The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: Strikerz04 on June 09, 2008, 07:54:22 PM
-
After looking at many classic $ale, the Aussie Temptation, and our craptation episodes, the host normally offers an additional cash gift or a reduced bargain if the contestant buys. My question concerns whether the decisions to bargain or bribe are up to the decision of the producer or the host, or a combination of both?
-
[quote name=\'Strikerz04\' post=\'187792\' date=\'Jun 9 2008, 04:54 PM\']After looking at many classic $ale, the Aussie Temptation, and our craptation episodes, the host normally offers an additional cash gift or a reduced bargain if the contestant buys. My question concerns whether the decisions to bargain or bribe are up to the decision of the producer or the host, or a combination of both?[/quote]This is only One Man's Opinion, but I can't imagine something as important as the reduction of a bargain's cost or addition of cash would be left to the discretion of the host, or you'd see something like this:
"You're ahead only by $5, but I'd really like you to have that trip to Tahiti, so I'll knock the price from $18 to $3, and add $700 in cash."
Perhaps not that dire, but possible. My guess is that the producer was off in the wings with a cue card or equivalent.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'187824\' date=\'Jun 9 2008, 11:59 PM\']
Perhaps not that dire, but possible. My guess is that the producer was off in the wings with a cue card or equivalent.
[/quote]
I'm thinking even the IFB...best way I can describe it is an earpiece that viewers usually don't see (the earpiece is connected to a cord, usually tucked away under the suit jacket). All the producer has to do is give cues from the booth (or table).
Pure speculation, they most likely had a rundown of which bargains would be offered, no? Would said rundown mention the $ale price, and then maybe indicate which bargains Jim/Rossi could haggle on?
Forgive me if I ramble, I still haven't finished my coffee and I'm typing as much as I can before I get to work. :-P
-
I doubt that it's nearly as elaborate as cue cards or an IFB in the host's ear. More likely is that the host is told how far he can go beforehand, and at least with Jim Perry, probably had leeway on how to approach the deal within that maximum. I haven't watched a lot of Temptation (my market doesn't carry it) but my guess is that Rossi is on a shorter leash just because that's the way things are done today.
-
IIRC weren't the "bribes" a little higher when the champ was the bargainer and was close to the high levels at the final sale (the car,jackpot, the floor, etc.) It could be producer's discretion based on who the bargainer was.
Then again, my memory may be fuzzy!
-
[quote name=\'joker316\' post=\'187846\' date=\'Jun 10 2008, 10:15 AM\']
IIRC weren't the "bribes" a little higher when the champ was the bargainer and was close to the high levels at the final sale (the car,jackpot, the floor, etc.) It could be producer's discretion based on who the bargainer was.
Then again, my memory may be fuzzy!
[/quote]
Indeed. There's a clip on YouTube of a several-day champ who hadn't gone for a single IB during her entire run. Jim plays up the begging and pleading, and does everything short of making it rain, Pacman Jones-style, as he lays out the hundreds. I'm pretty sure she still didn't go for it, but no Flash on my work comp=me not being able to verify at this moment.
-
[quote name=\'Sodboy13\' post=\'187849\' date=\'Jun 10 2008, 11:40 AM\']
[quote name=\'joker316\' post=\'187846\' date=\'Jun 10 2008, 10:15 AM\']
IIRC weren't the "bribes" a little higher when the champ was the bargainer and was close to the high levels at the final sale (the car,jackpot, the floor, etc.) It could be producer's discretion based on who the bargainer was.
Then again, my memory may be fuzzy!
[/quote]
Indeed. There's a clip on YouTube of a several-day champ who hadn't gone for a single IB during her entire run. Jim plays up the begging and pleading, and does everything short of making it rain, Pacman Jones-style, as he lays out the hundreds. I'm pretty sure she still didn't go for it, but no Flash on my work comp=me not being able to verify at this moment.
[/quote]
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1obGNqv80Lw (http://\"http://youtube.com/watch?v=1obGNqv80Lw\")
She doesn't take it.
-
Ah yes. The world-famous Alice Conkwright, the lady who did not buy ONE instant bargain.
-
Okay, for those who have seen her run...is there any reason why she didn't take any bargains? Was she not good on the buzzer during speed rounds, and wanted to protect early leads? Or was it just a case of not wanting anything they peddled in front of ther?
-
[quote name=\'tpirfan28\' post=\'187889\' date=\'Jun 10 2008, 06:09 PM\']
Okay, for those who have seen her run...is there any reason why she didn't take any bargains? Was she not good on the buzzer during speed rounds, and wanted to protect early leads? Or was it just a case of not wanting anything they peddled in front of ther?
[/quote]
Haven't seen the run, but personally, I'm gonna play to win. That $6 or $7 purchase (give or take) could bite me in the rear end...lose, and you go home with just the couple hundred in your "account" and maybe the one or two bargains you bought.
Orrrrr.....
Highest card on the Fame Game board is what, $25? I'm up $20 and my opponent answers a Fame Game question and hits that $25 card, I might break a small sweat and pray that I do well in the Speed Round.
-
Something else to consider. Lot wins usually take 8 or 9 games. She won in 6.
-
[quote name=\'whoserman\' post=\'187894\' date=\'Jun 10 2008, 07:16 PM\']
Something else to consider. Lot wins usually take 8 or 9 games. She won in 6.
[/quote]
Which was fine with me because I couldn't stand her. It got her out of there faster.
-
[quote name=\'tpirfan28\' post=\'187889\' date=\'Jun 10 2008, 06:09 PM\']
Okay, for those who have seen her run...is there any reason why she didn't take any bargains? Was she not good on the buzzer during speed rounds, and wanted to protect early leads? Or was it just a case of not wanting anything they peddled in front of ther?
[/quote]
You'd think so, but there was no flaw in her game; she just played an extremely conservative strategy. All of her matches were blowouts. She was an extremely good player at every stage of the game. I was a little surprised to see Don say that he couldn't stand her. She was my favorite Sale champion. It was fun to see someone play the game as aggressively as it could be played.
Side note: On her first appearance, she ousted an excellent champion who was playing for the lot + cash jackpot.
-
[quote name=\'Stripey\' post=\'188066\' date=\'Jun 12 2008, 04:09 PM\']
[quote name=\'tpirfan28\' post=\'187889\' date=\'Jun 10 2008, 06:09 PM\']
Okay, for those who have seen her run...is there any reason why she didn't take any bargains? Was she not good on the buzzer during speed rounds, and wanted to protect early leads? Or was it just a case of not wanting anything they peddled in front of ther?
[/quote]
You'd think so, but there was no flaw in her game; she just played an extremely conservative strategy. All of her matches were blowouts. She was an extremely good player at every stage of the game. I was a little surprised to see Don say that he couldn't stand her. She was my favorite Sale champion. It was fun to see someone play the game as aggressively as it could be played.
Side note: On her first appearance, she ousted an excellent champion who was playing for the lot + cash jackpot.
[/quote]
Yes, but a better champion would have purchased all the instant bargains every time and also had enough every day to win the game. Part of the gimmick of $ale is that you can buy luxurious items for very little money. She never took advantage of that.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'188067\' date=\'Jun 12 2008, 03:34 PM\']Yes, but a better champion would have purchased all the instant bargains every time and also had enough every day to win the game. Part of the gimmick of $ale is that you can buy luxurious items for very little money. She never took advantage of that.
[/quote]
"Luxurious items" that you may not really want and come with tax burdens.
Personally, I thought Alice was a great champion. She came to win the lot. Period. No frills, no messing about. Her "All The Way or Bust" attitude (as well as some impressive victories) made Alice Conkright a personal favorite of mine.
/Yet, didn't the $otC staff refer to her as "spooky"?
-
[quote name=\'JRaygor\' post=\'188070\' date=\'Jun 12 2008, 05:40 PM\']
/Yet, didn't the $otC staff refer to her as "spooky"?[/quote]
Indeed. My taping was not too long after she had appeared, and despite her success, she was described (and frankly, ridiculed) by the coordinators as the kind of contestant they didn't want.
Incidentally, "Spooky Old Alice" was the term George Gobel used to describe his wife in his routines. No idea whether that's coincidental, but "spooky" does seem to be an odd choice of adjective.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'188067\' date=\'Jun 12 2008, 01:34 PM\']Yes, but a better champion would have purchased all the instant bargains every time and also had enough every day to win the game. Part of the gimmick of $ale is that you can buy luxurious items for very little money. She never took advantage of that.
[/quote]I reject your thesis as flawed. The fact that she held her nerve, fought off the temptation or just plain wanted to win the lot and get the hell out doesn't lessen her accomplishments, one of which was averaging $108 per game. Your definition of "a better champion" doesn't work, because it doesn't make any sense. She reached the pinnacle of Sale-dom. There's nothing more. Next you'll tell me she should have tried to find the prize tiles on the Fame Game board, instead of the Fame Game bucks, because it would have pumped up her final total.
The gimmick is that you have that opportunity, not that you're forced to. That's why it's called Temptation down under. Do you take the luxurious prize you're offered, or tough it out and go for the big prize at the end?
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'188072\' date=\'Jun 12 2008, 03:06 PM\']Indeed. My taping was not too long after she had appeared, and despite her success, she was described (and frankly, ridiculed) by the coordinators as the kind of contestant they didn't want.[/quote]This seems really really wrong on their part. Never mind that you have to be the best of the best to win the lot, but to knock her and say "Don't do this!" seems doubly cruel.
-
In Australia, it was "Temptation." In the US, it was called "$ale of the Century" The whole idea was to buy things. If the player in the lead is never gonna buy anything, you might as well skip those segments and put in more questions.
After a day or two of continual "no sales", it might have been interesting to offer Alice a car or a major prize during the Instant Bargain. I wonder what she would have done.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'188105\' date=\'Jun 12 2008, 11:29 PM\']The fact that she held her nerve, fought off the temptation or just plain wanted to win the lot and get the hell out doesn't lessen her accomplishments[/quote]
Which wasn't as easy as it sounded. I believe, in her last two days, Perry would sometimes offer as much as $2000 in *cash* to get Alice to cave in and she held strong. To turn down that kind of money, which back then was quite the serious sum, was courageous in my opinion.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'188105\' date=\'Jun 12 2008, 09:29 PM\']
This seems really really wrong on their part. Never mind that you have to be the best of the best to win the lot, but to knock her and say "Don't do this!" seems doubly cruel.[/quote]
Except their job is to make good TV, not get strategically wise players. People buying Instant Bargains is better TV than someone turning down thing after thing.
That said, seeing as Alice's cash jackpot was very likely more than one of those coordinators make in a year, I gotta think she had the last laugh.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'188111\' date=\'Jun 13 2008, 12:01 AM\']
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'188105\' date=\'Jun 12 2008, 09:29 PM\']
This seems really really wrong on their part. Never mind that you have to be the best of the best to win the lot, but to knock her and say "Don't do this!" seems doubly cruel.[/quote]
Except their job is to make good TV, not get strategically wise players. People buying Instant Bargains is better TV than someone turning down thing after thing.[/quote]
But if all your players have the same strategy, good or bad, it makes for even worse TV.
-
[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' post=\'188113\' date=\'Jun 12 2008, 10:15 PM\']
But if all your players have the same strategy, good or bad, it makes for even worse TV.[/quote]
I don't follow you. How so?
-
[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' post=\'188113\' date=\'Jun 13 2008, 01:15 AM\']
But if all your players have the same strategy, good or bad, it makes for even worse TV.
[/quote]
I get what you're saying -- viva variety -- although I'm not sure that Sale would really have been that much worse off sans Alice.
I think the "if everyone has the same strategy" issue, however, is exactly why the coordinators would be spooked by Alice (not in a "spooky" sense, but in an "is she going to mess up our game?" sense). With the benefit of retrospect, Alice was an interesting one-time aberration, but if I were a contestant producer on the show at the time, I would have some concern that she would be a trendsetter. She took the "temptation" element out of the equation entirely. OK, that's fine as a one-time outlier, but if her style of play became the norm, the show would lose its central conceit. Not much fun in the long run. If I'd been in the contestant coordinators' shoes, I'd be anti-Alice, too. As a viewer, I thought she was fantastic.
-
[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' post=\'188113\' date=\'Jun 13 2008, 01:15 AM\']
But if all your players have the same strategy, good or bad, it makes for even worse TV.
[/quote]
It's one thing to have the strategy...it's another to execute the strategy. Not every player is like Alice (obviously, then there would be no point to the IB's). Alice was interesting to watch in that she set her goals and went for them. No IB's or other distractions. Nothing fazed her and she won her way. Nothing wrong with that. It was different than say, Mark DeCarlo's winning the floor, and IMO just as entertaing.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'188111\' date=\'Jun 12 2008, 10:01 PM\']Except their job is to make good TV, not get strategically wise players. People buying Instant Bargains is better TV than someone turning down thing after thing.[/quote]For sure. But saying whether or not it made for good television is different than "She didn't play the game I think it should be played, so she's not as good a champion." Your position is defensible and correct.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'188213\' date=\'Jun 13 2008, 08:20 PM\']
But saying whether or not it made for good television is different than "She didn't play the game I think it should be played, so she's not as good a champion."[/quote]
Yes. But when you're a contestant coordinator, those statements are precisely the same. When they're saying someone was a "good contestant," they could give three tin ones whether they were actually skillful at the game or not. To them, a "good contestant" is one who makes good TV, no more, no less. Their monetary success is immaterial to the coordinator.
-
My contention is that a player who picks up the instant bargains and the lot will go home with more prizes than someone who just picks up the lot. If that can be refuted, maybe I'll change my mind about it.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'188233\' date=\'Jun 14 2008, 05:55 AM\']
My contention is that a player who picks up the instant bargains and the lot will go home with more prizes than someone who just picks up the lot. If that can be refuted, maybe I'll change my mind about it.
[/quote]
While true, that doesn't necessarily make them a "better" champion, which was your original contention. If it's not something you genuinely want, all that $10 is buying you is a tax burden.
-
ok lets do the math. her record as is
6 days -$141.206
now, back then IBs were usually 5-10-15. thats 30 BUCKS A DAY ; lets say she buys every IB that would mean she would have to win 2 or 3 more days taking more risks to pad her total so itll look like
9 days- $170.000
worth it? i say HELL NO
GET IN GET THE CASH GET OUT
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'188233\' date=\'Jun 14 2008, 08:55 AM\']My contention is that a player who picks up the instant bargains and the lot will go home with more prizes than someone who just picks up the lot. If that can be refuted, maybe I'll change my mind about it.[/quote]
This is true. But a player that picks up the instant bargains and then loses the game on day 8 will go home with fewer prizes than someone who just picks up the lot in 6 days.
-
Well, Alice was so good with the questions that it would have been a blowout even if she had taken the instant bargains.
But, as Mr. Howard said, the strategy did get her off the show quicker.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'188233\' date=\'Jun 14 2008, 05:55 AM\']My contention is that a player who picks up the instant bargains and the lot will go home with more prizes than someone who just picks up the lot. If that can be refuted, maybe I'll change my mind about it.[/quote]But you changed the terms midstream. Your contention was "she could have been a better champion if X." I said that one had nothing to do with the other. You held fast, saying here that someone might change your mind, but you haven't refuted my rebuttal. (confused yet?) Saying that "A champion who wins more prizes than just the lot will have won more than someone who just won the lot" isn't saying anything at all.
If you acknowledge that your original point was either flawed, or not quite what you meant, that's fine and I've had my say. But I do think I'm owed an answer here.
-
She left prizes on the table (and money from which the taxes could be paid) when she didn't have to. She was so far out in front that the games were blowouts. As a viewer, I'm more excited when the games are close. Hope that answer is satisfactory.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'188403\' date=\'Jun 18 2008, 04:30 AM\']
She left prizes on the table (and money from which the taxes could be paid) when she didn't have to. She was so far out in front that the games were blowouts. As a viewer, I'm more excited when the games are close. Hope that answer is satisfactory.
[/quote]
BUT youre not accoounting for the risk of having to win 2 or 3 more games; everyone has ther nancy zerg
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'188403\' date=\'Jun 18 2008, 01:30 AM\']
As a viewer, I'm more excited when the games are close.[/quote]
As a contestant, she could give a damn whether you're excited or not.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'188413\' date=\'Jun 18 2008, 11:35 AM\']
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'188403\' date=\'Jun 18 2008, 01:30 AM\']
As a viewer, I'm more excited when the games are close.[/quote]
As a contestant, she could give a damn whether you're excited or not.
[/quote]
QFT. If she couldn't give up a few bucks now and then, how could she give a damn?
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'188415\' date=\'Jun 18 2008, 09:16 AM\']
QFT. If she couldn't give up a few bucks now and then, how could she give a damn?[/quote]
I'm genuinely not sure if you're just being obstinate at this point or if you just don't get the point that other people are presenting here.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'188422\' date=\'Jun 18 2008, 01:52 PM\']
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'188415\' date=\'Jun 18 2008, 09:16 AM\']
QFT. If she couldn't give up a few bucks now and then, how could she give a damn?[/quote]
I'm genuinely not sure if you're just being obstinate at this point or if you just don't get the point that other people are presenting here.
[/quote]
I understand and respect your and other's points. I watch the shows for their entertainment values, which don't always match a particular contestant's strategy.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'188425\' date=\'Jun 18 2008, 11:02 AM\']
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'188422\' date=\'Jun 18 2008, 01:52 PM\']
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'188415\' date=\'Jun 18 2008, 09:16 AM\']
QFT. If she couldn't give up a few bucks now and then, how could she give a damn?[/quote]
I'm genuinely not sure if you're just being obstinate at this point or if you just don't get the point that other people are presenting here.
[/quote]
I understand and respect your and other's points. I watch the shows for their entertainment values, which don't always match a particular contestant's strategy.
[/quote]
Here's the answer, I think. The contestant's aim is to win the most possible, as efficiently as possible. The contestant coordinator's aim is to make good television. Therefore, the contestant coordinators need to try and convince the contestants against certain strategies which, although would be lucrative for them, would produce bad television. This is why they want less Alice Conkwrights.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'188425\' date=\'Jun 18 2008, 11:02 AM\']
I understand and respect your and other's points. I watch the shows for their entertainment values, which don't always match a particular contestant's strategy.[/quote]
Then I ask you this, because maybe we're discussing this from differing definitions: are you saying she's a "poor champion" simply because you didn't enjoy watching her, or are you saying she's a "poor champion" because you think she played the game suboptimally (STRATEGICALLY suboptimally, not will-Jimmy-like-what-I'm-doing suboptimally) and was successful despite that?
Because if it's the former, then that's fine and you're working under the contestant coordinator's definition of "poor." But I'm reasonably sure you're the only one in this thread operating under that definition, too.
-
Someone on the show liked her, since they asked her to come back for their International Invitational in 1987.
I actually thought her antics could be quite funny, especially when Jim would try anything to get her to buy a bargain. Some of their banter was entertaining.
Jim: "If you buy this washing machine, I'll give you $100 to go with it"
Alice: "But my washing machine still works, it's old but it works."
Jim: "I'll give you another $100 to go break the darn thing!"