Author Topic: TPiR Recap - 6/4/2012  (Read 24324 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline GuyWithFace

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 2928
  • Attempted Sane Person
Re: TPiR Recap - 6/4/2012
« Reply #45 on: June 05, 2012, 02:03:02 AM »
Right now, the rules state that if the announced prize at the beginning of a cash game is not won, then the game is lost. If you change this, then it opens up the possiblity of $8,000 Bag "wins" and $10,000 Rent "wins". The definition as stated is clear enough to allow for this not to happen because it is functional across all of the games.
The problem with your argument is that the victory conditions of It's In The Bag and Pay The Rent (as well as Gas Money, Fortune Hunter, and Grand Game) are based solely on price knowledge and, minus Fortune Hunter, a willingness to go all the way.

On the other hand, the victory conditions of Plinko (as well as Punch-A-Bunch, The Phone Home Game, and Half Off) involve price knowledge and an element of luck; in the case of Plinko, landing all five chips in the center slot.

Given the very low probability of Plinko being won for its full stated value ($25,000/$50,000/$100,000/{foreign top prize}), some fans consider it won if the highest-value slot is hit at least once.

The rules are what they are. I'm not repeating them to force my "opinion" down people's throats; I'm repeating them because they're the damn rules. You can't just make them not be facts by declaring out of nowhere that they're opinions.
I am not saying you are wrong, Steve; I do wish to point out that two of Roger's other rules (Half Off never uses Box 13 for the money, That's Too Much always has the solution in slots 3-8) have been broken by the current regime, so it does not surprise me that the Plinko rule would be as well.
« Last Edit: June 05, 2012, 02:13:39 AM by GuyWithFace »
The above is my opinion and mine alone.

To answer your questions: yes, I am a guy and yes, I have a face. (I also have the occasional spurt of weirdness.)

Quote from: thepriceis_J
People are tired of the f**kery and drama, but if we'd actually talk to each other sometimes instead of a whole bunch of private conversations with other people, it'd go a long way to perhaps fixing the problems most seem to see in the site.

Offline stardf29

  • Taking a Bonus Spin
  • *****
  • Posts: 624
Re: TPiR Recap - 6/4/2012
« Reply #46 on: June 05, 2012, 02:28:42 AM »
Also, this is definitely not the first time Drew has referred to someone who won $10K+ in Plinko as a "winner". (And I doubt he's going to listen to anyone who argues otherwise, much less anyone from here...)

I should mention that I also do not like a number of the "official" rules, particularly pertaining to partial wins (winning $10 or $100 in Grand Game is not a "loss" when winning only SPs worth that much or winning more than that in Money Game is still a "loss"?). I accept that my not liking those rules doesn't make them any less "official", but in the end, I'm the one watching and deriving enjoyment from this show; I think I can have my own complicated system of what constitutes "loss", "win", "partial win", "partial loss" and "true win" and just not force anyone else to subscribe to that system.  :P

Offline FPGWillyT

  • 12/22/2006
  • FPG Host & TPiR Alumnus
  • *
  • Posts: 2748
Re: TPiR Recap - 6/4/2012
« Reply #47 on: June 05, 2012, 04:11:46 AM »
Also, this is definitely not the first time Drew has referred to someone who won $10K+ in Plinko as a "winner". (And I doubt he's going to listen to anyone who argues otherwise, much less anyone from here...)

I should mention that I also do not like a number of the "official" rules, particularly pertaining to partial wins (winning $10 or $100 in Grand Game is not a "loss" when winning only SPs worth that much or winning more than that in Money Game is still a "loss"?). I accept that my not liking those rules doesn't make them any less "official", but in the end, I'm the one watching and deriving enjoyment from this show; I think I can have my own complicated system of what constitutes "loss", "win", "partial win", "partial loss" and "true win" and just not force anyone else to subscribe to that system.  :P

No one I believe is criticizing anyone for what is perceived as a win for Plinko, it's just that some of us are aware that there was a declaration made by someone on the staff that Plinko would only be WON if $50K was won.

In fact, before priceisright.com, there was I believe the same question asked on cbs.com and it was answered as such there.

If you knew the full story of the S35 Premiere, you'd have a better grasp on why Plinko was played and why the writer of that show didn't want it played that day, so that this very issue wouldn't have even come up.

Offline SteveGavazzi

  • Director
  • **********
  • Posts: 17287
Re: TPiR Recap - 6/4/2012
« Reply #48 on: June 05, 2012, 04:12:57 AM »
If Money Game's cash could cause partial wins, there would be no way to outright lose the game.
"Every game is somebody's favorite." -- Wise words from Roger Dobkowitz.

Offline brosa0

  • Taking a Bonus Spin
  • *****
  • Posts: 961
  • Fan of Aussie TPiR!!
Re: TPiR Recap - 6/4/2012
« Reply #49 on: June 05, 2012, 07:44:51 AM »
All I know is that I'd be the happiest loser the show's had if I were to gain $10k on Plinko.

For what it's worth, and I know our current TPIR Aus version isn't crash hot, but I would find it difficult to consider anything other than a $3000 win on our Plinko an official 'win'.   I suppose that is because a) There are only 3 chips, and it seems a lot more likely that all 3 could be landed in the centre spot, and b) The top single amount, $1000, isn't exactly big.

The difference with the US one is that $10,000 is still such a significant amount to win.  However, the $10,000 slip doesn't mean Punch is "won" even though a significant amount of money is won, nor does reaching the $10k level on Pay The Rent.   In all cases I think it's just a very good playing.   I must say though I find it hard to consider it a 'loss' either.

Offline Ton80

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 1551
Re: TPiR Recap - 6/4/2012
« Reply #50 on: June 05, 2012, 09:38:12 AM »
I am just curious about one thing.  Those who say that Plinko is not won with a $10,000 chip cite Roger as their source.  Because he was the producer, what he said must be correct.

Well now Roger is no longer the producer.  The new producer says a $10,000 chip constitutes a win.  I already know the answer, and I am not looking for anyone to explain it to me.  I'm just saying that you can't claim that Roger was right because he was the producer, and then claim Mike, the current producer, is wrong.

If you stand on the "producer's word is gold" position, then you have to accept that position when somebody that disagrees with you does, too.

If you want to claim Roger was correct for any other reason, that is fine.  Just don't use the "he was the producer" argument.
Quote from: PriceFanArmadillo
Ton80 is also a three-time Sarcasm Cup champion.

Offline RCPlanes59

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 1203
    • YouTube
Re: TPiR Recap - 6/4/2012
« Reply #51 on: June 05, 2012, 03:38:31 PM »
My last word on this topic:

Nobody is ever allowed to complain about Pay the Rent ever again.

The odds of winning Pay the Rent are 1 in 180 and can be won with perfect pricing abilities.

The odds of winning Plinko (by the $50k standard) are 1 in 944,784, CANNOT be guaranteed to be won with perfect pricing abilities, and all this at half the payout.

$10k in Plinko is a win, END OF STORY. Fans have argued it for years, and we now have a settling and definite answer as to what constitutes a win. Anyone who says otherwise, and ever says ANYTHING bad about Pay the Rent, shall hereby be smited due to hypocracy.
Season 8 (2011-12) CSS 3rd Place

Offline Guint

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 2279
  • ^ Golden-Road.net
Re: TPiR Recap - 6/4/2012
« Reply #52 on: June 05, 2012, 04:01:29 PM »
^Don't open that can of worms. Pay the Rent is intentionally designed and setup to never be won. It is also designed look winnable when it isn't. Besides, Plinko has mitigating factors that work in its favor (being set up for 5 chips const...wait, never mind :P) and basic physics (your chances of getting $10,000 increase the further closer you are to the center).

I never actually believed this was a perfect show, because it isn't. As has been noted by the man who wrote the records for years and the man who knows about the Price is Right better than anyone else here (and even most of the actual Price is Right staff), Plinko is a win at $50,000. That's good enough for me.
« Last Edit: June 05, 2012, 04:03:58 PM by Guint »
Certainly more competent in running a game than Roger Goddell.

Offline BRB_TheFireball

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 6789
  • A Man Without A Forum
    • The Fireball on Golden-Road.net
Re: TPiR Recap - 6/4/2012
« Reply #53 on: June 05, 2012, 05:26:04 PM »
^Don't open that can of worms. Pay the Rent is intentionally designed and setup to never be won. It is also designed look winnable when it isn't.

People can say that about Pay the Rent all they want, but it doesn't change the fact that one contestant actually did have the right configuration of products and would have won the $100,000 if he had gone all the way.  That alone proves that Rent is not impossible to win.

Even Punchboard is at least theoretically winnable with its lone $25,000 slip out of 50 holes.

Plinko would need a real freak of nature for all five chips to land in the big money slot and placate the Price purists.
Well, this week was supposed to be a return to normalcy, but that's clearly not allowed.  Since you feel there is no need for this week's FPG to continue, I feel there is no need to continue as an FPG host or a G-R.net member.  Since most people are so desperate to push me out of here, why delay it?  I would have preferred that everybody publicly admitted it rather than string me along for the last two days, but it is what it is.  I am hereby resigning as FPG host and moderator, effective immediately.  whammy007 is the new permanent host.  No R-rated rant or airing of grievances from me.  Just a polite "goodbye for good".

--Fireball to Chelsea, 1/15/16

Offline SteveGavazzi

  • Director
  • **********
  • Posts: 17287
Re: TPiR Recap - 6/4/2012
« Reply #54 on: June 05, 2012, 08:05:57 PM »
Well now Roger is no longer the producer.  The new producer says a $10,000 chip constitutes a win.  I already know the answer, and I am not looking for anyone to explain it to me.  I'm just saying that you can't claim that Roger was right because he was the producer, and then claim Mike, the current producer, is wrong.

Mike is an idiot.  If he were to contradict Roger on something like this, Roger would be right pretty much by default.

(That said, I don't think Mike cares about this one way or the other.)
"Every game is somebody's favorite." -- Wise words from Roger Dobkowitz.

Offline RCPlanes59

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 1203
    • YouTube
Re: TPiR Recap - 6/4/2012
« Reply #55 on: June 05, 2012, 08:13:56 PM »
Mike is an idiot.  If he were to contradict Roger on something like this, Roger would be right pretty much by default.

(That said, I don't think Mike cares about this one way or the other.)

So Steve, what you're saying is that if a contestant wins $25,000 on Punch a Bunch, they actually only won $10,000 because that's the way Roger did it?

Steve, Roger got fired three years ago. Get with the program.
Season 8 (2011-12) CSS 3rd Place

Offline MrPlinko

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 1133
Re: TPiR Recap - 6/4/2012
« Reply #56 on: June 05, 2012, 09:59:31 PM »
I'm sorry that most of the board and our trusty recapper have decided to change the definition of a win for today.

Everybody needs to take a minute and think about why there is such pressure for this to be done.  There have been plenty of other shows that Plinko has been in and the $10k slot has been hit, and nobody makes a peep when these are declared Tech Losses (see here).   

Is it because of a lack of perfect shows in the last few years, and we take what we can get?  This should be no reason to lower our standards for one single show.  The show wasn't perfect, and I'm alright with that. 

Is it because Plinko is too hard to "win", and the definition should be changed entirely?  This is a separate debate from today's show, but it's going to be tough to draw the line.  There are other games that are difficult to win as well.

Right now, the rules state that if the announced prize at the beginning of a cash game is not won, then the game is lost.  If you change this, then it opens up the possibility of $8,000 Bag "wins" and $10,000 Rent "wins".  The definition as stated is clear enough to allow for this not to happen because it is functional across all of the games.

I have no problem with the term Tech Loss, or this statement appearing in green.  I do have an issue with Plinko being counted as won in the final show results, like today or this recap.

I understand, but than the rules should be changed as to what counts a win for a game.  Under the old system and Roger's rules, Plinko will never be won unless someone gets all five chips in $10,000.  I mean Pay The Rent has a better chance of being won at 100,000.  The producers need to re-write the TPIR Rules Constitution so that $10,000 or more is a win in Plinko.  Maybe if you want to call the perfect five chips in $10,000 as a "Super Win" I would be OK with that.  However, what are the odds of "Plinko Perfection?"  You have to have realistic assessments about a game's win-ability, or every cash game is a technical loss unless the top prize amount is won.  If you were on TPIR and you personally won $10,000 or $20,000, at Plinko, would you come home and when the show aired say to the world.  "I lost $20,000 at Plinko on TPIR, because it doesn't count as a win."  The millions of people who watch the show would never accept such a high amount of money given out as a loss.  So in my view, if $10,000 or more is won at Plinko we should count this as a win. If $50,000 is ever won in Plinko, it is a "Super Win."

Joe
« Last Edit: June 05, 2012, 10:06:42 PM by MrPlinko »

Offline SuperMatch93

  • Walking the Golden Road
  • ****
  • Posts: 320
Re: TPiR Recap - 6/4/2012
« Reply #57 on: June 05, 2012, 11:27:35 PM »
Sure, Roger may be a better producer than Mike, but that doesn't change the fact that Mike is the producer. If Roger was still the producer, and he decided to change the rules of winning Plinko, I doubt we would be having this argument.

This reminds me of the debate over whether or not dollar amounts on Jeopardy! that have been adjusted for inflation should count over the newer records.

Offline JokerFan

  • Retro Recap Guide
  • *******
  • Posts: 2485
Re: TPiR Recap - 6/4/2012
« Reply #58 on: June 06, 2012, 12:12:56 AM »
If you were on TPIR and you personally won $10,000 or $20,000, at Plinko, would you come home and when the show aired say to the world.  "I lost $20,000 at Plinko on TPIR, because it doesn't count as a win."
If I won the piggy bank on Any Number, I would say "I won $x playing Any Number" not "I lost $x playing Any Number" even though winning the piggy bank means a loss.  I believe the same thing applies to Plinko.  Saying "lost $20,000" makes it sound like you are paying the show money.

Offline SteveGavazzi

  • Director
  • **********
  • Posts: 17287
Re: TPiR Recap - 6/4/2012
« Reply #59 on: June 06, 2012, 12:35:31 AM »
So Steve, what you're saying is that if a contestant wins $25,000 on Punch a Bunch, they actually only won $10,000 because that's the way Roger did it?

Steve, Roger got fired three years ago. Get with the program.

You don't get to use the phrase "Get with the program" when you've just made an assertion this ridiculously stupid.
"Every game is somebody's favorite." -- Wise words from Roger Dobkowitz.