The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: nowhammies10 on June 03, 2021, 04:01:59 PM
-
Watching a rerun from the '80s, and had a question for the masses: the category was THINGS THAT ARE IRISH. Could the clue-giver put on an Irish brogue and say "This accent", in the same breath as "a four-leaf clover" and "Guinness"?
-
Yes to all of that.
-
Would "Notre Dame" be a legal clue for "Things that are Irish", in that their sports teams are nicknamed the Fighting Irish, or would that be buzzed as "does not fit the subject"?
-
Would "Notre Dame" be a legal clue for "Things that are Irish", in that their sports teams are nicknamed the Fighting Irish, or would that be buzzed as "does not fit the subject"?
I'd buzz it, but would allow "Notre Dame's football team" or "Notre Dame's fighters". Just Notre Dame in itself is not Irish, either when referring to the Indiana school or the French cathedral.
-
Would "Notre Dame" be a legal clue for "Things that are Irish", in that their sports teams are nicknamed the Fighting Irish, or would that be buzzed as "does not fit the subject"?
Buzz. Notre Dame in and of itself isn't Irish. You might be able to get away with "A Notre Dame football player".
That said, if I'm a judge for modern Pyramid I'm going to have the itchiest of trigger fingers when it comes to buzzing clues that just reference the word in the subject instead of actually satisfying it. One can only take so much "Leslie Nielsen's planet" and "Robin Thicke's lines" before it starts to feel like a lazy end-around.
-
Buzz. Notre Dame in and of itself isn't Irish. You might be able to get away with "A Notre Dame football player".
"Dublin. Certain whiskey. St. Patrick's Day."
Rather than coming up with clever ways to hint at the word in question, just give clues that point to the prompt and win the money. You won't have to worry about the judge's wrath either.
-
I am sure this incident has been discussed many times over the years. But, for the life of me, how the heck did the judges allow this clue https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSe_ve2uJls (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSe_ve2uJls)from Tony Randall in the 70's for the subject "Cotton Things" at 2:47?
-
They were much more lax in the 70s. That clue has always stood out to me.
-
I am sure this incident has been discussed many times over the years. But, for the life of me, how the heck did the judges allow this clue https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSe_ve2uJls (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSe_ve2uJls)from Tony Randall in the 70's for the subject "Cotton Things" at 2:47?
I cringed years ago. I cringed now. Way too descriptive.
-
I cringed years ago. I cringed now. Way too descriptive.
That said, would “little pill bottles’ stuffings” been acceptable? (I get that he used a preposition, but I don’t know if it’s “way” too descriptive. Just, too descriptive.)
-
I cringed years ago. I cringed now. Way too descriptive.
That said, would “little pill bottles’ stuffings” been acceptable? (I get that he used a preposition, but I don’t know if it’s “way” too descriptive. Just, too descriptive.)
I think so. I almost think his clue on the previous subject was more egregious. "A hoop on the street" for "Things you roll."
-
I think so. I almost think his clue on the previous subject was more egregious. "A hoop on the street" for "Things you roll."
I thought the same exact thing!
-
The judging was definitely less strict in the NYC episodes. I've seen this exchange in another WC with Tony:
Tony: Little Big Man...Midnight Cowboy...
Contestant: Kris Kristofferson movies?
Tony (quietly): You're close...
Contestant: Dustin Hoffman movies? *ding*
-
I wonder if they were concerned about the amount of time left and decided to be a little more loose with the judging because of it.