FULL RECAP - TPiR 01/28/2010

[brtsimpson142]

I dunno, is there a way, regarding That's Too Much, that — short of a bright or intuitive contestant figuring out the current TTM strategy and stopping on the second price to win, or a lawsuit from a contestant who believes the current trend to be unfair — the producers can stop with the "evil" TTM setups?

I keep saying, as soon as people figure out this so-called "strategy" Fingers is going to do an about-face on us and the right price will be somewhere near the middle like it used to be.  And really, there would be no grounds for setting up a lawsuit about this.  We've had that discussion before, when the Range Game thread happened.  It's very simple:  the rules of the game state that as soon as a contestant is shown a price THAT'S TOO MUCH (had to do it!) to be the retail price of the car, they're to tell Drew that they think they should stop.  Nowhere in the rules does it say the price can't be the first or last price in the row--evil yes, but game-rigging, no.

The only grounds for a lawsuit would be if the show was deliberately being deceptive--that is, knowingly presenting the contestant with a series of prices that are all under the ARP of the car, or else changing price tag the model is holding so that, no matter what price the contestant stopped on, the game could be a loss.  S&P would then break down the door to Studio 33 and we'd see some staffers go bye-bye and some cars awarded after the fact.  After the infamous Quiz Show scandal and the Press Your Luck incident, I just don't see that happening.  Short of that, it's no different than having a price like $19,191 in Lucky $even or $22,253 in Dice Game.  As long as the price is appropriate for the rules of the game, then it doesn't matter how evil the digits actually are.

It does not appear that the people who set up the game are listening to us, the masses. It is obvious that TTM is being used strictly to advertise cars (and even the plugs are abysmal, although this isn't the fault of Drew or Rich), with an intentional plan to not allow the car to be given away.

Pardon me, but when have they EVER listened to us (since Roger left)?  It is obvious that TPTB have been ignoring us, for months now, and are making the prizes all over more difficult to win (as John's statistics thread points out), with That's Too Much now earning its nicknames of "That's Too Hard" and "That's Too Evil" quite well.  There's a reason the prize copy is being written the way it is but it's got nothing to do with making the prizes easier or tougher to win, I can assure you of that, even if it is just an unpleasant side effect.

[notsoeasy]

I’m going to go against everything I believe in when I say this: Somebody else better start setting up That’s too Much!, or just don’t play the game all together. I've had it with that game!

FINGERS: THAT'S NOT TOO MUCH!!!

[Briguy]

I keep saying, as soon as people figure out this so-called "strategy" Fingers is going to do an about-face on us and the right price will be somewhere near the middle like it used to be.  And really, there would be no grounds for setting up a lawsuit about this.  We've had that discussion before, when the Range Game thread happened.  ....

True, but one of these times, they are going to plunk the TTM price on the very first one ... or maybe it could be the very last one. The point is, they don't want the car won, plain and simple. That's what I think. Playing devil's advocate here — If they are doing this to save on their budget, then how about show us a few more weeks of reruns (so that nothing is given away) and then make the game winnable once in awhile?

The only grounds for a lawsuit would be if the show was deliberately being deceptive--that is, knowingly presenting the contestant with a series of prices that are all under the ARP of the car, or else changing price tag the model is holding so that, no matter what price the contestant stopped on, the game could be a loss.  ...

Knowing the current practice, that might just well happen!   Seriously, I do think someone at Studio 33 owes us an explanation — is it a matter of saving the budget, making the game more "challenging," what is it? Yes, hide the price behind the second or ninth ones once in awhile, but the current pattern deserves an explanation. But sadly, I doubt that will ever happen as long as the "I don't have to tell you anything" attitude prevails.[/quote]

There's a reason the prize copy is being written the way it is but it's got nothing to do with making the prizes easier or tougher to win, I can assure you of that, even if it is just an unpleasant side effect.

You may have to remind us why the copy is written as such. And nowhere did I say the plug had anything to do with making the game "easier" or "harder" to win — it is merely a courtesy. You're showing the car on the air, and people might want to know a little more about the car than just what optionals it has on it. Tell me it's the car "that drives like silk and is easy on the gas" (OK, I just made that plug up), that I can "see the USA in this Chevrolet," or something like that.

Brian

[goldroadfanatic]

Knowing the current practice, that might just well happen!  Seriously, I do think someone at Studio 33 owes us an explanation...But sadly, I doubt that will ever happen as long as the "I don't have to tell you anything" attitude prevails.

Why would they tell us?  We, with some exceptions, are not affiliated with the show's production and they would never tell any outsiders what happens, and there are probably some legal reasons for that.  Also, nobody over there owes us anything, again, because we are not affiliated with them.

[brtsimpson142]

True, but one of these times, they are going to plunk the TTM price on the very first one ... or maybe it could be the very last one. The point is, they don't want the car won, plain and simple.

They don't want to give cars away, yes, likely because their budget is being squeezed like an orange in a juicer.  That seems most likely given the current economy, at any rate.

Knowing the current practice, that might just well happen!   Seriously, I do think someone at Studio 33 owes us an explanation — is it a matter of saving the budget, making the game more "challenging," what is it? Yes, hide the price behind the second or ninth ones once in awhile, but the current pattern deserves an explanation. But sadly, I doubt that will ever happen as long as the "I don't have to tell you anything" attitude prevails.

Making the game more "challenging" is a direct conduit to saving money, as it lessens the odds the game will be won.  (And Fingers has proven to us lately that she's frighteningly good at forcing losses when she wants to)

You may have to remind us why the copy is written as such. And nowhere did I say the plug had anything to do with making the game "easier" or "harder" to win — it is merely a courtesy. You're showing the car on the air, and people might want to know a little more about the car than just what optionals it has on it. Tell me it's the car "that drives like silk and is easy on the gas" (OK, I just made that plug up), that I can "see the USA in this Chevrolet," or something like that.

People might also want to know more about the mysterious MP3 players they give away, like whether they can do video or how much space they've got.  Those details aren't being worked in either.

Let me ask you this:  do you think there could be a connection between the bland prize copy and the games becoming more "challenging"?

Consider:  "Listen to all your favorite tunes on this small and sporty MP3 player."  (I just made up this copy but it's not too far off the mark for what we've been hearing for non-sponsored prizes lately)  Which of these two prices is half off, $10 or $25?

Now how about this:  "Take all your favorite tunes and movies with you with this 80GB Zune, from Microsoft."  Which of these two prices is half off, $40 or $90?  (even if we assume the Zune isn't a sponsored prize and they leave the name off, stopping at giving us the disk size and telling us that it does video too, we can plainly see on TV that it's a Zune, and that information helps us; but then again, you can't tell just by looking if it's an 80GB Zune, a 120, a 160, or a 320, and that makes a HUGE difference in the price)

So, in this example of a Half Off prize, not only do they not give away a pretty nice SP, but they also increase the number of boxes still in play, thus reducing the odds the contestant will find the cash-ola.

[joeyboy]

Making the game more "challenging" is a direct conduit to saving money, as it lessens the odds the game will be won.  (And Fingers has proven to us lately that she's frighteningly good at forcing losses when she wants to)

So a 1 out of 10 chance of winning is just too much?

[brtsimpson142]

So a 1 out of 10 chance of winning is just too much?

I wouldn't go quite that far.  But, if the budget is as bad as the game setups lately make it look, then I could see Fingers being motivated to make games as "challenging" as possible.  Slots 2 and 9 might be just one way of doing it.

[PriceFanArmadillo]

I keep saying, as soon as people figure out this so-called "strategy" Fingers is going to do an about-face on us and the right price will be somewhere near the middle like it used to be. 

And yet, the car has regularly been behind either 1 or 6 in Pass the Buck for how many years, and no one's picked up on it yet?  

Short of that, it's no different than having a price like $19,191 in Lucky $even or $22,253 in Dice Game.  As long as the price is appropriate for the rules of the game, then it doesn't matter how evil the digits actually are.

Except $22,253 would actually be on the friendly side of average for a Dice Game setup.  $21,621 is closer to what you're looking for.

[brtsimpson142]

And yet, the car has regularly been behind either 1 or 6 in Pass the Buck for how many years, and no one's picked up on it yet?

Fair point, I didn't think about that.

Except $22,253 would actually be on the friendly side of average for a Dice Game setup.  $21,621 is closer to what you're looking for.

I was trying to do two things at once when I picked that price  (note to self:  cannot multitask if numbers are involved!)  But you get what I'm saying though, that's the important part.

[Cartboy]

 Thank goodness Elaina won on 1 Right Price & prevented a skunking!

I’m going to go against everything I believe in when I say this: Somebody else better start setting up That’s too Much!, or just don’t play the game all together. I've had it with that game!

I totally agree.  It's absolutely ridiculous & asinine how they've been putting the right price at the 2nd or the 9th position every time.

[Casey]

Playing devil's advocate for a moment... Doesn't placing the correct price in the 2nd or 9th slot on TTM consistently actually reward loyal viewers ?  We all know it'll be either in 2 or 9 almost all of the time.  One of us regulars playing the game would have a really good shot at winning, wouldn't we?

[SteveGavazzi]

Playing devil's advocate for a moment... Doesn't placing the correct price in the 2nd or 9th slot on TTM consistently actually reward loyal viewers ?

Yes, but there aren't a whole lot of us to go around, and the game is definitely being set up to cause losses.

[brtsimpson142]

One of us regulars playing the game would have a really good shot at winning, wouldn't we?

That argument is self-defeating for a single reason:  reading back through old posts and seeing what happened to Voltaire and Willy, it looks like anyone associated with this site ("us" and "we") is persona non grata in Studio 33.

[penny_ante]

Playing devil's advocate for a moment... Doesn't placing the correct price in the 2nd or 9th slot on TTM consistently actually reward loyal viewers ?  We all know it'll be either in 2 or 9 almost all of the time.  One of us regulars playing the game would have a really good shot at winning, wouldn't we?

I suspect Stan's very good at sniffing out LFaTs.

[whinbaby]

The 7,202nd episode (90th for Season 38)

Showcase #1
Viking Kitchen Appliances - $11,885
LCD TV - $349
Trip to Edinburgh - $9,887

Showcase #2
Trip to Yosemite - $3,429
Trip to Rome - $9,236
BMW 528i - $50,125

Your Modeling Scorecard for January 28, 2010
Rachel Reynolds
Total:  8/$57,912 (5/$2,621, 3/$55,291)
Cars:  1/$50,125 (0/$0, 1/$50,125)
Trips:  0/$0 (0/$0, 0/$0)

Manuela Arbelaez
Total:  10/$62,470 (8/$34,945, 2/$27,525)
Cars:  1/$18,289 (0/$0, 1/$18,289)
Trips:  3/$22,515 (2/$13,279, 1/$9,236)

Gwennie Osborne
Total:  7/$59,195 (2/$6,139, 5/$53,056)
Cars:  1/$18,779 (0/$0, 1/$18,779)
Trips:  1/$3,429 (0/$0, 1/$3,429)