Author Topic: PYL: Did they miss an obvious solution? (Read 7795 times)

Jay Temple · « **on:** October 07, 2008, 02:11:46 AM »

When I was watching GSN's documentary on Michael Larson, a thought occurred to me. Once they were onto him, was there some reason they couldn't stop tape and just rearrange some of the panels? Then they'd have a board that was exactly as "random" as before but with no advantage to any player.

clemon79 · « **Reply #1 on:** October 07, 2008, 02:29:45 AM »

[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' post=\'199079\' date=\'Oct 6 2008, 11:11 PM\']
When I was watching GSN's documentary on Michael Larson, a thought occurred to me. Once they were onto him, was there some reason they couldn't stop tape and just rearrange some of the panels? Then they'd have a board that was exactly as "random" as before but with no advantage to any player.
[/quote]
Because what he did wasn't against the rules, and Compliances and Practices would be all over them like stink on shiat.

Craig Karlberg · « **Reply #2 on:** October 07, 2008, 04:09:09 AM »

As Chris said, there were no "violations" because he simply memorized what the pattern was & used it to his advantage racking up over $110K in cash & prizes. Of course they changed the pattern after Larson's big win, so we don't really know whether there was a solid case of any violations concerning his game back then.

I doubt if his 2 opponents would've sued him for what he did. There was no way to circumvent the situation. He just played the game his way & that was it.

whewfan · « **Reply #3 on:** October 07, 2008, 05:42:44 AM »

I think Jay was asking, if they COULD, could they have rearranged the slides and perhaps, change up the light pattern during a "stop tape"

One of the major problems with Larsen's streak was that they couldn't just stop at any point and "break for commercial". They usually did that when ALL players used up their spins. The audience was probably restless enough waiting for Larsen to stop spinning. If they decided to stop tape at some point, that would make the audience more restless. I also wonder if it would've been a S&P issue to rearrange the prizes and light patterns, as it might somehow be unfair to the other players. I think they let Michael keep going because they thought "this guy knows our board, and we need SOLID evidence to show that he was cheating" If they stopped tape, Michael would've KNOWN they were on to him, and maybe he would've changed his strategy.

TheLastResort · « **Reply #4 on:** October 07, 2008, 08:14:43 AM »

[quote name=\'whewfan\' post=\'199083\' date=\'Oct 7 2008, 05:42 AM\']One of the major problems with Larsen's streak was that they couldn't just stop at any point and "break for commercial". [/quote]

No, but they could edit...which they did anyway.

[quote name=\'whewfan\' post=\'199083\' date=\'Oct 7 2008, 05:42 AM\']The audience was probably restless enough waiting for Larsen to stop spinning. If they decided to stop tape at some point, that would make the audience more restless. [/quote]

The audience would be the last thing producers would worry about.

I don't see why they couldn't have rearranged some of the slides mid-game, as long as they could prove that the odds of hitting any one particular slide were the same.

joker316 · « **Reply #5 on:** October 07, 2008, 08:33:06 AM »

Perhaps because it could be construed that Larsen was getting so far ahead, it would appear as though they were changing the rules midstream. Then it could be an S&P violation. And since this was CBS we're talking about, they did not like any appearance of impropriety.

Don Howard · « **Reply #6 on:** October 07, 2008, 10:33:22 AM »

[quote name=\'whewfan\' post=\'199083\' date=\'Oct 7 2008, 05:42 AM\']
The audience was probably restless enough waiting for Larsen to stop spinning.[/quote]
The audience was probably having an orgasm over it. Personally, I wondered if he was going to make it to infinity.

MSTieScott · « **Reply #7 on:** October 07, 2008, 01:41:09 PM »

I could be imagining things, but didn't they have to stop tape once to switch to a new tape since they didn't anticipate going for so long?

I agree that the probability of a dead audience was low. I was in the audience for the Game Show Marathon episode of Press Your Luck -- when there were one or two spins left in that very close final round, they stopped tape to make sure Ricki knew what to say, and the audience was so into the game, they objected loudly. I can only imagine the energy in the audience during Larson's run.

As for switching the slides around, the problem is that they would still need one square to cycle through the $3,000; $4,000; and $5,000 + one spin spaces (because otherwise, where would Big Bucks go to?). And since at the time, the staff didn't know exactly how Larson was consistently hitting the spin spaces, there would have been the possibility in their minds that even if they moved those slides to, say, the third square, he might have been able to start hitting that square consistently. And, yeah, whether Standards and Practices would have allowed it anyway.

rwalker · « **Reply #8 on:** October 07, 2008, 01:59:47 PM »

[quote name=\'Don Howard\' post=\'199094\' date=\'Oct 7 2008, 10:33 AM\']
[quote name=\'whewfan\' post=\'199083\' date=\'Oct 7 2008, 05:42 AM\']
The audience was probably restless enough waiting for Larsen to stop spinning.[/quote]
The audience was probably having an orgasm over it. Personally, I wondered if he was going to make it to infinity.
[/quote]

MO MONEY, MO MONEY MO MONEY! WE WANT MO MONEY!

/I don't think Tomarken was, he was about to faint once Mike passed 40 grand.

Chelsea Thrasher · « **Reply #9 on:** October 07, 2008, 02:01:52 PM »

Tweaking the Big Bucks square would've probably raised a few eyebrows and been jerkier. But there might've been a partial solution along these lines that would have been slightly more feasible: Larson alternated between the $3K/$4K/$5K+ and $500+/$750+/$1000+ squares. While tampering with Big Bucks might've thrown some awkward glances the show's way, they probably could have tinkered the smaller square (maybe, say, swap out it and the square above it - or just replace $750+ with a Whammy)

tvrandywest · « **Reply #10 on:** October 07, 2008, 02:04:37 PM »

I was a contestant on epiosodes 9, 10, and 11 and had a friend who was a PhD, an instructor at UCLA and a Jeopardy! champ with me, sitting in the audience with his wife. Early on, he spotted the patterns and tried to communicate one of them to me after episode 10. He had it, but it was too complex for me to to get a handle on, and even if I could grasp the pattern I would have needed an opportunity to try to work out the timing - the show had not yet debuted on the air. I didn't use the information, but was fascinated to know that under the right circumstances it could have been a factor for someone with a different mindset than mine.

Now...

The way I heard it, nobody in the studio knew what to do. It was a weekend, and they were calling S&P supervisors and the CBS daytime programming chiefs (Brockman, Boden) in the era before cell phones. They did reach one of those two (name withheld) who told me that his first question was "is he cheating or did he receive any outside assistance?" The answer of course was "no" and that seemed to be the litmus test for stopping the game.

If anyone even considered changing squares, I know the production company would want permission from the network and from S&P, thus the phone calls. It's likely nobody would have wanted to single-handedly authorize it without a chance to talk it over with the other parties. Stopping tape for an hour or more to facilitate such a meeting or conference call would have been more expensive than the prize money they gave away.

But on Monday I know they quickly reversed the decision to not use a truly random generating mechanism!

Randy
tvrandywest.com

toetyper · « **Reply #11 on:** October 07, 2008, 03:15:39 PM »

do we know how long it took to tape the larsen game as opposed to normal?'

PYLdude · « **Reply #12 on:** October 07, 2008, 03:26:09 PM »

[quote name=\'toetyper\' post=\'199125\' date=\'Oct 7 2008, 02:15 PM\']
do we know how long it took to tape the larsen game as opposed to normal?'
[/quote]

This would be a good place to look, for a start.

tyshaun1 · « **Reply #13 on:** October 07, 2008, 04:27:00 PM »

[quote name=\'tvrandywest\' post=\'199115\' date=\'Oct 7 2008, 02:04 PM\']

But on Monday I know they quickly reversed the decision to not use a truly random generating mechanism!

Randy
tvrandywest.com
[/quote]

Thing is, Randy, they never went to a random generator, they only added more patterns. I'm still surprised that no one else ever got on the show and did what he did again; although I've come to understand that the contestant coordinators STRONGLY advised against trying it, there was no feasible way to stop them.

The other thing that strikes me is that the show ran 2 more years even after Larson. Did CBS truly believe in the show that much?

Tyshaun

tvrandywest · « **Reply #14 on:** October 07, 2008, 04:33:41 PM »

[quote name=\'tyshaun1\' post=\'199134\' date=\'Oct 7 2008, 01:27 PM\']
[quote name=\'tvrandywest\' post=\'199115\' date=\'Oct 7 2008, 02:04 PM\']
But on Monday I know they quickly reversed the decision to not use a truly random generating mechanism!
[/quote]
Thing is, Randy, they never went to a random generator, they only added more patterns. I'm still surprised that no one else ever got on the show and did what he did again; although I've come to understand that the contestant coordinators STRONGLY advised against trying it, there was no feasible way to stop them.

The other thing that strikes me is that the show ran 2 more years even after Larson. Did CBS truly believe in the show that much?
[/quote]
I forgot, yes, they only added more patterns. Any network "believes" in a show when and for as long as it gets ratings. In reality, the $100,000+ they gave Larsen busted their prize budget, but wasn't a huge sum in the context of the overall cost of production.

Randy
tvrandywest.com