The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: TravisP on January 04, 2007, 09:13:33 AM
-
According to Challenge, Sony are after contestants to take part in a UK version of Pyramid. Which from the listing it will feature Donny Osmond. Looks like a US duplicate for the British audience then.
http://www.challenge.co.uk/getinvolved/ (http://\"http://www.challenge.co.uk/getinvolved/\")
-
You have my deepest sympathy. I never thought it was possible to screw up The $XXX,000 Pyramid, but Sony somehow found a way to do it with Pyramid in my eyes. Here's hoping you guys can fix some of the issues I felt our game had, like the Winner's Circle which was a bit too easy, the really bad tournaments, and, hmm, maybe a set that's more than steal beams.
-
Donny Osmond? Wouldn't brother Jimmy, that "Long-Haired Lover from Liverpool" have more marquee value for GB?
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'142123\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 02:58 PM\']
Donny Osmond? Wouldn't brother Jimmy, that "Long-Haired Lover from Liverpool" have more marquee value for GB?
[/quote]
Jimmy did quite well in I'm a Celeb a few years ago, but Donny has been a regular on the chat show circuit over here for aaaaaaggges and is the bigger name, so it makes sense really.
-
Didn't British television already screw up the Pyramid once? This just proves that y'all are gluttons for punishment. :)
/Oh, right. And you boil meat, too.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'142135\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 05:20 PM\']
Didn't British television already screw up the Pyramid once? This just proves that y'all are gluttons for punishment. :)[/quote]
Yep, it began as a segment in a much bigger everning extravaganza hosted by Bruce Forsyth in 1978 (The £1,000 Pyramid, as part of Bruce's Big Night), next year became a segment in The Steve Jones Games Show, and then was on and off (mainly off) throughout the eighties, finally ending in 1991. It was hosted by the same guy throughout.
/Oh, right. And you boil meat, too.
And do you know what? It's LOVELY.
-
[quote name=\'Brig Bother\' post=\'142137\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 09:49 AM\']
And do you know what? It's LOVELY.
[/quote]
Boiling meat as a preparatory action to something else (say, boiling country-style ribs to get the fat off, then broiling or grilling them" is just fine with me. Boiling and serving it directly, not so much. :)
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'142139\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 05:51 PM\']
Boiling meat as a preparatory action to something else (say, boiling country-style ribs to get the fat off, then broiling or grilling them" is just fine with me. Boiling and serving it directly, not so much. :)
[/quote]
Well we wouldn't boil everything, obviously. But a proper slab of bacon? Lovely!
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'142139\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 12:51 PM\']Boiling meat as a preparatory action to something else (say, boiling country-style ribs to get the fat off, then broiling or grilling them" is just fine with me. Boiling and serving it directly, not so much. :)[/quote]
The reason I boil my chuck roast is to make broth for egg noodles. I've rarely had better.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'142135\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 01:20 PM\']
Didn't British television already screw up the Pyramid once? This just proves that y'all are gluttons for punishment. :)[/quote]
Hey, they could've brought John Davidson out of mothballs just for the Brits!
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'142135\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 01:20 PM\']
Didn't British television already screw up the Pyramid once? This just proves that y'all are gluttons for punishment. :)[/quote]
Hey, they could've brought John Davidson out of mothballs just for the Brits!
John know all the rules to Pyramid verbatim today as well he did 15 years ago! And I challenge anyone out there to prove me otherwise!
-
[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'142121\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 10:17 AM\']
Here's hoping you guys can fix some of the issues I felt our game had, like the Winner's Circle which was a bit too easy, the really bad tournaments, and, hmm, maybe a set that's more than steal beams.
[/quote]
Were these the main criticisms that the show had during its run? I wasn't around here then. I'll agree about the tournaments.
-
I wasn't really involved in this forum at the time, so I truly have no idea. For me, the issues were that the Circle was far too easy, the celebrities (for the most part) weren't that good, the music blew, the set blew, the tournaments blew, and I think they could have had far better hosting choices. Really, the only part I liked was toughening up the main game the bit, but the difficulty seemed to flip flop between the main game and the Circle. I don't know what the opinion was here, maybe some of the older members could fill us in, because I am curious as well. I should probably search.
-
The main issue I had with the show is they took the focus off the game/contestants and focused too much on the celebrities and whatever project they had going on at the time.
That, and the Winner's Circle blew.
-
[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'142160\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 04:32 PM\']
The main issue I had with the show is they took the focus off the game/contestants and focused too much on the celebrities and whatever project they had going on at the time.
That, and the Winner's Circle blew.
[/quote]
In addition, you never had the same set of celebrities doing a whole week.
Granted, you had some no-name B, C & D-listed dogs in the celebrity mix during the syndicated 100K run that you had to endure for 5 days in a row, but that (along with returning contestants) allowed consistency and you knew the shows were running in some sort of order.
-
The judging was all over the place, the way-too-cutesy main game categories, bad pacing, seventeen camera angles in the Winner's Circle . . .
(. . . celebrity "briefing", "Things Tom Cruise's Dentist Would Say", "buddy", no buildup to the Super Six . . .)
-
[quote name=\'TimK2003\' post=\'142164\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 04:10 PM\']
[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'142160\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 04:32 PM\']
The main issue I had with the show is they took the focus off the game/contestants and focused too much on the celebrities and whatever project they had going on at the time.
That, and the Winner's Circle blew.
[/quote]
In addition, you never had the same set of celebrities doing a whole week.
Granted, you had some no-name B, C & D-listed dogs in the celebrity mix during the syndicated 100K run that you had to endure for 5 days in a row, but that (along with returning contestants) allowed consistency and you knew the shows were running in some sort of order.
[/quote]
At that point in Pyramistory, you could have a C-list celeb, but you were damn sure they could play the game well.
One of my major gripes in Donnymid's time was , you had only one episode as a contestant to play, and to win serious coin, you had to climb the pyramid twice.
Good luck doing 'that' with Jillian Barberie or Estelle Harris, or many others that barely qualified as 'celebrities'.
If I had to pay my own way to be a contestant, then showed up on tape day to find out that I'd be playing with Jillian, I would have hunted down executive consulatant Harry Friedman and had a few words .
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'142173\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 05:50 PM\']
One of my major gripes in Donnymid's time was , you had only one episode as a contestant to play, and to win serious coin, you had to climb the pyramid twice.[/quote]
I didn't know $10,000 wasn't "serious coin." Besides, I never really liked how you get rewarded for losing WC's in the 70's and 80's.
Whenever there's a discussion about likes and dislikes (....okay, just dislikes) about Donnymid, it makes me wish I could see some of the early 10K or Cullen shows because I think those would be the most comparable products: 10K for skill level and Cullen for formatting. Then I might be able to see just why you people think it's such a gawd-awful product. I admit it wasn't great, but it wasn't horrible.
I have this feeling that UK Pyramid isn't going to be a carbon copy. I'm probably wrong.
-
The others summed up the same gripes I had. It was a decent effort that needed lots of work, both with the rules and aesthetics.
-The several camera angles...why not just stick to a static shot of celeb and contestant? It's a game show, not MTV
-Too much celebrity pimpage
-Revolving celebs and contestants killed the consistency IMO. Why not give the celebs the chance to get better during the week, and maybe even get a good chemistry with the contestants?
-The set...Pyramid is a suspenseful game show, but it's natural suspense. You don't need dark mood lighting to build up the drama. Save that mess for Millionaire
-The "theme song"...is this a rave or a game show?
On a 1-10 scale, it got a 6. Was something I'd watch if nothing else was on. Meh.
-
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'142185\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 04:42 PM\']
Besides, I never really liked how you get rewarded for losing WC's in the 70's and 80's.
[/quote]
In the 70's? Okay. In the 80's? You're being rewarded for winning the front game. And you're a fool if you try to duck ANY Winner's Circle, since how you do there was what decided if you got to come back the next day.
-
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'142185\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 07:42 PM\']
I didn't know $10,000 wasn't "serious coin." Besides, I never really liked how you get rewarded for losing WC's in the 70's and 80's.
[/quote]
I don't know what you mean by "got rewarded for losing WC's"...you get consolation money for every category you identified. It's fair enough, and Osmond's show did the same thing.
Whenever there's a discussion about likes and dislikes (....okay, just dislikes) about Donnymid, it makes me wish I could see some of the early 10K or Cullen shows because I think those would be the most comparable products: 10K for skill level and Cullen for formatting. Then I might be able to see just why you people think it's such a gawd-awful product. I admit it wasn't great, but it wasn't horrible.
I have this feeling that UK Pyramid isn't going to be a carbon copy. I'm probably wrong.
I don't think anyone felt the show was horrible, but to say it compares to the prior versions (not counting Davidson) would be horribly wrong. Like I said above, it needed work. It wasn't Card Sharks 01 bad, but it wasn't a masterpiece either.
They got it right in the 70s and 80s. Why they couldn't do what worked then (with a 2002 update) is beyond me, and that's the problem I have with many 2000s revivals. Producers try too hard to modernize the show, and it looks like an episode of TRL.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'142191\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 04:49 PM\']
I don't know what you mean by "got rewarded for losing WC's"...you get consolation money for every category you identified. It's fair enough, and Osmond's show did the same thing.
[/quote]
I think what he's saying is that if you duck the first WC, then you're actually playing for more money if you make it to the second one then you would be if you won it.
Unsurprisingly, this reflects a significant lack of reasoning on his part, as well as an utter inability to see the big picture.
-
One could argue (not very strongly) that it's not the best aesthetic. A player who wins their second Winner's Circle of the day is always going to get the same money that the "better" player who won both Winner's Circles gets. But that has nothing at all to do with an individual contestant's reward for doing well.
-
Good discussion on the overall scoring issues that were a minor issue in every version of the Pyramid (Thanks Bob for being so spendy!)...
But to clarify my own post, I was referring to the fact that to make it to the tournament for 100K (Is 'that' serious coin enough for you, Joe? Sheesh), you had to go 2 for 2 in the Winners Circle in one show. That's it, no other tries allowed.
Someone who had Mary Cadorette as a partner could do it. Someone with Jillian Barberie could not. It was a big flaw in the 2002 scoring system.
/Would love to have Mary Cadorette as a partner.
//Yep, that kind.
///Oh what the hell, same could be said for Jillian.
////If I had a muzzle handy.
/////For her, not me, dumbass.
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'142208\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 10:15 PM\']
But to clarify my own post, I was referring to the fact that to make it to the tournament for 100K (Is 'that' serious coin enough for you, Joe? Sheesh), you had to go 2 for 2 in the Winners Circle in one show. That's it, no other tries allowed.
Someone who had Mary Cadorette as a partner could do it. Someone with Jillian Barberie could not. It was a big flaw in the 2002 scoring system.
[/quote]
Also, if the first Winner's Circle wasn't won, it pretty much made the whole second half of the show pointless. There's no competition to see who the "champion" will be, since neither of these contestants can ever come back.
-
[quote name=\'Fedya\' post=\'142232\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 08:51 PM\']
Also, if the first Winner's Circle wasn't won, it pretty much made the whole second half of the show pointless. There's no competition to see who the "champion" will be, since neither of these contestants can ever come back.
[/quote]
They play a second game, and the winner of that game gets a shot at $10,000.
Where in the HELL is that pointless?
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'142234\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 09:24 PM\']
[quote name=\'Fedya\' post=\'142232\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 08:51 PM\']
Also, if the first Winner's Circle wasn't won, it pretty much made the whole second half of the show pointless. There's no competition to see who the "champion" will be, since neither of these contestants can ever come back.[/quote]They play a second game, and the winner of that game gets a shot at $10,000.
Where in the HELL is that pointless?
[/quote]Maybe a case can be made for the fact that if no one wins $10k in the first act, $25k won't be won in the second, and thus no $100k chance exists. But Chris is right. I wouldn't turn down a single chance to win $10,000, even if I knew that I was missing out on up to $115,000 more. $10k is a nice safety net in the bank account, I assure you.
The one thing that I found tolerable about the 2002 iteration of Pyramid was that whole thing. But if you don't hace a chance to come back and do it again on the next show, there's really no point. I'm surprised Mr. Stewart didn't think of that when he had the nighttime $25k running.
-
OK, I'm trying to picture what the UK version looks like. Trouble is, it's just exactly what Donnymid looked like in 2002. The Brits can have that version & screw with it as they please. Besides, our last version wasn't even as close to what Pyramid was back in the day.
Now that Donny's off to England, where's it goona leave the revival of NTT? Up in the air? Dead in the water? Gee I hope not on both counts.
-
I don't think Donny running off to England for a few weeks would hurt the NTT revival ... Brit "series" are usually shorter, and if Donny and the crew hustle, they can get one done in a couple of weeks.
-
OK, I'll go ahead and join in on the ass-kicking Osmond's Pyramid. :-) The Brits are in for a real treat! Hehe.
I, for one, hated the TV screens. I think most of the people who WOULD have watched Pyramid (and thus made it a ratings winner) actually like the trilons. I don't understand modernizing things for the sake of modernizing itself. But this is not a matter of opinion -- I'm sure there are those who liked the TV screens. By the way, I didn't bitch and moan when Vanna got the touch-screens -- I'm all for updating if it ADDS to the game, which the touch screens did, by introducing Toss-Ups, which spread the money around more. But the "trilons in the Winner's Circle" thing is such a part of pop culture ("Things that are Comcastic", anyone?) that I think having graphics of "What Tom Cruise Might Say" superimposed on the screen made it seem slightly.......sterile. Not friendly. Yes, to who said it seemed like TRL.
Also, the Winner's Circle was all about drama. This is why the show was successful. The damn clock added all the drama in the world on the 80's versions! In the Osmond version, when they put in a SILENT clock but with very yucky sounding synthesized music underneath it, the whole thing just seemed very....hollow.
And don't even get me started on how dense the celebs were, and how iffy the judging was. I loved how strict the Clark/Davidson versions were -- they watched you like a freaking hawk. "Sag" for "droop"? ZAP. "Revolver" fpr "Parts of a Gun"? ZAP. I saw an eppy of the Clark version today when Nathan Cook started to move a bit in the WC on "What a Belly Dancer Might Say". Of course, he got zapped. I think the Osmond Pyramid's judge would have let Nathan do an entire hula dance (and they would have provided the music! LOL).
They could have done it right, but they screwed everything up. I'm exactly the kind of demo they want too, and one who would be inclined to watch their show: a 18-49 male with expendable income who loves freaking game shows. But even *I* couldn't care about this version. I watched it for Vicki Lawrence and Dick Clark, and that was about all I could stand. Adios, amigo.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'142234\' date=\'Jan 5 2007, 12:24 AM\']
[quote name=\'Fedya\' post=\'142232\' date=\'Jan 4 2007, 08:51 PM\']
Also, if the first Winner's Circle wasn't won, it pretty much made the whole second half of the show pointless. There's no competition to see who the "champion" will be, since neither of these contestants can ever come back.
[/quote]
They play a second game, and the winner of that game gets a shot at $10,000.
Where in the HELL is that pointless?
[/quote]
Well, pointless for the viewer (or at least, this viewer). I would compare it to the few cases where the $100K in the tournament was won in the first half of a show, and the second main game/WC was played by the two losing contestants for a shot at $10K. Sure, it's nice for them, but I never found it very meaningful for the home audience.
-
[quote name=\'Fedya\' post=\'142264\' date=\'Jan 5 2007, 01:37 PM\']
Well, pointless for the viewer (or at least, this viewer). I would compare it to the few cases where the $100K in the tournament was won in the first half of a show, and the second main game/WC was played by the two losing contestants for a shot at $10K. Sure, it's nice for them, but I never found it very meaningful for the home audience.
[/quote]
"You can walk offstage with a bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken, or we'll give you a shot at $10,000."
"I'll take the chicken!"
-
[quote name=\'Fedya\' post=\'142264\' date=\'Jan 5 2007, 11:37 AM\']
Well, pointless for the viewer (or at least, this viewer). I would compare it to the few cases where the $100K in the tournament was won in the first half of a show, and the second main game/WC was played by the two losing contestants for a shot at $10K. Sure, it's nice for them, but I never found it very meaningful for the home audience.
[/quote]
Words fail me.
-
[quote name=\'Fedya\' post=\'142264\' date=\'Jan 5 2007, 02:37 PM\']
Well, pointless for the viewer (or at least, this viewer). I would compare it to the few cases where the $100K in the tournament was won in the first half of a show, and the second main game/WC was played by the two losing contestants for a shot at $10K. Sure, it's nice for them, but I never found it very meaningful for the home audience.
[/quote]
I don't know how much longer I can stand this symphony of ridiculousness. You're probably the kind of person who thinks Janice, Dian & Holly should drop by studio 33 for Barker's last show, too.
-
The important thing here is that we don't know anything about this incarnation other than it's "Pyramid," Donny's hosting it and it's going to be on the UK equivalent to GSN. Since the Brits seem to have a better grasp of what makes game shows work these days (the "TPIR" revival aside), this could be a lot better than some of you think.
However, if whoever holds the overseas format rights (Fremantle held the overseas format licensing rights last I saw) only gives the producers the bible and reference tapes of the last U.S. incarnation, then I could see trouble ahead.
-
Although I disagree with the second game being "pointless" if the first game ended in a $100K win, I do see where Fedya is coming from - it always seemed rather anticlimactic to me if the $100K was won during the first game, but in the second game, they play for $10,000, which by itself is great, but compared to $100,000 is not much at all. Equivalent to someone who's 6 ft. tall, who has been regarded as "tall", standing next to someone 7 ft. tall who makes him look short. In this day and age, $100,000 seems like nothing especially when much higher figures are tossed around, but back in the '80s when I originally watched it, seeing someone win $10,000 vs. $100,000 was a MASSIVE difference.
-
I'm just having fun thinking of all the game shows we should be turning off early because they've become "pointless to the viewer".
"That guy only got $250 in the Audience Match on MGPM? Well, screw this! What else is on?"
-
[quote name=\'aaron sica\' post=\'142281\' date=\'Jan 5 2007, 02:01 PM\']
Although I disagree with the second game being "pointless" if the first game ended in a $100K win, I do see where Fedya is coming from - it always seemed rather anticlimactic to me if the $100K was won during the first game, but in the second game, they play for $10,000, which by itself is great, but compared to $100,000 is not much at all.
[/quote]
Unless you'd rather Dick and the celebrities do a little soft-shoe for the second half of the show, do you have a better idea?
Ted's point, wholesale, was that if there wasn't a chance for someone to win $25,000 on the Osmond show, then the show was pointless, because apparently giving someone the chance to win $10,000 Just Isn't Enough. Which is ridiculous.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'142286\' date=\'Jan 5 2007, 02:14 PM\']
[quote name=\'aaron sica\' post=\'142281\' date=\'Jan 5 2007, 02:01 PM\']
Although I disagree with the second game being "pointless" if the first game ended in a $100K win, I do see where Fedya is coming from - it always seemed rather anticlimactic to me if the $100K was won during the first game, but in the second game, they play for $10,000, which by itself is great, but compared to $100,000 is not much at all.
[/quote]
Unless you'd rather Dick...
[/quote]
Sounds like a plan to me. :)
In seriousness, his logic basically says there's no reason to watch the first game because it can only end in $10,000.
-
More news from Challenge
They are set to produce 30 X 30 minute episodes to be filmed at Fountain Studios in London (also used for PokerFace, X-Factor and previously the first series of 1 Vs 100). All of the shows will be given a primetime slot on the channel (between 7pm-10pm) and set to run weekdaily from 7th May 2007.
No word on the format though but rumours are going around that its £5,000 for winning the Winners Circle once and £15,000 for winning twice.
-
[quote name=\'TravisP\' post=\'143893\' date=\'Jan 19 2007, 07:30 PM\']
No word on the format though but rumours are going around that its £5,000 for winning the Winners Circle once and £15,000 for winning twice.
[/quote]
As in the first trip is 5,000 pounds, and the second trip is an extra 10,000, or can you win 20,000 pounds total?
Sorry if that sounds smartassed, but that's a genuinely confusing rule (as it was in the States), and I just wanted to clarify.
/Is it possible to do a pound sign on U.S. computers?
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'143897\' date=\'Jan 19 2007, 04:35 PM\']
/Is it possible to do a pound sign on U.S. computers?
[/quote]
Yeah, two ways: you either install the British keyboard set in Windows (assuming your Keyboard Control Panel will let you - I can't seem to make the IntelliType one do it) and flop back and forth as needed, or you hold down the Alt key and type "0163" on the keypad. (SPECIFICALLY on the keypad.) The latter is probably easier for occasional use.
-
Alt+412 works as well.
-
It's not exactly certain but given Challenge is on a budget. I suspect it will be £15,000 maximum, also I can't see them doing a big money tournament. As they also have Take It or Leave It returning this year as well (possible £50,000 top prize).
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'143897\' date=\'Jan 20 2007, 12:35 AM\']
[quote name=\'TravisP\' post=\'143893\' date=\'Jan 19 2007, 07:30 PM\']
No word on the format though but rumours are going around that its £5,000 for winning the Winners Circle once and £15,000 for winning twice.
[/quote]
As in the first trip is 5,000 pounds, and the second trip is an extra 10,000, or can you win 20,000 pounds total?
Sorry if that sounds smartassed, but that's a genuinely confusing rule (as it was in the States), and I just wanted to clarify.
[/quote]
Crikey, is that really confusing? The smart money is as Travis says, £5k for one success, £10k for winning it the second time for £15k total. You fail the first time but win the second, you win £5k.
-
It's not confusing in and of itself, but it could be if it used the $25KP rules (for both '70s and '80s)--"first trip worth $10K, second trip worth a total of $25K, win or lose on the first trip".
-
[quote name=\'Brig Bother\' post=\'143957\' date=\'Jan 20 2007, 01:23 PM\']
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'143897\' date=\'Jan 20 2007, 12:35 AM\']
[quote name=\'TravisP\' post=\'143893\' date=\'Jan 19 2007, 07:30 PM\']
No word on the format though but rumours are going around that its £5,000 for winning the Winners Circle once and £15,000 for winning twice.
[/quote]
As in the first trip is 5,000 pounds, and the second trip is an extra 10,000, or can you win 20,000 pounds total?
Sorry if that sounds smartassed, but that's a genuinely confusing rule (as it was in the States), and I just wanted to clarify.
[/quote]
Crikey, is that really confusing? The smart money is as Travis says, £5k for one success, £10k for winning it the second time for £15k total. You fail the first time but win the second, you win £5k.
[/quote]
Um, that's why I asked. Excuse me for wanting a little clarification.
-
[quote name=\'Brig Bother\' post=\'143957\' date=\'Jan 20 2007, 10:23 AM\']
Crikey, is that really confusing? The smart money is as Travis says, £5k for one success, £10k for winning it the second time for £15k total. You fail the first time but win the second, you win £5k.
[/quote]
It's only confusing in that here in the States, they represented it much differently...you played for a total of $25K if you went to the Winner's Circle twice, regardless of whether you won the $10K the first time. So if you won the first time, then technically the second run was only worth $15K, but if you didn't, it was worth $25K.
If you're right, yours is a much more straightforward system.
-
In which case, I'm the one in the wrong here, sorry. I always thought Donnymid was $10k for one win, $25k for winning both. Wow.
-
[quote name=\'Brig Bother\' post=\'143983\' date=\'Jan 20 2007, 02:28 PM\']
In which case, I'm the one in the wrong here, sorry. I always thought Donnymid was $10k for one win, $25k for winning both. Wow.
[/quote]
That's how Donnymid worked. The Clark Pyramid was the more confusing one.
-
Here...to end all.
Clark $25K/$100K (non-turnament):
- First attempt: $10,000
- Second attempt, regardless of first won or not: $25,000 (If I remember correctly, if you win both, you only win $25K)
Donnymid:
- First attempt: $10,000
- Second attempt, if first is NOT won: $10,000
- Second attempt, if first IS won: $15,000 added on for $25K
-
[quote name=\'whoserman\' post=\'143984\' date=\'Jan 20 2007, 05:31 PM\']
[quote name=\'Brig Bother\' post=\'143983\' date=\'Jan 20 2007, 02:28 PM\']
In which case, I'm the one in the wrong here, sorry. I always thought Donnymid was $10k for one win, $25k for winning both. Wow.
[/quote]
That's how Donnymid worked. The Clark Pyramid was the more confusing one.
[/quote]
If there's anything I liked about Donnymid (there were a few), it's the fact that when someone won both Winners Circles, they'd flash a "$15,000" graphic for a few seconds, then flash "$25,000". I guess they realized that simply flashing "$25,000" might make the viewers think someone actually won $35,000.
Glad we got this all cleared up. :-)
-
[quote name=\'tpirfan28\' post=\'143987\' date=\'Jan 20 2007, 02:44 PM\']
Clark $25K/$100K (non-turnament):
- First attempt: $10,000
- Second attempt, regardless of first won or not: $25,000 (If I remember correctly, if you win both, you only win $25K)
[/quote]
If you win the 2nd WC, you only win $25K regardless of whether or not you won the 1st WC. The first WC total is wiped out.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'143900\' date=\'Jan 19 2007, 04:42 PM\']
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'143897\' date=\'Jan 19 2007, 04:35 PM\']
/Is it possible to do a pound sign on U.S. computers?
[/quote]
Yeah, two ways: you either install the British keyboard set in Windows (assuming your Keyboard Control Panel will let you - I can't seem to make the IntelliType one do it) and flop back and forth as needed, or you hold down the Alt key and type "0163" on the keypad. (SPECIFICALLY on the keypad.) The latter is probably easier for occasional use.
[/quote]
On a certain subset of "U.S. computers," the key combination Option+3 is all that's needed.
Fun fact: the pounds sterling symbol is part of the character set available in U.S. closed-captioning -- something I've always assumed comes from the role of PBS member station WGBH in the creation of captioning. If you're captioning programming imported from the U.K., you see, it helps quite a bit to be able to use £.
-
[quote name=\'trainman\' post=\'144015\' date=\'Jan 20 2007, 09:55 PM\']
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'143900\' date=\'Jan 19 2007, 04:42 PM\']
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'143897\' date=\'Jan 19 2007, 04:35 PM\']
/Is it possible to do a pound sign on U.S. computers?
[/quote]
Yeah, two ways: you either install the British keyboard set in Windows (assuming your Keyboard Control Panel will let you - I can't seem to make the IntelliType one do it) and flop back and forth as needed, or you hold down the Alt key and type "0163" on the keypad. (SPECIFICALLY on the keypad.) The latter is probably easier for occasional use.
[/quote]
On a certain subset of "U.S. computers," the key combination Option+3 is all that's needed.
Fun fact: the pounds sterling symbol is part of the character set available in U.S. closed-captioning -- something I've always assumed comes from the role of PBS member station WGBH in the creation of captioning. If you're captioning programming imported from the U.K., you see, it helps quite a bit to be able to use £.
[/quote]
I have a laptop computer that does not have a keypad. I guess I am SOL.
-
[quote name=\'rebelwrest\' post=\'144036\' date=\'Jan 21 2007, 01:09 AM\']I have a laptop computer that does not have a keypad. I guess I am SOL.[/quote]
No, you're not. Most laptops should have a function/fn key somewhere near the space bar. The keypad numbers are combinations of that function key and a letter or number on the keyboard. YMMV with this method.
The sure-fire way to get pound signs on a Windows PC is to open character map, click on the pound character, copy it to the clipboard, and paste it where needed.
-
[quote name=\'MikeK\' post=\'144060\' date=\'Jan 21 2007, 11:16 AM\']
The sure-fire way to get pound signs on a Windows PC is to open character map, click on the pound character, copy it to the clipboard, and paste it where needed.
[/quote]
I thought a pound sign was Shift+3. :)
I use Character Map all the time. For those who don't know where it is, on Windows PC's, go Start->(All) Programs->Accessories->System Tools->Character Map.