Author Topic: Picky Pyramid Judging (Read 8575 times)

knagl · « **on:** February 28, 2013, 10:28:41 PM »

Browsing YouTube tonight (can you tell it\'s slow at work?), I came across the same category in two different clips, with seemingly different judging on what was essentially the same clue.

Exhibit A, at 15 seconds in:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKvAEMsS0Ys

Exhibit B, at 1:02 in:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qk9Zcgc39Uk

Now, I realize that in the first clip she said \"salespeople\" and in the second clip Levar said \"salesperson\", but aren\'t they the same clue? If the issue was that she said \"people\" -- I can\'t imagine saying \"person\" instead makes it suddenly okay. To be honest, I thought that her getting buzzed in the first clip was a little bit extreme, but that\'s just my two cents. Opinions?

BrandonFG · « **Reply #1 on:** February 28, 2013, 10:42:17 PM »

Seems pretty nitpicky to me too, not to mention inconsistent. It reminds me of another Winner\'s Circle where coincidentally LeVar Burton got zapped for saying \"26 Across\" as a clue for \"THINGS IN A CROSSWORD PUZZLE\". The ruling was later reversed and the contestant won.

I would think the same logic applies here, esp. since they allowed it in the second clip, and given that People is a common plural form of Person. Yes, a keyword was used, but in a different context to where it shouldn\'t give away the answer. IMO, it also reminds me of categories where Dick/Bill/John/Donny/Mike would say \"Phrases with the word \'White\' in them, and you can say \'White.\' \"

TLEberle · « **Reply #2 on:** February 28, 2013, 10:53:49 PM »

If you read part of the answer aloud you lose your shot at the top prize.

No joy.

Kevin Prather · « **Reply #3 on:** February 28, 2013, 11:01:43 PM »

If you read part of the answer aloud you lose your shot at the top prize.

No joy.

Doesn\'t apply with the word \"Things\".

clemon79 · « **Reply #4 on:** February 28, 2013, 11:10:56 PM »

Doesn\'t apply with the word \"Things\".

Why not?

Kevin Prather · « **Reply #5 on:** March 01, 2013, 12:01:13 AM »

Doesn\'t apply with the word \"Things\".

Why not?

Dunno why, but it didn\'t. Here\'s two examples, and I\'m sure there\'s more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Isf9_Bavwh8#t=1m15s

(1:15)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKTsx8AWEco#t=1m5s

(1:05)

dale_grass · « **Reply #6 on:** March 01, 2013, 12:27:10 AM »

I just want to go on record as saying the last trilon spining while falling off the bottom of the screen after the top box is blown is one of my favorite game show effects.

pyrfan · « **Reply #7 on:** March 01, 2013, 02:04:37 AM »

Starting sometime in 1987, they wouldn\'t even allow the giver to say \"person\" if the category contained \"people.\" I saw two different celebs get buzzed on PEOPLE WHOM YOU HELP for that reason. Even this rule wasn\'t enforced 100%, though, as Teresa Ganzel wasn\'t buzzed for saying \"A freshly bathed person\" for PEOPLE WHO WEAR A ROBE in 1988.

parliboy · « **Reply #8 on:** March 01, 2013, 11:52:22 AM »

So summary:

They got more tight-assed in general about judging as the series progressed, to the point that it created perceived inconsistency.

Different judges were better at catching different things, and complaining that you get buzzed for something that was illegal when it\'s been excused before is like complaining when you get a speeding ticket because \"I did 70 in a 60 yesterday and no one seemed to mind.\"

TLEberle · « **Reply #9 on:** March 01, 2013, 02:10:45 PM »

Sports leagues change their rules every year for all sorts of reasons. It shouldn\'t be surprising that a game show changes their rules in order to make a better game and/or better show. Consistency is great but it seems a tall order to expect a judge in 1985 to call things right down the same line as a different judge would have done in 1978.

parliboy · « **Reply #10 on:** March 01, 2013, 04:24:17 PM »

Absolutely agreeing with that. The concern for some here is that you\'re not comparing 78 to 85, but basically the same series to itself. If you don\'t know the timeline of rules changes, seeing those two clips, from the same series and on the same set, can be a bit jarring.

Doesn\'t make it wrong. Just jarring.

Loogaroo · « **Reply #11 on:** March 01, 2013, 06:30:53 PM »

Sports leagues change their rules every year for all sorts of reasons. It shouldn\'t be surprising that a game show changes their rules in order to make a better game and/or better show. Consistency is great but it seems a tall order to expect a judge in 1985 to call things right down the same line as a different judge would have done in 1978.

I suspect that as players got better at the game, the rules got stricter to compensate. In the very first clip of the very first \"What Not to Do\" video, Geoff Edwards gives \"People with no clothes on\" as a clue for \"Things that Streak\". It was fine back then; no way it survives a buzzer in the \'80s. By the mid-\'80s, Stewart and company probably concluded that everyone had essentially figured the game out and there\'d be no more gimmes.

TimK2003 · « **Reply #12 on:** March 01, 2013, 09:57:22 PM »

I\'m surprised that they didn\'t name the category as \"THINGS THAT ARE COMMISSIONED\", or would that have eliminated all people, since it is asking for \"things\"?

TLEberle · « **Reply #13 on:** March 01, 2013, 09:59:13 PM »

You commission a painting. You don\'t commission an actor or real estate sale.

Unrealtor · « **Reply #14 on:** March 01, 2013, 11:56:32 PM »

You commission an officer.