others into the conversation...
-
Alex has a more detailed explanation on Twitter (buzzerblog)
I will look elsewhere, but thanks.
-
And yet not one single link to bring others into the conversation...
I think you're fully capable of typing in twitter dot com slash buzzerblog, don't you?
-
And yet not one single link to bring others into the conversation...
I think you're fully capable of typing in twitter dot com slash buzzerblog, don't you?
If you're gonna be a prick about it, you'd think you'd at least try to be gramatically correct...
JakeT
-
https://twitter.com/buzzerblog
-
And yet not one single link to bring others into the conversation...
I think you're fully capable of typing in twitter dot com slash buzzerblog, don't you?
If you're gonna be a prick about it, you'd think you'd at least try to be gramatically correct...
JakeT
Umm...okay?
Don't see where I was grammatically deficient there but not gonna belabor it.
-
Survey questions like the old version. Call 10 cards (instead of the old 5) to win the game, $10K, and play the Money Cards with it for a chance at over $500,000.
A few relevant tweets:
https://twitter.com/buzzerblog/status/1122218457729249280
https://twitter.com/buzzerblog/status/1122220170150334466
-
My friend who attended the first taping on Friday said he had to wear a suit and tie and that the set is designed like a casino. Joel McHale talks to the audience. The first taping took about 2 and 1/2 hours. It's being taped at one of the newer studios at CBS Television City. So far everything I've read and heard is mostly positive.
-
Alex has a more detailed explanation on Twitter (buzzerblog)
I will look elsewhere, but thanks.
Here you go, and everyone else:
http://buzzerblog.com/2019/04/28/details-on-abcs-card-sharks-revival/
-
The only thing I'm not a fan of is the push counting as a loss. IMO, it should be just that, a push. No money won, no money lost. To me, getting down to the 6th card, betting it all on "Lower than an Ace", only to see another Ace and "Bust" is not a good look.
Then again, I guess it gives the show more of a gambling element...
-
Then again, I guess it gives the show more of a gambling element...
Not to mention working as a budget-saver.
-
The first taping took about 2 and 1/2 hours. It's being taped at one of the newer studios at CBS Television City Studios. So far everything I've read and heard is mostly positive.
It took that long for 1 30-minute episode? And FTFY.
Tyshaun
-
Not to mention working as a budget-saver.
Because God forbid that a game show should have budgetary constraints.
If I wasn't already I am on record saying that they could play the end game for $128,000 and it wouldn't lose anything--it would be well in line with Match Game and Pyramid, though I don't know what Press Your Luck is doing. I think it is stupefying to have a game show where someone could win $640,000 one episode and $4,000 the next. (Before I hear thirty people say "But Millionaire!" their initial prize kitty was funded by the phone game. The initial run of Card Sharks had very constrictive rules in the Money Cards because they had no idea how the game would play out. If the show finishes their run of engagement and they can make pushes a no change proposition in 2020 that's fine.
I am not totally sold on two rows of ten cards because I think it will be unwieldy and Scott St. John's vision of what game shows should be doesn't really jive with mine, but I'm not out and out dismissive of CS anymore.
-
The first taping took about 2 and 1/2 hours.
It took that long for 1 30-minute episode?
Hour-long episode.
-Jason
-
For the most part, this sounds like they’ve stayed pretty true to the classic format. The 5 question/10 card format seems odd, but I assume that’s to take care of the straddling issue. And I wish they’d kept the push rule, but I get the whole budget constraint thing, plus it’s not like this is an entirely new change. So I have no real complaints at this stage.
A few questions for anyone who’s in the know...
— Is this still 2 out of 3 games? I’d assume so, as the Q&A discussion seemingly would have to be awfully stretched out for it to be a single game. But I wasn’t entirely clear on that from the Buzzerblog article.
— If it is 2 of 3, is the third game shortened as in the classic versions? Or is it still 5 questions/10 cards?
— What were the questions like, content-wise? Fairly close to the original (albeit with 21st century sensibilities)? Or did they go full-on Harvey Feud?
— I know it’s airing for an hour, but is it essentially 2 back-to-back episodes that could be stripped later, as most of the other ABC revivals have been? Or did they stretch out one entire match (+Money Cards) to an hour?
-
— I know it’s airing for an hour, but is it essentially 2 back-to-back episodes that could be stripped later, as most of the other ABC revivals have been? Or did they stretch out one entire match (+Money Cards) to an hour?
The former. Two episodes with two contestants each.
-
— Is this still 2 out of 3 games? I’d assume so, as the Q&A discussion seemingly would have to be awfully stretched out for it to be a single game. But I wasn’t entirely clear on that from the Buzzerblog article.
No, it's 1 out of 1 game. Yes, the Q&A discussion is stretched out. (So is the Money Cards discussion.)
— What were the questions like, content-wise? Fairly close to the original (albeit with 21st century sensibilities)? Or did they go full-on Harvey Feud?
Fairly close to the original, with both "survey" and "educated guess" questions.
-
No, it's 1 out of 1 game. Yes, the Q&A discussion is stretched out. (So is the Money Cards discussion.)
But at least it's a five-question game. My concern about chrome over content is not allayed, but it does sound like they're going to have the equivalent of a two-of-three match in one longer game, and I suppose that's OK. The fact that there is dialog during the Money Cards doesn't hit my happy place--that's supposed to be a quickfire round where there isn't lots of rumination or much in the way of comment unless something out of the ordinary happens. But then I have a >> button on my Tivo.
-
The fact that there is dialog during the Money Cards doesn't hit my happy place.
I think Card Sharks is one of those games where the end game is a bigger draw than the front, so giving it more time makes sense (also it's 2019--everything is drawn out and dramatic). I just wonder if the sacrifices made to give it extra time don't reduce front game to "who gets sudden death right so they can pass."
-
I have just come from a taping and, rest assured, this is an excellent production. You have to modify your Endless Games home game to play this version but it can be done.
There was one glitch during the first of the two episodes I saw. Even though this situation will probably be edited out, the spoiler is for people who want to surprised by the rule changes. The players cut their respective decks on camera at the beginning of the game to see who gains control of the first question. Both players cut to their nines creating a tie. No one told the host that the contestants were supposed to set those cards aside and cut again so they stopped tape. When taping resumed the contestants cut again but one of them cut to the blank card used to keep them from seeing the bottom of their decks.
-
How was the hosting?
-
Thanks BrandonFG, trainman, and alphonzos for the info.
But at least it's a five-question game. My concern about chrome over content is not allayed, but it does sound like they're going to have the equivalent of a two-of-three match in one longer game, and I suppose that's OK. The fact that there is dialog during the Money Cards doesn't hit my happy place--that's supposed to be a quickfire round where there isn't lots of rumination or much in the way of comment unless something out of the ordinary happens. But then I have a >> button on my Tivo.
I just wonder if the sacrifices made to give it extra time don't reduce front game to "who gets sudden death right so they can pass."
I agree with both of these statements almost entirely. With the information we have, it sounds like the Money Cards may have been injected with a Deal or No Deal virus, so to speak, where we’ll be getting long, drawn out talk-throughs and overdramatized reveals. As TLEberle said, the MC should be more rapid fire, IMHO.
That said, the response from the online game show community folks who have seen a taping has been largely positive. So I’m keeping an open mind.
-
The game could end after one question or could go as long as five questions. Each episode will take longer than an half-hour to tape and be edited down to twenty two minutes in post production.
-
The game could end after one question or could go as long as five questions. Each episode will take longer than an half-hour to tape and be edited down to twenty two minutes in post production.
Yeah, what if you get someone incredibly lucky who does run all ten in one shot? Doubt it'll happen, but yeah.
Some more nitpicky questions: anyone got word about the card art? 1978-1989 style cards (as seen on GS Marathon as well, more or less) or something new?
So we're getting a remix or soundalike of the classic theme. Soundalike NBC sound effects too, or some borrowed off of PIR like ABC's Match Game (and of course MG7x) which would make it like Eubanks'?
/Doubt they share the losing horns as liberally as they did in the 70s and 80s though.
-
Yeah, what if you get someone incredibly lucky who does run all ten in one shot? Doubt it'll happen, but yeah.
Musical guest.
-
Yeah, what if you get someone incredibly lucky who does run all ten in one shot? Doubt it'll happen, but yeah.
Musical guest.
Didn't Jeopardy do that once during a Seniors Tournament match that ran short?
-
I was goofing--nobody should be running all ten cards in a single turn. Even if they get a fantastic run it would be prudent to bank at the halfway point just in case. The point of a ten card row is to approximate the timing of a regular match from the old days without having the variability of maybe ending in as few as two or as many as eleven questions.
-
I wouldn't be surprised if the contestant release has a provision that the producer has the discretion to throw out a game that is played too quickly, and just pay out the $10,000 prize. If that were the case, I would expect there to be at least a privately agreed limit, such as a minimum of 3 hands, with the S&P folks. Although the cost of deadheading a game (the production time being much more than the prize) is expensive, it is not unprecedented (Million Dollar Password and a scrapped round of Press Your Luck immediately come to mind).
-
Some more nitpicky questions: anyone got word about the card art? 1978-1989 style cards (as seen on GS Marathon as well, more or less) or something new?
New designs (both front and back).
-
I will be interesting to see if contestants try to run all 10 in one shot. I could not figuare out a formula for the odds of making through all 10 without an automatic loss or push. I was wondering the odds you can't make it across in one shot even if you were perfect on calling high and low.
So I just got a deck ofcards and while watching tv, schuffled and cut them after each attempt. Of 50 tries, 23 had a push somewhere in 10 cards, 27 did not. So assuming 50 is a sufficient sample, your of odds of it be impossible in one shot are a little less than 50%>
-
So assuming 50 is a sufficient sample, your of odds of it be impossible in one shot are a little less than 50%>
It isn't. There are people here who are able to write Monte Carlo simulators that can run hundreds of thousands of iterations of your questions so that the vagaries of chance are ironed out.
Assuming that we're only looking at duplicates and not incorrect guesses, I came up with:
1-{[12/13]^9} = 0.513435
as the chance that a contestant will run into a pair in nine calls of the cards. This assumes every call is its own event with an infinitely-sized deck and so not exact, but it's a start. And again that says nothing of guessing wrong or freezing.
-
continued from previous post:
As to whether people will try to make a perfect run---my guess is unless the cards fall perfectly, no. It is much more advantageous to be one or two cards away from victory going into sudden death than to have had four shots at winning and having made no progress other than maybe changing the base card each time. The other problem is that if Card Sharks takes a page from The Cross-wits and says the person who wins the first question can win a car by executing a perfect run, if that pays off there is a whole lot of stalling in that episode as they have two or three segments with absolutely nothing to do, except maybe drag out the Money Cards.
-
As posited by Game Show Theory, 101 viable strategies exist for this revival in the Money Cards, with regards to 'best' strategy. No one solution will fit all for various risk tolerances, but that's why such a great number of concepts exist. You can go for the extremely conservative concept of minimum wagers every go, to assure yourself of $350, with an average value of $1,020.95, sd=$311.38, with a zero bust percentage, since there's so little you're actively choosing to put on the line. On the other side of the extremist coin, hyper-aggression gives you a $5,350 minimum with a $10,216.55 average and sd of $6,816.24, assuming your 10.23% bust chance doesn't happen! This assumes this blogger has the figures right from this edition, but I've always known Dave to be reliable.
Given this raw data, I made the equation of Optimal Wagers, OW, is equal to X*(1-Y). X is the expected end value/money within 1sd, or 84.4% of simulations. Y is the bust percentage, already in decimal form. Then I sorted my data by highest to lowest to factor this in. So, while a decent risk exists employing this strategy, at an 18.57 bust clip percentage, the end value is $4,917.66, leaving you with a target minimum averaging $3,475. To achieve this, bet 30% of your existing pot on 7/9, 60% on 6/10, 90% on 5/Jack, 100% on 4, 3, 2, Queen, King, and Ace. 8s, well, you pass if you can.
-
As posited by Game Show Theory, 101 viable strategies exist for this revival in the Money Cards, with regards to 'best' strategy. No one solution will fit all for various risk tolerances, but that's why such a great number of concepts exist. You can go for the extremely conservative concept of minimum wagers every go, to assure yourself of $350, with an average value of $1,020.95, sd=$311.38, with a zero bust percentage, since there's so little you're actively choosing to put on the line. On the other side of the extremist coin, hyper-aggression gives you a $5,350 minimum with a $10,216.55 average and sd of $6,816.24, assuming your 10.23% bust chance doesn't happen! This assumes this blogger has the figures right from this edition, but I've always known Dave to be reliable.
Given this raw data, I made the equation of Optimal Wagers, OW, is equal to X*(1-Y). X is the expected end value/money within 1sd, or 84.4% of simulations. Y is the bust percentage, already in decimal form. Then I sorted my data by highest to lowest to factor this in. So, while a decent risk exists employing this strategy, at an 18.57 bust clip percentage, the end value is $4,917.66, leaving you with a target minimum averaging $3,475. To achieve this, bet 30% of your existing pot on 7/9, 60% on 6/10, 90% on 5/Jack, 100% on 4, 3, 2, Queen, King, and Ace. 8s, well, you pass if you can.
That doesn't sound right- If what we've been hearing about the MC is right (10K to start, 6 total bets, 1K minimum first 5 bets, 6th Big Bet optional but if you play minimum half your money), if you go minimum every time and miss (and decide to play the Big Bet card and miss) it should be $2,500 left...
10K-(1K*5)-2,500 (Big Bet)=2,500
-
What does it all mean?
-
Here's a view of the setup of the "Money Cards," board, and the excellent casino look:
https://www.facebook.com/buzzerblog/photos/a.383598448492/10157200301178493/?type=3&theater
-
Buzzerblog == hard pass.
-
Just stumbled across what appears to be an actual video promo for the show:
https://vimeo.com/337304139
-
Is it just me or do the Money Cards look CG?
-
I was thinking a monitor, but apparently they’re actual cards.
-
I was thinking a monitor, but apparently they’re actual cards.
Thanks Brandon.
-
I was thinking a monitor, but apparently they’re actual cards.
More than apparently -- I can definitely confirm they're actual cards.
-
I was thinking a monitor, but apparently they’re actual cards.
More than apparently -- I can definitely confirm they're actual cards.
Thank you sir!