TPiR Recap - 10/29/2010 (All Hallows Price 4)

[Kyle]

Pay The Rent had the most impossible setup of any grocery products I have ever seen in my life!  I would not have made it to $5000.  I say, keep the game.  I agree $100,00 isn't supposed to be won.  But neither was the Million bucks in Clock Game in the Specials or the Double Showcase Winner Million Dollars supposed to be won, but they were.  

I'm afraid that was also the contributing factor to...

a) the DSW rule being changed later in the spectaculars to $500 (which someone still admittedly beat)
b) the powers that be getting more paranoid about "ringers" in the audience

I'm afraid the powers that be at this point want to have their cake and eat it too; they've become so obsessed about giving away really cool (in their estimation) prizes that they'll trot around really expensive stuff, such as a $100,000 payout in Pay the Rent, but, ramp up the difficulty so that the odds are in the house's favour. That way, they can brag about how the prizes are so much better today than they were during the Barker/Roger years. Only the more observant viewers (such as the ones here) are aware that most of it goes un-won.

Something else occurred to me...suppose on a future primetime special, they decide to up the prize value in Pay the Rent to $500,000...or even $1,000,000. If no one is winning the game as it is now, you can bet that most contestants that get up there to play it won't leave with more than $10,000 then, either.

[SteveGavazzi]

How can you prove though that this game was designed to deceive?

Look at the format, and then ask me that question again.

[BD]

Not saying that it will happen but if someone DOES indeed win $100,000 in Pay the Rent, so many people here are gonna poop bricks lol.

I doubt someone will this season but I wouldn't be surprised if someone does in the future.

[PriceFanArmadillo]

There were some great ideas today (like the aforementioned opening, the 2nd showcase, and even Jeff's movie reference during Coming Or Going) but it just all felt TOO sickly sweet. Like swallowing 10 spoonfuls of sugar or something.

Let me get this straight...your problem with yesterday's show is that it was too awesome?

I am astounded that so many people continue to defend this piece of s*** of a game.

As is, the game they air is pretty crappy, I admit.  However, I find that if I completely ignore the fact that the top level exists, Pay the Rent is perfectly enjoyable as a $10,000 game.  If it has a 'survival of the fittest' mechanism that temps less-than-bright contestants to throw away said $10,000, I can't say I feel sorry for them.

I guess it's pretty sad I have to resort to self-delusion to enjoy this game, but I'm willing to do what it takes.

[heelsrule1988]

Not saying that it will happen but if someone DOES indeed win $100,000 in Pay the Rent, so many people here are gonna poop bricks lol.

I assure you that if it is, it will only be because of dumb luck. I mean, even those of us who know how the game is supposed to be played find difficulty trying to play it!

[MrPlinko]

Neither of those was intended to deceive the contestant into making bad guesses.

I am astounded that so many people continue to defend this piece of s*** of a game.

LOL!

Do you think that Pay The Rent could be made somewhat better, with easier priced products?

Joe

[CJBojangles]

As is, the game they air is pretty crappy, I admit.  However, I find that if I completely ignore the fact that the top level exists, Pay the Rent is perfectly enjoyable as a $10,000 game.  If it has a 'survival of the fittest' mechanism that temps less-than-bright contestants to throw away said $10,000, I can't say I feel sorry for them.

I agree wholeheartedly. I guess it's kind of an emotional roller coaster for me. I'm initially interested in seeing whether the contestant will play it halfway right or totally screw it up, but then it's excruciating to watch the contestant place the grocery items after putting the ramen noodles in the mailbox. However, what I find exciting is "Will Joe Blow be smart and quit with his ten grand or be a doofus and blow it." It's always fun seeing someone win $10,000, but I too have that lack of sympathy for the idiot that thinks a bottle of shampoo is over $11.00.

I have moments of excitement mixed with moments of complete apathy, if not frustration. But I can say I feel the same way about some other pricing games, so I don't mind this one being trotted out.

Do you think that Pay The Rent could be made somewhat better, with easier priced products?

Yes, and if they ever want it won that's what they'll have to get around to doing. Ultimately having the contestant start at the top, and/or wording the explanation as such that the contestant knows the products are not supposed to go in order by price, is what would improve the game. I wondered myself if having SP's instead of GP's would make the game any easier. It'd be hell on the models, but I think I'd do better working in whole dollars.

[Mallory16]

Do you think that Pay The Rent could be made somewhat better, with easier priced products?

No.  In fact, that's part of the problem:  Pay the Rent is actually more likely to be fully won with harder products, simply through dumb luck!  Easier products will actually make it less likely for the contestant to win $100,000, since they will think they understand how the game works, but then it'll turn out they don't.

[TPIRighteous]

No.  In fact, that's part of the problem:  Pay the Rent is actually more likely to be fully won with harder products, simply through dumb luck! 

I don't think dumb luck gets them that far. Maybe it gets them a little closer to being right than they'd be with easy products, but I don't see anyone thinking that that WD40 was cheaper than the seeds. The prices in the middle are usually hard to put in order, but almost anyone can at least get an idea of what's expensive and what's cheap.

[BD]

I assure you that if it is, it will only be because of dumb luck. I mean, even those of us who know how the game is supposed to be played find difficulty trying to play it!

I think it'll be a combo of both "dumb luck" and "knowledge". A person knowing the strategy but not being 100% sure in their choices.

People that appear to be "TPIR Casuals" can talk/know strategies too... I mean I have seen people in the past use the right strategy for cover up.

[Flerbert419]

Do you think if they put the prices right in front of the products, most people would be able to figure out how to set it up?

Dumb luck is certainly going to be the way to win this thing.

I'm surprised nobody mentioned Scott as the flying monkey; I thought that was pretty cool.

Roger, when was the last time someone didn't end the safe combination in 0?

Since nobody answered this yet, it was June 27, 2008.  The woman used a 5 (which is a better option than what he chose yesterday.....)

[SteveGavazzi]

Not saying that it will happen but if someone DOES indeed win $100,000 in Pay the Rent, so many people here are gonna poop bricks lol.

Truthfully, I want to see it won just because that'd make Mike designer accessories a brick.

Do you think that Pay The Rent could be made somewhat better, with easier priced products?

The products aren't the issue.  The rules need rewritten.

[spoon14]

The production values for the costumes and other thematic touches was great. I agree that Jeff did a fantastic job. On the other hand, Drew did a poor job. Some of explanation were really messy. And it seemed like he forgot that he was supposed to bring along the price tags in Golden Road to the next prize. He tossed the price of the bandana on the ground (I don't think he accidentally dropped it) before realizing he needed to bring it to the doghouse. I guess Lanisha drew the short straw. That costume must have been a pain to deal with. It was cool that the Golden Road contestant got into the spirit.

I disagree with the idea that Mike et al. want Pay the Rent never to be won. I think they just want it to be won extremely rarely. After all, extremely rarely is the better result and it's not as if they made it impossible. It's like slot machines. A casino wants the jackpot to be won rarely because it costs money. But they don't set the slots up to never be won. They need it to be won every once in a while to make others think they have a chance (however slim) and spend their money. Or think of a DSW; $250 is really small window. They don't want it to happen much. But I imagine that a DSW coming up less than 5% of the time is good enough because viewers realize that it could actually happen in a given show.

On the other hand, that was a really tough set-up. The very first PTR playing had a set-up that someone who understood the strategy would a good chance to win if they were willing to risk $10,000. But on the Halloween show, the pricing was so difficult that it was a longshot even for someone who understands it and is a risk-seeker.

[yabbaguy]

Was that the Big Door banging open as the $1000 shopping spree was being described?

Also, with Pay the Rent, if you know the most expensive item, stick it in the vault, and you have a 1/30 chance, even if you place the remaining items completely at random, of winning $100,000 [5!/(2!*2!) = 120/4 = 30 for the 5! ways to place those items, divided by 2! twice since the two items on the first floor and second floor are interchangeable]. That is significantly difficult, but it's not Plinko's astronomical odds for a $50,000 prize, notwithstanding the fact that getting 5 chips is by no means a guarantee. The fact that Pay the Rent should have strategy, but is essentially placing the items at random or has an incredibly farfetched strategy (let's see, second least or third least expensive in the mailbox?), is what's annoying me. Again though, 1/30 is slim but nowhere near impossible, so I'd expect a winner at some point soon.

It's a great show. Saw Golden Brick Road coming from a mile away, but I loved it, especially with the skipping. Having the pages guarding the safe was cool as well, and Jeff was nothing but amusing. :)

[sideshowPA]

Also, with Pay the Rent, if you know the most expensive item, stick it in the vault, and you have a 1/30 chance, even if you place the remaining items completely at random, of winning $100,000 [5!/(2!*2!) = 120/4 = 30 for the 5! ways to place those items, divided by 2! twice since the two items on the first floor and second floor are interchangeable]. That is significantly difficult.....

OK, as a math guy, I have to ask....what?

You are not describing the difficulty of this game correctly.  First off, the set-ups we have seen so far have shown that the correct set-up rests on the contestant placing an item that is clearly NOT the least expensive in the mailbox.  While the most-expensive item does need to appear in the vault, it is hardly the tricky aspect of this game.  We have debated the probability of many games on Price, but this is not one where I believe a probability argument will ever be valid.  The set-up of the prices will dictate the probability of a winner:  if the production staff WANTS a winner, they can arrange it so that least-to-greatest works.  If not, they can also set it up so that the 5th best appears in the mailbox.