) I guess the next on will be Poland then...
Post by Mech on Feb 18, 2011 15:20:24 GMT -5
I've noticed that this season that Meredith seems to have more freedom with what she tells contestants during questions. In past seasons it was really noticeable that she wasn't allowed to influence the player's game in any way. Specifically, when a contestant was torn between going for a high dollar question or walking, she would only tell them "You are guaranteed $25,000. If you go for it and win, you get $XXX,XXX. If you're wrong, you lose $XX,XXX".
This season, though, she's giving the vibe about taking more risks. I can recall one contestant who jumped a $25,000 question in round one and then jumped their $100,000 question. They obviously didn't have that big of a bank at this point, and she was very persistent with telling the player "You're _only_ risking $XX,XXX. It's a HUGE payoff of $250,000 and you'd _only lose_ a small amount if you were wrong." It really seems like she's pushing the contestants to take more gambles in round two.
Then, today, the player was going for his $100,000 question. He only had $36,600 in his bank because of two jumps in round one ($25,000 & $7,000). She made it clear to him that he was only risking $11,600 on a $100,000 payoff and made it sound like it was worth the risk. On top of that, she did something I thought she was strictly forbidden to do - that being giving the player more information about the question and answer choices:
"Who authored the majority opinion in 'Miranda vs. Arizona,' the supreme court case that gave rise to the Miranda warnings?"
A: Hugo Black
B: Earl Warren
C: William Brennan
D: William Douglas
The contestant said he was leaning towards "C" because he knew William Brennan was a supreme court justice and wasn't sure if the other three were. In seasons past, the host generally wouldn't say anything about this. The player is supposed to use their own knowledge about the question and make their choice. Getting anymore information from an outside source has the very real possibility of changing the outcome of their game. Meredith immediately went on to say "Well, they are all supreme court justices, not just William Brennan."
Woah! Ok, sure, a lot of people probably knew that but the contestant clearly didn't. With that new information he could have changed his mind about what he was going to do with answering the question. Perhaps he was going to pick William Brennan solely on the fact that he didn't know if the other three were also supreme court justices, but having been told they were by Meredith, he could have easily said "well in that case, I don't know and I'm going to walk." He didn't walk, though. He still chose Brennan and was wrong. But he did say "Thank you for that" to Meredith after she gave him that information.
I think the fact that Meredith can be more open with contestants about the amount of money they are risking and how the gamble is usually worth the risk is a great thing. We're definitely seeing more people take bigger risks and we're all shouting at our TV's "Go for it! You're not risking much!" anyway, and it's nice that Meredith tells them exactly what we are all thinking. As for giving extra information about the answers, yeah it was nice and it would have been great if it helped him win, but it seems like it breeches the integrity of the game.
Any thoughts?
Mech
This season, though, she's giving the vibe about taking more risks. I can recall one contestant who jumped a $25,000 question in round one and then jumped their $100,000 question. They obviously didn't have that big of a bank at this point, and she was very persistent with telling the player "You're _only_ risking $XX,XXX. It's a HUGE payoff of $250,000 and you'd _only lose_ a small amount if you were wrong." It really seems like she's pushing the contestants to take more gambles in round two.
Then, today, the player was going for his $100,000 question. He only had $36,600 in his bank because of two jumps in round one ($25,000 & $7,000). She made it clear to him that he was only risking $11,600 on a $100,000 payoff and made it sound like it was worth the risk. On top of that, she did something I thought she was strictly forbidden to do - that being giving the player more information about the question and answer choices:
"Who authored the majority opinion in 'Miranda vs. Arizona,' the supreme court case that gave rise to the Miranda warnings?"
A: Hugo Black
B: Earl Warren
C: William Brennan
D: William Douglas
The contestant said he was leaning towards "C" because he knew William Brennan was a supreme court justice and wasn't sure if the other three were. In seasons past, the host generally wouldn't say anything about this. The player is supposed to use their own knowledge about the question and make their choice. Getting anymore information from an outside source has the very real possibility of changing the outcome of their game. Meredith immediately went on to say "Well, they are all supreme court justices, not just William Brennan."
Woah! Ok, sure, a lot of people probably knew that but the contestant clearly didn't. With that new information he could have changed his mind about what he was going to do with answering the question. Perhaps he was going to pick William Brennan solely on the fact that he didn't know if the other three were also supreme court justices, but having been told they were by Meredith, he could have easily said "well in that case, I don't know and I'm going to walk." He didn't walk, though. He still chose Brennan and was wrong. But he did say "Thank you for that" to Meredith after she gave him that information.
I think the fact that Meredith can be more open with contestants about the amount of money they are risking and how the gamble is usually worth the risk is a great thing. We're definitely seeing more people take bigger risks and we're all shouting at our TV's "Go for it! You're not risking much!" anyway, and it's nice that Meredith tells them exactly what we are all thinking. As for giving extra information about the answers, yeah it was nice and it would have been great if it helped him win, but it seems like it breeches the integrity of the game.
Any thoughts?
Mech
