Author Topic: Pay the Rent - why hasn't it been axed yet?  (Read 1664 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tpir04

  • In the Audience
  • **
  • Posts: 68
Pay the Rent - why hasn't it been axed yet?
« on: June 29, 2018, 08:55:48 AM »
I asked the question in the subject line, now here is my explanation. Frankly, I believe it's just an excuse to offer $100,000. Yet even someone with a vague understanding of prices can walk away with $10,000.

Offline Punchboard91

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 4719
Re: Pay the Rent - why hasn't it been axed yet?
« Reply #1 on: June 29, 2018, 10:20:25 AM »
You answered your own question. It offers a huge cash prize that is rarely won. And yes, typically most contestants are able to reach $10,000, but a good number of them still risk it and go for the $100,000.

Offline JayC

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 4649
Re: Pay the Rent - why hasn't it been axed yet?
« Reply #2 on: June 29, 2018, 10:49:20 AM »
I feel like if a new regime were to take over Pay the Rent may be retired or reformatted to be downsized and offer a lower top prize, but unless that happens there's no way it'll be axed. It allows them to offer a large prize while only giving it away at most once or twice a season, and $10,000 isn't the budget hit it once was.

Offline garffreak

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 1761
Re: Pay the Rent - why hasn't it been axed yet?
« Reply #3 on: June 29, 2018, 10:48:48 PM »
Because there is no reason to retire it.

It's a high-stakes cash game that draws excitement. It adds thrill and drama.  And it holds a better win/loss rate than the next highest payout cash game (Plinko).

The Big Three is now the Big Four; I do not see that changing any time soon.
New TPiR Announcer: Gilbert Gottfried.  See?  Things *can* be worse.

Offline Estil

  • In the Audience
  • **
  • Posts: 61
Re: Pay the Rent - why hasn't it been axed yet?
« Reply #4 on: July 03, 2018, 05:34:21 PM »
That excitement is pretty much gone as soon as the contestant puts the cheapest product in the mailbox...the show knows most contestants will do that instinctively, and right away blow any chance at the $100K.  It along with Temptation are a couple of my most disliked Pricing Games because you already know the game will be lost...in the case of Temptation it's nearly impossible to win (it once had a five YEAR losing streak did it not?) and that's not justified for a "regular car" game...if it offered a big luxury/sports car or offered two cars (one digit in each small price goes with one car, the other in the other car) it'd be different.

Offline Estil

  • In the Audience
  • **
  • Posts: 61
Re: Pay the Rent - why hasn't it been axed yet?
« Reply #5 on: July 03, 2018, 05:36:18 PM »
Because there is no reason to retire it.

It's a high-stakes cash game that draws excitement. It adds thrill and drama.  And it holds a better win/loss rate than the next highest payout cash game (Plinko).

The Big Three is now the Big Four; I do not see that changing any time soon.

Plinko doesn't really count because (technically) it's only a "win" if all five chips land in the big spot which is pretty much impossible (I think only once has a contestant done it four times; how many times has the big spot ($5 or $10K depending on era) been hit three times?).

Offline garffreak

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 1761
Re: Pay the Rent - why hasn't it been axed yet?
« Reply #6 on: July 04, 2018, 11:11:47 PM »
Plinko still counts, even if it is hard and all luck.  It's still easier than Stack the Deck with a car price of $21,034.
New TPiR Announcer: Gilbert Gottfried.  See?  Things *can* be worse.

Offline jimme

  • Outside in Line
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: Pay the Rent - why hasn't it been axed yet?
« Reply #7 on: July 18, 2018, 08:25:14 PM »
It is one of the several games I actually try to play along with in real time.  It does get exciting if the contestant is making a decent attempt at winning.

Offline ooboh

  • In Contestant's Row
  • ***
  • Posts: 224
Re: Pay the Rent - why hasn't it been axed yet?
« Reply #8 on: July 18, 2018, 08:44:17 PM »
Plinko still counts, even if it is hard and all luck.  It's still easier than Stack the Deck with a car price of $21,034.

I fail to see how guessing a car price of $21,034 is harder than the 1-in-59,049 chance of winning $50,000, provided you get all four prizes. Heck, I could guess that price if I knew the car in question and managed to get one of the three grocery products pairs correct.

Offline RedWing512

  • In the Audience
  • **
  • Posts: 64
Re: Pay the Rent - why hasn't it been axed yet?
« Reply #9 on: July 20, 2018, 09:31:19 AM »
That excitement is pretty much gone as soon as the contestant puts the cheapest product in the mailbox...the show knows most contestants will do that instinctively, and right away blow any chance at the $100K.

Here's the thing, though--we know that when a contestant does that they are more than likely heading for a loss, but does Joe Plinko know that? I'd be willing to wager that they don't.

If the contestants on the show can't figure out the secret, then most people at home won't either, and consequently the game still remains exciting for them up until the final reveal.

Offline Plinkoman

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 1828
Re: Pay the Rent - why hasn't it been axed yet?
« Reply #10 on: July 20, 2018, 10:35:03 AM »
I have a love/hate relationship with PtR. I hate it because it is rarely won and can be deceiving to the average viewer. I love it because it is a fun challenge to me as a LFaT. When it's played I usually grab a pen and paper and try to play along.

If any cash game needs to be axed it's Time Is Money. Very little play along factor for me and it's aggrevating to see how often this game is lost or played poorly. After the initial ten seconds for the $20k, the game just seems messy and anti-climatic to me.

Anyway, that's just my two cents.

Offline Alfonzo

  • Director
  • **********
  • Posts: 3217
Re: Pay the Rent - why hasn't it been axed yet?
« Reply #11 on: July 20, 2018, 10:47:14 AM »
If any cash game needs to be axed it's Time Is Money. Very little play along factor for me and it's aggrevating to see how often this game is lost or played poorly. After the initial ten seconds for the $20k, the game just seems messy and anti-climatic to me.

Proof positive that there's different strokes for different folks. One thing the new regime did that the old one couldn't was make Time is Money work. They turned a poorly thought out Switcheroo rip-off into one of the better cash games that actually reward you for knowing what you are doing. That, and making the name of the game mean something.

Besides, if play along factor really meant anything Plinko would have been gone a long time ago.

"Audience, if you're scared buy a dog!"

Bryan, the Punchboard player who gave up $5,000 for a chance at $10,000 and won ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPQ_RRwCfhY )