-
Were there ever times on "Sale Of The Century" in which a contestant ended up with zero dollars as a result of so many missed answers?
-
[quote name=\'kurtinrod62\' date=\'Feb 26 2005, 02:17 PM\']Were there ever times on "Sale Of The Century" in which a contestant ended up with zero dollars as a result of so many missed answers?[/quote]
While I can't say I'm 100% sure; I'm sure they did; and in that case; I believe they had to sit on the next question.
-
[quote name=\'kurtinrod62\' date=\'Feb 26 2005, 02:17 PM\']Were there ever times on "Sale Of The Century" in which a contestant ended up with zero dollars as a result of so many missed answers?
[snapback]76306[/snapback]
[/quote]
At least once that I saw during the 1983-89 version. When this happened, the readout would not have a 0. Instead, it would be blank. But the player didn't have to sit out for a question. Not in the 1980s version. During the Kelly/Garagiola era, that knocked you out of the game.
-
[quote name=\'Modor\' date=\'Feb 26 2005, 12:18 PM\']While I can't say I'm 100% sure; I'm sure they did; and in that case; I believe they had to sit on the next question.
[snapback]76307[/snapback]
[/quote]
I'm pretty sure you're wrong. I wanna say I saw it happen once, and Jim mentioned something to the effect of not being able to go below 0, and in fact when they got their next right answer, they went back up to five bones.
-
In an episode with former ATGS'er Tom Gauer, contestant Jas, was at 0 for several questions. This was due to buzzing in before Perry barely said 2 words.
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Feb 26 2005, 02:50 PM\'][quote name=\'kurtinrod62\' date=\'Feb 26 2005, 02:17 PM\']Were there ever times on "Sale Of The Century" in which a contestant ended up with zero dollars as a result of so many missed answers?
[snapback]76306[/snapback]
[/quote]
At least once that I saw during the 1983-89 version. When this happened, the readout would not have a 0. Instead, it would be blank. But the player didn't have to sit out for a question. Not in the 1980s version. During the Kelly/Garagiola era, that knocked you out of the game.
[snapback]76309[/snapback]
[/quote]
It seemed to me that in the one instance I saw on the original of this happening, the player was then staked with another $20--although his/her opponents were also given $20. This was the standard rule on "SOTC"'s affiliated show (since I believe Ronnie Greenberg was listed as a producer or consultant) "The Who, What or Where Game," except that the stake on that show was $125.
-
[quote name=\'uncamark\' date=\'Feb 28 2005, 06:14 PM\'][quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Feb 26 2005, 02:50 PM\'][quote name=\'kurtinrod62\' date=\'Feb 26 2005, 02:17 PM\']Were there ever times on "Sale Of The Century" in which a contestant ended up with zero dollars as a result of so many missed answers?
[snapback]76306[/snapback]
[/quote]
At least once that I saw during the 1983-89 version. When this happened, the readout would not have a 0. Instead, it would be blank. But the player didn't have to sit out for a question. Not in the 1980s version. During the Kelly/Garagiola era, that knocked you out of the game.
[snapback]76309[/snapback]
[/quote]
It seemed to me that in the one instance I saw on the original of this happening, the player was then staked with another $20--although his/her opponents were also given $20.[snapback]76534[/snapback]
[/quote]
I'm skeptical about this one. That's like rewarding a player for answering incorrectly. If you have a score, you lose 5. If you don't, you get 20 for hitting 0. That would also help the champion too much in their quest for the next prize level. I do recall Celebrity Sweepstakes contestants being given $2 if they hit $0 with the other player getting an extra $2 as well.
-
I swear I remember seeing a player get knocked down all the way to $0 on the Perry version, and subsequently being eliminated from the game... I could be wrong, though. Wish I had a name to give y'all.
-
The Celebrity Sweepstakes rule was a good one since the minimum bet was $2 anyways. Not only did a player's score got reset at $2 from $0, it also was reset to $3 from $1 to keep the minimum bet available for all players. Never seen something like on SotC but it sure would've been odd to see everyone's scores go up by $20.
-
[quote name=\'Craig Karlberg\' date=\'Mar 2 2005, 03:36 AM\']The Celebrity Sweepstakes rule was a good one since the minimum bet was $2 anyways. Not only did a player's score got reset at $2 from $0, it also was reset to $3 from $1 to keep the minimum bet available for all players. Never seen something like on SotC but it sure would've been odd to see everyone's scores go up by $20.
[snapback]76706[/snapback]
[/quote]
The pilot on the trading circuit had the rule that any contestant who ended up with a zero score would be a spectator(as Jim McKrell put it) for the rest of the show.
-
I do recall Celebrity Sweepstakes contestants being given $2 if they hit $0 with the other player getting an extra $2 as well.
"Celebrity Sweepstakes" also had a strange rule that if a contestant's score dropped below $10, they could only bet $2 until they built it back up again (the bets on that show were $2, $5 and $10 on each question). When they started out they had three contestants, but downgraded to two later in the run. If a contestant hit $0, they were given some more money to play with - and the other contestant that same amount.
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Mar 2 2005, 09:07 AM\']
I do recall Celebrity Sweepstakes contestants being given $2 if they hit $0 with the other player getting an extra $2 as well.
If a contestant hit $0, they were given some more money to play with - and the other contestant that same amount.
[snapback]76711[/snapback]
[/quote]
Is there an echo in here?
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Mar 2 2005, 09:07 AM\']Is there an echo in here?
[snapback]76720[/snapback]
[/quote]
Naw, sorry, that was me. Musta been the gazpacho. :)
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Mar 2 2005, 09:07 AM\']
I do recall Celebrity Sweepstakes contestants being given $2 if they hit $0 with the other player getting an extra $2 as well.
"Celebrity Sweepstakes" also had a strange rule that if a contestant's score dropped below $10, they could only bet $2 until they built it back up again (the bets on that show were $2, $5 and $10 on each question).
[snapback]76711[/snapback]
[/quote]
That rule was not there in the beginning--I believe it was added shortly before Ralph Andrews gave half the rights to Burt Sugarman and Carol Wayne's daily double became a regular feature of the show. I guess it was there to try to keep the players from going for broke too fast.
-
The thing that bothers me about the $5 bet being "out of play" if a player's score is < $10 is that even though their score may say $7 or even $5 & they can't bet $5? That's wierd! You'd think that that bet would be available in such situations. I guess they wanted the player to "gradually" work their way back into the flow of the game