FULL RECAP - TPiR 01/18/2010

[rob79]

Today just confirmed it. Kathy has no clue whatsoever how to set That's Too Much fairly. And that's a shame after she worked alongside Roger for so many years. I'm sick and tired of these unfair setups. Please, please, please let's get the correct stopping price somewhere back in the middle. Please.

Overall other than TTM this was a pretty good show, with some good wins.

If Thyra isn't contestant of the year material i'm not sure who is. That entire segment just flat out was awesome.

This week is already better than last week. There were more games won in this one show (4) than the entire last week of shows (3). Now saying that we probably will get another skunking tomorrow. Hopefully, that's not going to be the case.

[The Big Wheel]

And that's a shame after [Kathy] worked alongside Roger for so many years.

That's exactly what I've been thinking since all these strange setups started.  Kathy had the world's best teacher, yet at test time she fails miserably.

[Cartboy]

One Away:  I thought for sure Thrya had it on the first try, but still a great win!
Most Expensive:  I was actually pretty confident about the TV being the most expensive.
Pick A Pair:  That's how you do it!
Coming Or Going:  Nice to see this one again & nice win!
That's Too Much:  RETIRE IT!!!!
Punch A Bunch:  Well, at least the last slip wasn't another $50.
Showcases:  Pretty nice bid by Stephanie!  How the heck was SC2 $28,000!?

Great start to the week, IMHO.  Hopefully, this is a sign of things to come.

[TPIRighteous]

Kathy has no clue whatsoever how to set That's Too Much fairly.

I think she knows how to set it up fairly, but chooses not to. It can't be the coincidence of just making a poor decision every time the game is played. It's just like Range Game: they've noticed this phenomenon where contestants are much more comfortable with their guesses as close to the middle of the range as possible. They go to the middle, the answer's toward the extreme, and money is saved. Simple.

[mbetush]

The real kick in the pants with TTM is that even if set up "fairly" (spaces 3-8), theres still only a 1 in 6 chance of winning, and then throw in the skill and knowledge of Joe Plinko and that probably hovers around 1 in 8.

[MrPlinko]

Finally an episode that I can watch!

Joe

[pinball777]

I really wish someone with knowledge of the show would go and get That's Too Much and say right away after the first pick, it will be in spot 2 or 9 depending on the first price. The more Greco does this, the more predictable and easier it is for loyal viewers to win. Too bad no one has yet to catch on to it. Today it was close.

[goldroadfanatic]

Even if one watches the show every day, the question is how many times one has to see a pattern in a certain game before he catches on.  Heck, it took me a while to figure out the Zero Rule in Ten Chances, and that was years before I knew of this site.

[SteveGavazzi]

Well, this certainly was better than anything last week.  Drew even did a fairly decent job aside from Punch a Bunch.

I can't believe we had the same number of wins before the first Showcase Showdown as we had all last week.

"George" was an awesome contestant.

Drew managed to be an odd combination of himself and Barker during Most Expensive.  I can't really describe it well, but it's better than what he usually gives us.

That's Too Much! irked me even more than usual today...it was just as impossible as it always is, and it derailed what could have been the longest win streak all season.

I was impressed that they actually put in a plug for the personal trainer.  I wasn't so impressed that there was no real plug for the personal chef.

Although I think it's silly to offer trips in four different parts of the show (the first IUFB, the fourth game, and both showcases), I thought they did a pretty good job of working Boston into the TV showcase.

You know, will all the grumpiness about the show not using "patterns" in the set-up of pricing games like they use to, everyone seems pretty darn upset when a "pattern" of consistency is used in That's Too Much". Granted, the second slot is evil for various reasons, but you can't have things both ways when it comes to the set-up for the games.

And why not?  Having patterns doesn't automatically make the patterns good.  You said it yourself -- the way That's Too Much! is set up these days goes totally against human nature.

No, I can't say it's totally fair either. But setting up the game to win on the second or ninth position is similar to putting the winning slip in the corners (at least at one time...), on Punch-a-Bunch...  They may not always be there, but the theory is widely know.

That's not the same thing.  Roger used that commonly-held belief to control how much the game gave away -- he knew where to put the money if he wanted it won, and he knew where to put it when he didn't want to have to pay out very much.

That's Too Much! is always set up for a loss anymore.

You really think the current regime would retire a game because it's not getting won enough?

Sadly, I think That's Too Much! is doing exactly what they want it to.

[sjd93]

Sadly, I think That's Too Much! is doing exactly what they want it to.

I know - someone else had said that the game might be retired because of all the losses, and I was pointing out that the current staff is probably very happy with all the losses.

[brtsimpson142]

I'll go a step further, wasn't That's Too Much introduced in the season where everyone was winning everything?  It seemed to me when the game first showed up that it was a none-too-subtle way to cut down on car wins on the show.

[chad1m]

The discussion about how "unfair" the game is by placing a price in a certain place is getting pretty old. People saying that making the second (or ninth) price, out of ten, the correct one is unfair is like saying making "A" the correct answer in a multiple choice exam is wrong because the human brain expects the correct answer to be buried in the middle. In a game show based mostly on skill (in this game, anyway), who cares about how the human brain thinks? Sure, I want to see wins like everyone else, but I want to see earned wins. The object of the game is to figure out which price is closest, not how the game runner's thought process goes. If you think correctly that the price of that Dodge is $19,240 and the second price to show up on the table is $19,600 and you go with your instincts (and not the audience's perception of where the price should be because of "fairness") and stop, you've just got yourself a brand new car.

I guess I’m saying there is no point in having ten prices set up if it is not within the realm of possibility and/or plausibility that any one of them could be the correct answer. If you want more wins, retire the game or get rid of half of the displays. This is The Price is Right, not Everybody Wins Easily.

[voguevixen]

For the record, not like it matters, but I would've won That's Too Much.

I "won" it too because a) it's a Hyundai, so it's cheap, and b) I was going by the "huge price gap" rule I learned here at this very board.  I wouldn't say it was a hard setup for fans.  This and Lucky Seven are easily my "worst" games, so if I can do it so could she.

My favorite bit regarding "George" is that she's obviously a regular viewer of the show and knew what Drew was looking for in a "One Away" contestant.  I LOVED when he just walked offscreen like "I'm no longer needed here." 

[sideshowPA]

The discussion about how "unfair" the game is by placing a price in a certain place is getting pretty old. People saying that making the second (or ninth) price, out of ten, the correct one is unfair is like saying making "A" the correct answer in a multiple choice exam is wrong because the human brain expects the correct answer to be buried in the middle.

For a one-question multiple-choice test, you are correct.  But do you feel it would be fair to have a 10-question multiple-choice test where ALL of the correct selections were A or E?  Hopefully not, and this is precisely what Fingers is doing.  

It was noted that 10 of the last 11 times TTM has been played, the correct choice has been in the 2nd or 9th slot.  The 11th time, the correct slot was 8th.  Do you believe this was due to the producers truly wanting to test pricing ability?  Or to mess with their heads?

The core of your argument is correct: contestants should be rewarded for pricing items correctly.  All wins is just as boring as no losses.  But the variety is lacking here.

EDIT and REFLECTION: I once gave a 10 question true/false quiz to a class where all the answers were true.  Want to piss off a group of 10th graders?  Try that, my friend....

[TheBigAK]

Digital Media Player 176   
Chrome Citrus Juicer  100

With SP's that are $100 or more, it is even more apparent that they need to adjust Punch-a-Bunch for inflation.

One Away was great today.  Nothing more needs to be said about it.   Great.

With all the WINS today, I'm afraid that we'll go back to impossible budget mode for the next 4 years.