First IUFB: Personal Robot (Temi: Mobile personal service robot); ARP: $3,999 (James)
| TRINYON | CRAIG | JAZMINE | MARK |
| 1200 | 1250 | 1600 | 1601 |
Mark is playing LUCKY $EVEN for a 2022 Volkswagen Taos S (1.5L engine, 8-speed AT, FWD, paint/fabric protection, carpeted floor mats, baby mirror, heavy duty trunk liner) (Rachel).
First number is...
Remaining: $7
Guess: 8
Remaining: $4
Guess: 6
Remaining: $2
Guess: 8
Remaining: $1
Guess: 3
Remaining: $0. LOSS
Second IUFB: Designer Sunglasses (Gucci: 4 pairs of aviators); ARP: $1,770 (Overhead)
| TRINYON | CRAIG | JAZMINE | EMILY |
| 1800 | 1000 | 650 | 800 |
Craig is playing Bullseye for MLS Season tickets (2022 Season Tickets for 2 to soccer stadium of your choice + VIP parking, concessions and snacks; ARP: $11,000) (Rachel and James).
Grocery items:
Pick 1: Mouthwash 2 x $5.99 = $11.98 WIN
Third IUFB: Range (Thor Kitchen: Stainles steel gas range with cast iron cooking grates); ARP: $2,399 (James)
| TRINYON | SHEILA | JAZMINE | EMILY |
| 1501 | 1200 | 1600 | 2000 |
Emily is playing PLINKO! for a chance to win $1,000,000!.
Chip #1 (Brad & Taylor Knife Sharpener) (Rachel):
Chip #2 (Nostalgia Electric Fondue Pot):
Chip #3 (Ultrasonic Washer):
Chip #4 (Oxo Digital Food Scale):
Emily drops the first chip...
$ |
||||||||
| 1 0 0 0 |
2 5 0 0 |
5 0 0 0 |
0 | 200 0 0 0 |
0 | 5 0 0 0 |
2 5 0 0 |
1 0 0 0 |
Emily drops the second chip...
$ |
||||||||
| 1 0 0 0 |
2 5 0 0 |
5 0 0 0 |
0 | 200 0 0 0 |
0 | 5 0 0 0 |
2 5 0 0 |
1 0 0 0 |
Emily drops the third chip...
$ |
||||||||
| 1 0 0 0 |
2 5 0 0 |
5 0 0 0 |
0 | 200 0 0 0 |
0 | 5 0 0 0 |
2 5 0 0 |
1 0 0 0 |
Emily drops the fourth chip...
$ |
||||||||
| 1 0 0 0 |
2 5 0 0 |
5 0 0 0 |
0 | 200 0 0 0 |
0 | 5 0 0 0 |
2 5 0 0 |
1 0 0 0 |
LOSS (Total Winnings: $10,121)
SCSD #1
| Contestant | Winnings | Spin 1 | Spin 2 | TOTAL | RESULT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mark | $3,999 | 65 | 55 | 1.20 | |
| Emily | $12,520 | 30 | 10 | .40 | |
| Craig | $12,770 | 60 | – | 60 | *SHOWCASE* |
Fourth IUFB: Designer Luggage (Tumi: pair of suitcases, nylon backpack); ARP: $2,295 (James and Rachel on CHUGGS)
| TRINYON | SHEILA | JAZMINE | RANDALL |
| 726 | 1200 | 850 | 725 |
Sheila is playing BARGAIN GAME for:
She picks Barcelona.
| ITEM | PRICE TAG | ARP | DIFFERENCE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Fifth IUFB: Go-Kart (Electric go-kart with 1600watt power, helmet); ARP: $1,620 (Rachel)
| TRINYON | JEAN | JAZMINE | RANDALL |
| 1500 | 8000 | 3000 | 800 |
Trinyon is playing Double Prices for a 2021 Mitsubishi Outlander Sport LE (2L engine, CVT, FWD, welcome package, tonneau cover, black lug nuts, wheel locks) (James).
Well, Jazmine is still here. We knew the golden limo was coming, but now she needs to escape a trip to Marion Station, Maryland. She bids 3rd here, so it's not pleasant.
Sixth IUFB: Fitness Mirror (Pro-Form iFit: workout mirror, barbell, 2 dumbbells, 4 weight plates, family membership for year of streaming workouts); ARP: $1,499 (James)
| KAREN | JEAN | JAZMINE | RANDALL |
| 1200 | 3500 | 2600 | 2601 |
Jazmine departs while Karen is playing Back to '72 for a chance to win $50,000 in cash (Rachel).
Karen has $50 to price these three items:
WIN
SCSD #2
| Contestant | Winnings | Spin 1 | Spin 2 | TOTAL | RESULT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sheila | $25,385 | 50 | 35 | .85 | |
| Trinyon | $27,370 | 15 | 80 | .95 | *SHOWCASE* |
| Karen | $51,641 | 65 | 95 | 1.60 |
THE FABULOUS SHOWCASES
Trinyon has the honors...
SC1 - Craig
SC2 - Trinyon
Results: 4 out of 6
Winnings: $172,996
Biggest Winner: Craig
This Recap is solely intended for the purpose of Golden-Road.net.
Reproduction of this without authorized consent is prohibited.
Recap produced by Roadgeek Adam
Templates by Visualbasicwizard and WhammyPower788
CSS work provided by cu2010.
I like the Back To '72 game so far! It seems like it'll be a fun game! I just wish it wasn't temporary, and exclusive to this season! Hopefully there will be enough popular demand to keep that game for a while longer! You know! Wheel Of Fortune's cash format was only supposed to be for about a month in 1987, and they've kept it to this day! Plus, Month Hall was only planning to host Let's Make A Deal for only a month on the 1990 version, and he stuck around until that version was cancelled in early 1991!
As an aside re: the prize descriptions....I was kinda hoping they'd used Johnny Olson's voiceovers for those, that woulda been a definite blast from the past and added to the feel of the game that much more. I think George tried to sound like him, especially for the 1st prize, but it's not the same as the genuine article.
What I'd personally love to see them do, is each successive season they play it, have it change years. Aka Season 51 could be Back to 73, 52 Back to 74, and so on. And course, each season would use prizes specific to the year tied to the game. I think it'd be a great idea and a way to maintain a nod to the show's past as time goes on from here.
I like the backdrop used for the game, it looks like part of the old turntable with the color pattern from that year is used. I hope they use that backdrop when showing item up for bids behind the giant price tag. Maybe have the same backdrop with the purple, red, orange color pattern used this season.
I think they should have used the blue cards with the brand name for the small prizes. Music cues from that year should be used during the game play. I am hoping they will use some of the vintage music cues this season. I like the backdrop used for the game, it looks like part of the old turntable with the color pattern from that year is used. I hope they use that backdrop when showing item up for bids behind the giant price tag. Maybe have the same backdrop with the purple, red, orange color pattern used this season.Why stop there? Exhume Johnny's corpse to read the copy! Bring back the harassment!
In thinking about it, maybe they're being cheeky when they say Back To 72 will be retired at the end of the season. Because next year it will be called Back To 73.
That's exactly what I was thinking! No need to throw out a perfectly good game at the end of the season!
Back to '72: Our first new game in 1,457 days! It's a good concept that has a lot of really cool throwback elements such as the background looking like the old turntable, the shag carpeting, and the TV with a dial that changes "channels" as the amount you can be off by goes down. I do wish they had come up with a different pricing scheme for the game as this one feels like it's going to be too easy. Today's contestant messed up on the last product--given that she had $36 to play with, she should have guessed no less than $86. As mentioned above, I also hope they bring back classic prize cues for this game.
It would be cool to see screencaps of the items from when they originally appeared though, and probably well within the realm of possibility.It would certainly remove the potential issues with attempting to track down the actual physical items. It would also allow the game to use larger-size SPs than could reasonably fit inside the TV screen prop.
I think they should have used the blue cards with the brand name for the small prizes.The blue sponsor cards were not in place during 1972, instead being orange/tan.
I like the Back To '72 game so far! It seems like it'll be a fun game! I just wish it wasn't temporary, and exclusive to this season! Hopefully there will be enough popular demand to keep that game for a while longer! You know! Wheel Of Fortune's cash format was only supposed to be for about a month in 1987, and they've kept it to this day! Plus, Month Hall was only planning to host Let's Make A Deal for only a month on the 1990 version, and he stuck around until that version was cancelled in early 1991!
Also, yes, I'd love to see somebody win a million dollars this week in one of the remaining games!
Would Back to ‘72 work better if the ARP for each item wasn’t revealed until after the contestant has made their guess for all 3 items similar to the setup of Give or Keep?
If there are keeping the high cash prize for the game, then holding off on revealing the prices may increase the difficulty of the game.
That's exactly what I was thinking! No need to throw out a perfectly good game at the end of the season!
Seconded. I'm optimistic that they'll change their minds, but they'd have to call it something else.
Wouldn't they have to pay Johnny's estate money for having him "read" the copy again in a new episode?
Given that Fremantle can air hundreds, heck, thousands of game show episodes where Johnny announces across Buzzr/Barker Era Price, I don't think that's a concern.Reruns, particularly on a niche streaming channel, are a whole different thing than new episodes on a broadcast network. I don't think you can blow it off that easily. That being said, I will freely admit I don't have knowledge of Johnny's contract, or anything else related to this - it was just the thought I had as to why they aren't using Johnny's voice. Everything boils down to money.
I'm also not necessarily sold on the idea of playing a pricing game which requires zero knowledge of current, present day prizes and the like...I don't think anybody--both in the past regime and the current one--have ever explicitly stated that the show must focus on modern-day goods and prices.
Reruns, particularly on a niche streaming channel, are a whole different thing than new episodes on a broadcast network. I don't think you can blow it off that easily.
I don't think anybody--both in the past regime and the current one--have ever explicitly stated that the show must focus on modern-day goods and prices.
Knowing the prices of items from 2021 vs. knowing the prices of items from 1972 are two different skillsets.That’s like asking a Jeopardy contestant to only study up on modern history, even though ancient history is still a potential subject.
That’s like asking a Jeopardy contestant to only study up on modern history, even though ancient history is still a potential subject.
In the end, It’s still pricing knowledge irregardless, and that’s the whole premise of the show.
That’s like asking a Jeopardy contestant to only study up on modern history, even though ancient history is still a potential subject.
In the end, It’s still pricing knowledge irregardless, and that’s the whole premise of the show.
Not to mention Now or Then has asked similar of contestants (if including current prices into mix too), for many years now. This isn't that new in that sense.
I'm also not necessarily sold on the idea of playing a pricing game which requires zero knowledge of current, present day prizes and the like (someone could likely counter that Now....or Then is also like this but that is incorrect; you can know the prices of everything "NOW" and know that the prices that don't match are "THEN"s).I guess you aren't aware that Now...or Then requires literally no pricing knowledge at all and can be won 100% of the time by simply knowing that exactly 2 of the 6 products are "THEN".
I guess you aren't aware that Now...or Then requires literally no pricing knowledge at all and can be won 100% of the time by simply knowing that exactly 2 of the 6 products are "THEN".
http://slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2013/11/winning_the_price_is_right_strategies_for_contestants_row_plinko_and_the.html
Oh, don't worry, I was. I've read all of LiteBulb's stuff (which is excellent, by the way) and remember running into that exact article which he linked to. :)
I was arguing strictly from a pricing perspective, but if nothing else, you just further proved my point that knowledge of what items cost during the "THEN" date isn't necessary in that game.
And that thought isn't totally true. Without knowing which 2 are the Then you may still make an error(s) that stop you from winning.
For instance, you pick 2 Now correctly. Go to pick the 3rd for the win and say now and it is then. Now to win you are forced to pick the one on the other side of the 2 correct - if you get that wrong you can no longer win, and you don't know for certain which one it is.
Theoretically, you could try the other ones first, but no one does that and would that even be permitted if someone tried?
I never even knew that it was only 2 that were Then. Has that always been the case? Seems like it could easily be exploited...almost too much so.Since the late 90s, at least.
Seems like it could easily be exploited...almost too much so.
Theoretically, you could try the other ones first, but no one does that and would that even be permitted if someone tried?
Insanity: doing the same exact thing over and over expecting different results.
Million Dollar Plinko is insanity.
Once again, Million Dollar Plinko is insanity.They'll never learn.