Your Game Show Pet Peeves

[gamesurf]

Oh those prize puzzles. Some days they feel like a real reach to fit the prize after so many years.

I get it--the pressure of actually being on the show...If you're thinking but not sure, the investment and possibly extra time to think if you're still, uh, puzzling over some other part of the answer.

Agreed all around

real money at stake.

See, I got the opposite theory: it’s not psychologically “real money” until you’ve won it. To a nervous contestant, it’s just house money, just points in a bank tallying up the score. And you’re almost never gonna be in a situation where $250 decides the game.

I have a much easier time forgiving that scenario far easier than I can forgive, say, a friend in financial need being so easily willing to throw away $250 on something so frivolous.

[Briguy]

My biggest involves Wheel of Fortune also.  I don’t like when the contestants pick an obvious vowel, and then immediately after solve the puzzle, costing them $250.  That just seems dumb to me.

I've been on a forum where the basic idea of many of their stories is "what's obvious to one isn't so obvious to another." Like Pat Sajak is so oft to say, playing the game in the studio is not the same as playing at home.

And besides, better to be sure that the vowel is correct and help you be 100-percent sure of the puzzle ... rather than give an incorrect solution without buying a vowel and it cost the contestant a lot more than $250.

(The only time I'd recommend not buying a vowel in such a situation is if the game were on the line and buying a vowel and then solving would still cause them to fall less than $250 short of the leader (i.e., lose). Then again, in the heat of competition, most contestants probably aren't thinking that.)

Brian

[Briguy]

While I realize and respect that this entirely a personal thing,  maybe think about this one a bit.   The “Zero Rule” is not so much a  published “rule” as an internal guideline to make the game regularly winnable.    It is not immediately obvious to the average viewer.   Someone who watches the show even, say, 2 or 3 days a week might only end up seeing one or two playings of 10C in a year’s time, depending on the game rotation, or they might not see it at all.    Even if they do, the chances of them noticing that all prices specifically end in 0 would be remote.   Given that the average person who gets on stage is not a game show statistician, one can hardly fault them for believing the price can be any combination of the given numbers, especially as such is implied if not explicitly stated in the on-air rules explanations.  They aren’t being “stupid” or doing something unintuitive, they just don’t have a piece of privileged information. 


In fact, this “rule” remains one of the few real advantages that LFsAT still have should they be chosen as a contestants because of its relative obscurity.   Further, it makes the game more exciting to watch for those in the know as it builds suspense as each DIGIT is written, rather than just each price.

I guess if I had a pet peeve about 10 Chances, it's not that they "don't know the 'zero rule'." Hardly that.

It's that, when they make a line of incorrect guesses, they get rattled and end up repeating a previous answer.

This is why I think they haven't enforced the so-called "10-second rule" very much if at all. In all the times I've seen the game, I've seen many times where a contestant gets shaken up when they get several incorrect guesses on the three-digit prize (it's always been the three-digit prize) and they have, consequently, fewer chances to win the car.

That's when it's a good idea for Drew -- something both he and Bob have done -- to take the contestant aside, tell them to relax and take a deep breath, review their previous guesses and then really think about what other prices could fit the three-digit prize. Better to take their time and at least try to play the game well rather than rush the game with some "10-second rule."

(And yes, I get why they might have had a "10-second" rule ... to prevent unneeded stalling and to keep the show on pace.)

Brian

[htmlcc92]

...

Then again, in the heat of competition, most contestants probably aren't thinking that.)

...

Is Wheel like Jeopardy! in that there are displays off camera in front of the contestants that they can see that show each of their current scores?

[Casey]

I should have maybe been more clear in the specific example I mean that irritates me.  Not all vowel buys right before a solve bother me - sometimes you aren’t sure of 1 word until the vowel is in it.

But in a case where it’s like:
BUYING _ VOW_L

and the person buys an A and then solves - that’s when it bothers me.

[COINBOYNYC]

One of my pet peeves has always been when the host says "I'll" do something, as if the action in question was entirely up to his discretion.  For example, when Richard Karn hosted Family Feud he would always say "I'm going to double the points" instead of "We're going to double the points" - in this case, "we're" meaning "the show," which I thought was more appropriate.

[wrikent3500]

It came about because of the Money Cards and contestants betting big amounts of money on a card and having a double show up and losing in some cases everything bet

Card Sharks doubles rule that allowed contestants to win or lose in the main game on a duplicated card, despite there being no option to predict that. Never has seemed fair to me. And if the rumors are to be believed....based on what Tom Kennedy said in an interview he did a couple years ago, it may well be the reason he passed on doing the show when offered it. Listen to what he says here and you be the judge.

[pricefan18]

It came about because of the Money Cards and contestants betting big amounts of money on a card and having a double show up and losing in some cases everything bet

That has nothing to do with the main game does it? I'm confused as how it would be. Are you thinking of the later push rule? That isn't what I am talking about here. I'm strictly speaking of how a contestant could call higher on a 2 on their set of cards, get another 2 and lose control/the game itself through no fault of their own.

[b_masters8]

That has nothing to do with the main game does it? I'm confused as how it would be. Are you thinking of the later push rule? That isn't what I am talking about here. I'm strictly speaking of how a contestant could call higher on a 2 on their set of cards, get another 2 and lose control/the game itself through no fault of their own.

And the embarrassment would be trebled if it were sudden-death and you were behind, 1 game-nil, in a game that you needed to win in order to tie the match!

[pricefan18]

And the embarrassment would be trebled if it were sudden-death and you were behind, 1 game-nil, in a game that you needed to win in order to tie the match!

Yeah that part is even worse. At least up to then you could hypothetically freeze and then subsequently change a card if you felt a duplicate was coming if you won control of the next question, but at that stage it was basically a crapshoot.

[Teddy]

Here's another one from Family Feud: Since the show came back in 1999, Fast Money losses do not include the long buzzer sound like they did when Dawson and Combs were the hosts. I've always wondered what the reason for that was, probably because someone on the staff did not like it and wanted it gone completely.

[Priceboi1983]

 What irks me is when a George Grey calls it “Bidder’s Row”. It is Contestant’s Row and has been that way since September 4, 1972.

[TPIR_rules]

Ken Jennings constantly losing to Brad Rutter on Jeopardy!.

[COINBOYNYC]

I don't like that they call the mountain climber from Cliffhangers "Yodely Guy," because he's not doing any actual yodeling.

Also, it makes me think of Yodels (the snack cake).

[1DC]

To be fair to George Gray, there was actually at least 1 time where Rod Roddy called Contestants' Row "Bidders' row" when he was announcer. I have an old Price is Right episode from 1993 or so where he did just that as a model was bringing an item up for bids there for the 4 contestants to look at. I'm not sure if there were any other instances of Roddy calling Contestants' Row "Bidders' row".