# I’ll be on The Chase (ABC) Spoilers



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

I was a contestant on season one of The Chase, premiering this Thursday on ABC. 

I’m on episode 107, airing January 21st. It was such a fun experience and I am excited to share.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Thanks for letting us know. I'll definitely set this up to watch now. Remind us again right before it airs


----------



## series5orpremier (Jul 6, 2013)

I already had a OnePass set up but this is cool to know and adds even more reason to watch. The first episode airs Thursday night so I'll be watching all the way through the 21st at least. The promo shows the three big Jeopardy champions. I think I saw that Ken Jennings will also be the interim-host of Jeopardy starting next week.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

Glad you had fun, look forward to watching it, and hope you were successful in your try at it!


----------



## ThePhoenix (Feb 13, 2008)

I was already looking forward to this show. Now, there’s one more reason to watch. Good luck! I mean, hope you did well!


----------



## series5orpremier (Jul 6, 2013)

I was just watching last night's Jimmy Kimmel, and at the 17 minute mark there's a commercial for The Chase. It features a contestant referring to the Jeopardy champions, "We're not afraid to take down any of those guys." Nice.


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

Looking forward to watching! I already had a season pass set up to record, but it's even more exciting to watch someone I know is on the show. So cool!


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Very exciting. I also had an SP, because of the hosts, but now there is a special reason to watch.

I'm confident you did well!


----------



## MauriAnne (Sep 21, 2002)

I watched tonight's premiere and liked it. Can't wait for your episode @firerose818 and to hear the behind-the-scenes scoop.


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

I like that they added the revolving "chasers" to this version 
Like watching them rag on the person in the hot seat.



Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

The game was OK but I just hate the hour-long, prime-time gameshow format. The actual gameplay is buried under two tons of glitz and fancy lights and blah banter. One of the great things about Jeopardy! is they fit so many questions into a tight half-hour. I was definitely leaning on the FF button during the individual chase portion.

The best parts of this were the other Chasers watching, and also allowing answers to be given as soon as possible. You really get a feel for how amazing these guys are at this by how fast they come up with answers across a wide spectrum. And also how good they are at guessing correctly even if they're not sure.

One thing: the first guy, who got kicked out, seemed to me to get much harder questions during his chase than the second two.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

I miss the Beast.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

As a huge fan of the UK version, which has four contestants and a little less filler, I kinda liked the changes that stop it being a direct copy - namely the chasers. The amounts involved are ginormous in comparison and the individual chase questions are a lot harder (the UK version can see up to 8 or 9 correct answers).

I was intrigued to see that the sound effects during the chaser board were the same, which made me wonder if there was a five second time limit to pressing the answer button like the UK show or not (like the GSN version).


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I enjoyed it. Challenging questions, and the game format works well (unlike the stupid show that followed it). Looking forward to seeing one of our own on here in a few weeks


----------



## DVR_Dave (Apr 19, 2017)

I watched the UK version the last time I was over there on vacation. I kinda liked that version better.


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

TonyTheTiger said:


> As a huge fan of the UK version, which has four contestants and a little less filler, I kinda liked the changes that stop it being a direct copy - namely the chasers. The amounts involved are ginormous in comparison and the individual chase questions are a lot harder (the UK version can see up to 8 or 9 correct answers).
> 
> I was intrigued to see that the sound effects during the chaser board were the same, which made me wonder if there was a five second time limit to pressing the answer button like the UK show or not (like the GSN version).


I can confirm you have five seconds to answer the question.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

I thought the snarky comments from the peanut gallery was a little odd.

I also would have liked to see the Chaser give his answers before the answer is revealed. It's a little weird when they go "oh, yeah, I got that one right." I know he certainly had the answer locked in, but it still kind of _feels_ like he could just say he got it right when he really didn't.


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

When you are playing, you look at a monitor and you can see that you both select an answer.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

LoadStar said:


> I thought the snarky comments from the peanut gallery was a little odd.
> 
> I also would have liked to see the Chaser give his answers before the answer is revealed. It's a little weird when they go "oh, yeah, I got that one right." I know he certainly had the answer locked in, but it still kind of _feels_ like he could just say he got it right when he really didn't.


It worked the same way on the UK version of the game, with "The Beast", and I used to gripe about that as well. Sure, it's locked in (we assume and are promised) but I'd rather hear it from the Chaser and know it that way (or see it on the screen if they want to show it that way, just to have it confirmed in some way that makes it more obvious what they chose).


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

So no spoilers of course, but tell us what the filming was like, and how did you get picked? 

Fun background stuff.



Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

TIVO_GUY_HERE said:


> So no spoilers of course, but tell us what the filming was like, and how did you get picked?
> 
> Fun background stuff.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


1) I think I am going to live tweet when it airs, Pacific Time (I am @museummama818)

2) @trainman told me about open auditions. I filled out the form, and then took an online trivia test. After that, I did about an hour long zoom audition with a producer where we tested lighting, etc and I completed a few trivia rounds with him. That tape got edited and sent to ABC. From there it was a long time of not hearing anything, and then I was contacted by the show producers about filming and Covid testing.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

firerose818 said:


> 2) @trainman told me about open auditions. I filled out the form, and then took an online trivia test. After that, I did about an hour long zoom audition with a producer where we tested lighting, etc and I completed a few trivia rounds with him.


I had done that hour-long Zoom audition, and at the end, the producer basically said, "We're still looking for more contestants, especially women, so if you know any, please send them our way." I knew a hint when I heard one. Due to travel restrictions and whatnot, they were really only looking for people located in Southern California, so @firerose818 was the first person I thought of (I know from LearnedLeague and elsewhere that she's very good at trivia).

Obviously, I think I should get a cut of her winnings, if there are any!


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

I think people are sort of using this as a general discussion thread for the show..

I thought it was pretty interesting. I liked the peanut gallery comments from the two other chasers..

I don't THINK I've seen it before.. at least not a full episode. There was a GSN version IIRC.

At first it seemed strange that the contestant doesn't get farther in the first chase round depending on how many questions they get right.. But it does vary how much money they get. Also, the amounts offered by the chaser varied by a lot.. two different contestants had $75K, but the amounts for the ahead/behind spots were wildly different.

I do like the "chaser gets the question wrong, contestant can answer it to get even farther ahead". That sort of feels like the animal fighting against the lion attacking it. It would feel more like a chase/be more dramatic if they did questions one by one with the contestant/chaser, but that might take up extra time.


----------



## series5orpremier (Jul 6, 2013)

A repeat of the first episode is in my program guide for tonight 10/9 pm.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

I'm enjoying it so far. It has enough trivia content to keep me watching. I can't take shows where you spend a minute or two between each question. Having said that, during the middle phase (defend your money?), once the contestant makes a choice, there is a five second wait until they show the correct answer. Why? It's a waste of time, just show us the answer. 

Assuming the GOATs cycle equally, Brad Rutter is next week. Of the three, he's the one I'd rather face. James is a monster. A beast. He beat them in 2/3 of the time allotted.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I just started watching this show after firerise's post. I basically like the show but wish there was (a lot) less banter and the 3 or 4 seconds delay between the host asking for the answer and the correct answer being indicated drives me nuts. Some of the Chasers' "insults" seem scripted.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

cheesesteak said:


> Some of the Chasers' "insults" seem scripted.


Oh I bet they were, but I thought they were still funny. Heck, James even said one of the hosts' comments was scripted, and she admitted it -- at least that's what I understood them to mean.


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

I enjoy the GSN version with Brooke and the Beast - the have a great rapport together-but I cannot watch in real time-have to DVR and FF. Same with this version-too much filler. It's fun so far though. Glad they are keeping the same format as the GSN version-IMHO any change would ruin the show.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

Regina said:


> I enjoy the GSN version with Brooke and the Beast - the have a great rapport together-but I cannot watch in real time-have to DVR and FF. Same with this version-too much filler. It's fun so far though. * Glad they are keeping the same format as the GSN version*-IMHO any change would ruin the show.


Not quite. As I confirmed with FireRose, in the second half of the chase (between the contestant and chaser), there is a five second rule that wasn't in the GSN version. IOW, after one or other locks in an answer, the opponent has five seconds to do the same or they forfeit the question. I've only seen the first episode so far, so I'm not sure if this is the only difference - apart from the prize values, of course.

By contrast, the UK version has four contestants and, as a daytime show, lower prize values (1000UKP per Q to start and up to about 80,000 for the high offer). Of course, with a fourth player and potentially four steps advantage in the final chase, it's fractionally easier to win, although it doesn't happen very often.


----------



## ThePhoenix (Feb 13, 2008)

I’m pretty sure that 5 second rule was also in the original GSN version.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

TonyTheTiger said:


> Not quite. As I confirmed with FireRose, in the second half of the chase (between the contestant and chaser), there is a five second rule that wasn't in the GSN version. IOW, after one or other locks in an answer, the opponent has five seconds to do the same or they forfeit the question. I've only seen the first episode so far, so I'm not sure if this is the only difference - apart from the prize values, of course.
> 
> By contrast, the UK version has four contestants and, as a daytime show, lower prize values (1000UKP per Q to start and up to about 80,000 for the high offer). Of course, with a fourth player and potentially four steps advantage in the final chase, it's fractionally easier to win, although it doesn't happen very often.


That brings up the only quibble I've had with any version of the show. It is too hard to win.


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

So I think I just saw firerose818 on an ad for the show. That's going by her avatar picture, as I've never met her. Yay firerose818!


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Tomorrow night!


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

Howie said:


> So I think I just saw firerose818 on an ad for the show. That's going by her avatar picture, as I've never met her. Yay firerose818!


I have been in a few promos!


----------



## MauriAnne (Sep 21, 2002)

firerose818 said:


> I have been in a few promos!


I just saw you !!!!!


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

MauriAnne said:


> I just saw you !!!!!


Me too! Sandwiched in between Bruce, Bon Jovi, Tom, and the Pres. Not a bad sandwich!


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

Too bad I wasn’t watching ABC.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Regina said:


> I enjoy the GSN version with Brooke and the Beast - the have a great rapport together-but I cannot watch in real time-have to DVR and FF.


1.7x makes a lot of these game shows such more entertaining!


----------



## Demandred (Mar 6, 2001)

Great job!


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

Spoilerizing just in case...


Spoiler



The first contestant was pretty bad. It may have just been bad luck, but she was not good at all on the questions she was asked. Frankly, I'm surprised that she even got the single question right. Not surprised at all that she couldn't make it through.

Wes, the second contestant on the team, did pretty well. Some tough questions and unfortunately unable to bank more than the 3 correct questions worth, but did pretty well and did make it through.

That leaves Firerose who got some tough questions and pulled out 4 correct. Nothing at all to sneeze at. Don't blame her at all for not trying for the higher payout, and kept it close though, well.... in the end.

Hopefully it was a ton of fun just to be on the show. Would have liked to see it more competitive in the final chase but the chaser is always at the advantage and is just so quick that it is hard to beat them unless the team builds up a huge lead.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

I thought you did great. After a rough start in the first part, you came on strong towards the end to get $100K. And a good start in the Chase. But then some really tough questions once you got close to the bottom. I only knew orrery because that word was used in Lovecraft Country, never heard it before that.

Rocks?!? Really, rocks? Some pretty obscure questions.

Having watched all three episodes, it's becoming clear how hard it is to win. You basically have a "regular person" going up against one of the three GOAT trivia champs. No matter how good one is, no one is _that _good. Of the nine contestants, only four made it to the end, and that's with a three question head start. And of the three finals, it's 2-1 GOATs.

They need to have some prize in between all or none. Maybe some money based on how close the final was. Even Jeopardy lets you walk away with $1K or $2K.

Congrats again. You looked great, came across as confident, and did us proud (like we had anything to do with it ).


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

Thanks. It was indeed crazy hard. It really was a lot of fun though.


----------



## lalouque (Feb 11, 2002)

Penguins! Done in by penguins. :screamcat:


----------



## series5orpremier (Jul 6, 2013)

At least you made a friend, in case you ever run into Brad Rutter again.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

I feel like the difference in taking the lower money vs the money you earn after you have 1 person who's already banked money is well worth it. To get the chaser 1 more step away.

These guys know everything. 

I forget the actual money, i think it was $50k difference, but when paired with the $75k, it's just $25k each.

-smak-


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

series5orpremier said:


> At least you made a friend, in case you ever run into Brad Rutter again.


Between those 3 guys, Brad is by far the most charming guy. JH is kinda a D

-smak-


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

astrohip said:


> only knew orrery because that word was used in Lovecraft Country, never heard it before that.


I had heard it before that, but having seen it in LC meant it was fresh in my head. And I knew penguins were perverts. But damn, those were some hard questions! I would not have fared nearly as well overall.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Somehow I knew the penguin question, probably saw it on some documentary I watched (March of the Penguins perhaps?). I should have known the orrery question as I saw Lovecraft but for some reason didn't remember, but also orrey has or in it, from orbit.

Great job! It has to be hard with the lights on and under all that pressure to have a clear enough mind to get those questions. I'm not sure I could do it. Maybe the thirtysomething self could have but at this age, my memory isn't what it used to be.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

Steveknj said:


> I should have known the orrery question as I saw Lovecraft but for some reason didn't remember,


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

eddyj said:


>


Oh I remember it now. I just didn't when watching The Chase.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

1. Great job, Ilana!

2. I don't like this show. It's fun to watch people win. But they set up a show where that's almost impossible.

Hey Turtleboy, for $1 billion, you can go 1 on one with LeBron James!


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

Turtleboy said:


> 1. Great job, Ilana!
> 
> 2. I don't like this show. It's fun to watch people win. But they set up a show where that's almost impossible.


I enjoyed the older version of the show (with "The Beast") and would concur, it is a very difficult show. Would also hope that they do pay *something* to people that actually make it to the final chase, even if it is just a relatively small consolation prize. Just making it that far is very tough. The questions that are asked are not easy. Actually reminds me a bit of when _Who Wants to be a Millionaire_ first aired. The questions were deceptively tough. They looked fairly easy, and many of us would have known about 60 - 80% of the answers, but on any given question the chance of getting the answer right would have been tough.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Also, questions are a lot easier when you are sitting on your couch.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

Turtleboy said:


> Also, questions are a lot easier when you are sitting on your couch.


Oh, most definitely! And they were not easy even then!


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

You did good, Ilana (now I know your name). You made all of us TCFers proud.


----------



## kaszeta (Jun 11, 2004)

Turtleboy said:


> Also, questions are a lot easier when you are sitting on your couch.


Yeah, that was like my experience (and probably Firerose's as well) with a Learned League championship. It's one thing to sit back and answer my morning trivia questions over a cup of coffee sitting at my dining room table, with no pressure, trying to coax those recalcitrant neurons that aren't _quite_ remembering an answer.

It's a whole different matter to do 4 rounds of 12 questions with 10 minute time limits each. That time pressure makes all the difference.

Doing it live with studio lights, etc? That can't help either. 

Well done, Ilana.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

terpfan1980 said:


> I enjoyed the older version of the show (with "The Beast") and would concur, it is a very difficult show. Would also hope that they do pay *something* to people that actually make it to the final chase, even if it is just a relatively small consolation prize. Just making it that far is very tough. The questions that are asked are not easy. Actually reminds me a bit of when _Who Wants to be a Millionaire_ first aired. The questions were deceptively tough. They looked fairly easy, and many of us would have known about 60 - 80% of the answers, but on any given question the chance of getting the answer right would have been tough.


I'd change this up that whatever money you win in the "chase" round is yours, and you can double it in the final round, or you get the money you won, plus the combined value of the final round. So for example, you win $100k in the Chase round, and another person wins 75k in the Chase round, then you keep that $100k and go for $175k additional (each) in the final round. Something like that


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> I'd change this up that whatever money you win in the "chase" round is yours, and you can double it in the final round, or you get the money you won, plus the combined value of the final round. So for example, you win $100k in the Chase round, and another person wins 75k in the Chase round, then you keep that $100k and go for $175k additional (each) in the final round. Something like that


Too much money for a game show to do weekly. But surely something in between all or none could be figured out.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

astrohip said:


> Too much money for a game show to do weekly. But surely something in between all or none could be figured out.


I don't think so, For example the musical game show on Fox with Jamie Foxx as host (I can't remember the name off hand, gave out money like that every week. I don't think it's that much in today's money.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

That all depends on whose money you are talking about. Game show has profit motive. They want to produce content that they can sell (popular content) without spending too much on it. Look at successful shows such as Jeopardy, Wheel of Fortune, etc. They are typically handing 10's of thousands to the winners. Not hundreds of thousands in any one show. Even then, there are lots of times when Jeopardy, at least until recently with more hunting going on and higher risk bets, etc., was only paying out in the teens (to the winner) and then the consolation prizes to the runner up and third place finishers.

Hell, GSN somewhat irritates me with their "America Says" game show. It's all or nothing, though they do give $1k to the winner of the main game. In the bonus round though it's $15k if you can win it, but otherwise too bad, no matter how many items you got right in the bonus round. I wish they'd give $100 per item right in the bonus round, and $15k if you get them all right. That would give incentive to team members to try harder and not just freeze or joke around, etc. At least there's a little extra money to be had even if you didn't win the $15k

On other shows they do it winds up, typically, paying less. Similarly with Family Feud and such. There's the chance at $20k, but no guarantee. Plenty of times the winners got hundreds and not the big money.

Personally, I think something like $1k guaranteed if you make it to the final chase would be fair. Maybe as much as $5k to the team, and maybe $1k for anyone that doesn't make it through to the final chase. That said, I have no idea what consolation prizes they are really offering at this point. (I assume some sort of parting gift is given)


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

eddyj said:


>


Ha, I tweeted this while the show was airing:










I know Brad Rutter has occasionally competed casually in pub trivia in the L.A. area, but with @firerose818's work schedule and commuting to Vegas, she might not have an opportunity to run into him around town (after the pandemic).


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

The trivia in that episode seemed a lot harder than the previous episodes. I realize trivia is you know it or you don't know it for the most part, but with Jeopardy and the previous episodes of this, I know the vast majority of answers off the top of my head. 

This one seemed to have a lot harder/more obscure questions, though I did know a few (and correctly educated-guess-ed a few more -- which is what I meant by 'for the most part') that the contestants didn't.

I do think the first guy should have gambled for the higher money (one closer to the chaser), since he did so badly in the first round.


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

Congrats Ilana! It was so cool seeing you on this show. Tough questions but I'm glad that you had fun!


----------



## Donbadabon (Mar 5, 2002)

That was fun. Some of those questions I actually knew, but I know if I am actually playing I would blank. 
But what a cool experience.


----------



## BluesFools (Apr 5, 2000)

It's worth seeking out the GSN episode where James Holzhauer (pre-Jeopardy) was a contestant. It's on rotation on GSN and is scheduled to be shown this Wednesday, 3pm ET.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Steveknj said:


> I'd change this up that whatever money you win in the "chase" round is yours, and you can double it in the final round, or you get the money you won, plus the combined value of the final round. So for example, you win $100k in the Chase round, and another person wins 75k in the Chase round, then you keep that $100k and go for $175k additional (each) in the final round. Something like that


In this version of the game, I'd also have each chaser go up against one person, and then one gets the final round.

Why have that gameshow star power there, and have two of them sit in a room and make jokes?

-smak-


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Do the "losers" on this show (or any game show, really) actually walk out the door with nothing? I don't need specifics but are there parting gifts and/or a remuneration for time spent helping them with their show?


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

I received absolutely nothing.


----------



## kaszeta (Jun 11, 2004)

firerose818 said:


> I received absolutely nothing.


Like Wheel of Fish!


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

firerose818 said:


> I received absolutely nothing.


Tsk! That's awful! I know you had a good time, but still-there should be a "parting gift" of sorts-perhaps a copy of "The Chase" home game?


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

firerose818 said:


> I received absolutely nothing.





Regina said:


> Tsk! That's awful! I know you had a good time, but still-there should be a "parting gift" of sorts-perhaps a copy of "The Chase" home game?


I figured they'd at least give you scale! And it was at your expense to travel there to be on the show too. I guess the demand to be on these shows is enough they don't have to give you an incentive to come on (well other than the chance to be on TV and maybe win some money). At least it's an experience you will never forget.


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> I figured they'd at least give you scale! And it was at your expense to travel there to be on the show too. I guess the demand to be on these shows is enough they don't have to give you an incentive to come on (well other than the chance to be on TV and maybe win some money). At least it's an experience you will never forget.


There were no travel expenses because I am in Los Angeles. But they paid for travel for any competitor that wasn't local. I'm not sure why you would think otherwise.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

firerose818 said:


> There were no travel expenses because I am in Los Angeles. But they paid for travel for any competitor that wasn't local. I'm not sure why you would think otherwise.


I just assumed they wouldn't, glad to see that they do.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

firerose818 said:


> I received absolutely nothing.


We really need a DISLIKE button 'cause that sucks. No parting gifts?!!? Cheap bastages. Seriously, they should give you something for effort!!!!


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

I was hoping you at least got a picture of you and the chaser.


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

DancnDude said:


> I was hoping you at least got a picture of you and the chaser.


Nope. We had no contact with the Chasers except while filming. Brad now follows me on Twitter though, so that's something. LOL.


----------



## MauriAnne (Sep 21, 2002)

firerose818 said:


> There were no travel expenses because I am in Los Angeles. But they paid for travel for any competitor that wasn't local. I'm not sure why you would think otherwise.


I have a friend of was on Wheel of Fortune a few years ago and she had to pay her travel expenses from NC to CA. I think I've read that it's the same for Jeopardy contestants' first trip to CA; if they need to come back for additional days of filming, the show picks it up. But I guess most all shows are having local contestants now during pandemic.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

MauriAnne said:


> I have a friend of was on Wheel of Fortune a few years ago and she had to pay her travel expenses from NC to CA. I think I've read that it's the same for Jeopardy contestants' first trip to CA; if they need to come back for additional days of filming, the show picks it up. But I guess most all shows are having local contestants now during pandemic.


They don't pay for travel expenses, but second place gets $2k and third place gets $1k, instead of all of the crap they used to get. So that should pay for travel.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

I tried out for the GSN version of "The Chase" and didn't make it as a contestant there, either... but they asked me to come in and be a fake contestant for the day they were doing tech rehearsal before the real tapings started. I wound up getting 9 hours of pay as a production assistant (and free lunch). I also got to see the Chaser from that version, Mark Labett, in sweats and flip-flops, instead of the fancy suits he wore on-air (but the host, Brooke Burns, was in full wardrobe and makeup).

So I've made more money from "The Chase" than Ilana, although I didn't get to be on national TV.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

So you're rich, she's famous?


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Not getting paid sucks. I know that the volume of potential candidates means they can set the rules as to who gets paid but a winning contestant can spend almost half the show on camera promoting their product so they should at least get scale for essentially being an employee.


----------



## JFriday (Mar 20, 2002)

Just win Baby! Not everyone gets a trophy.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

There must be a game show exception to paying scale, but I'm pretty sure people on Amazing Race and Survivor make at least some money, even for last.

-smak-


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Good episode tonight. Finally some cash handed out.

The questions at the end didn't seem balanced. If I had to rate them on a toughness trivia scale, the two contestants had questions that were 7/10, and James had 9/10. They only had a couple of outright "Huh?" ones, and James had several.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

astrohip said:


> Good episode tonight. Finally some cash handed out.
> 
> The questions at the end didn't seem balanced. If I had to rate them on a toughness trivia scale, the two contestants had questions that were 7/10, and James had 9/10. They only had a couple of outright "Huh?" ones, and James had several.


I wonder what they do to try to make the questions even. Not only do they need to be even, but the time it takes to ask the question should be even as well.

-smak-


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

JFriday said:


> Just win Baby! Not everyone gets a trophy.


I know you're kidding but these contestants are providing labor to a for-profit business. There should be some base compensation in addition to possible winnings provided besides (hopefully) a free lunch.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> I know you're kidding but these contestants are providing labor to a for-profit business. There should be some base compensation in addition to possible winnings provided besides (hopefully) a free lunch.


Yeah, I am really surprised they don't get some token payment.


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

BluesFools said:


> It's worth seeking out the GSN episode where James Holzhauer (pre-Jeopardy) was a contestant. It's on rotation on GSN and is scheduled to be shown this Wednesday, 3pm ET.


Wow beast got slaughtered

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

eddyj said:


> So you're rich, she's famous?


Sure, if you call $165.75 after taxes "rich"!


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

trainman said:


> Sure, if you call $165.75 after taxes "rich"!


According to some other thread I see pop up all the time, you're richer than the 49% who haven't saved anything.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

That episode was by far the best so far. Very exciting.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

mattack said:


> That episode was by far the best so far. Very exciting.


They had two very strong contestants, both with personality. That made a huge difference.

First contestants I've liked since that archive lady.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

For me it was the last segment..


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

trainman said:


> Sure, if you call $165.75 after taxes "rich"!


Infinitely more than @firerose818 got!


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I wonder if that entire set is real, or if lots of it is done with greenscreen. It seems too crazy to be real.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

madscientist said:


> I wonder if that entire set is real, or if lots of it is done with greenscreen. It seems too crazy to be real.


Seems to me there's a way we can find out...


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

It was real and it was spectacular. 

Fun fact, we filmed at Dunder Mifflin. The exterior of it, anyway.


----------



## lambertman (Dec 21, 2002)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1327016514143154176


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Not what I expected the outside to look like. Not sure what I expected... probably more of a traditional sound stage, I guess. This looks like a boring office building (or a boring The Office building, apparently.)


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

Why is that building famous?


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

eddyj said:


> Why is that building famous?


It's the exterior of the Office-the Dunder Mifflin Building-(see above posts)


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

Ah, never watched The Office, so I didn't get the reference.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

firerose818 said:


> It was real and it was spectacular.
> 
> Fun fact, we filmed at Dunder Mifflin. The exterior of it, anyway.


Does that make it a paper chase?

Sorry.....


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

TonyD79 said:


> Does that make it a paper chase?
> 
> Sorry.....


rimshot!


----------



## JFriday (Mar 20, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> I know you're kidding but these contestants are providing labor to a for-profit business. There should be some base compensation in addition to possible winnings provided besides (hopefully) a free lunch.


No they aren't, they're playing a game to try to win money. The people that actually work for the game show are getting paid for their labor.

Maybe I should use your logic next time I go to Vegas.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

JFriday said:


> No they aren't, they're playing a game to try to win money. The people that actually work for the game show are getting paid for their labor.
> 
> Maybe I should use your logic next time I go to Vegas.


Didn't realize Vegas productized gaming and sold it to advertisers for a television show.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

eddyj said:


> Ah, never watched The Office, so I didn't get the reference.


well, there's your problem.

watch it. it's hilarious. (Watch the orig British version too)


----------



## Agatha Mystery (Feb 12, 2002)

JFriday said:


> No they aren't, they're playing a game to try to win money. The people that actually work for the game show are getting paid for their labor.
> 
> Maybe I should use your logic next time I go to Vegas.


But they are also profiting off of the image and labor of the contestants. There should be a token award. If you are on a tv show, you get a minimum pay. As of 6/30/17, the minimum a union background actor could be paid for a day of work in LA was $162. While contestants are most likely not in the SAG/AFTRA union, they are there for most of the day and should at least be compensated for their time.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Agatha Mystery said:


> But they are also profiting off of the image and labor of the contestants. There should be a token award. If you are on a tv show, you get a minimum pay. As of 6/30/17, the minimum a union background actor could be paid for a day of work in LA was $162. While contestants are most likely not in the SAG/AFTRA union, they are there for most of the day and should at least be compensated for their time.


Especially since they perform the same amount of work in aggregate as the Chaser who is definitely getting paid.


----------



## JFriday (Mar 20, 2002)

Agatha Mystery said:


> But they are also profiting off of the image and labor of the contestants. There should be a token award. If you are on a tv show, you get a minimum pay. As of 6/30/17, the minimum a union background actor could be paid for a day of work in LA was $162. While contestants are most likely not in the SAG/AFTRA union, they are there for most of the day and should at least be compensated for their time.


There reward is they get to be on TV and tell everyone they know, hence this thread.


----------



## JFriday (Mar 20, 2002)

TonyD79 said:


> Didn't realize Vegas productized gaming and sold it to advertisers for a television show.


I'm willing to bet if told beforehand that if they lose you would get nothing most contestants would have still shown up. Ilana?


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

JFriday said:


> I'm willing to bet if told beforehand that if they lose you would get nothing most contestants would have still shown up. Ilana?


Circular logic. Claim that they are playing for a reward then claim they would play if they knew they were getting nothing for certain?


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

JFriday said:


> I'm willing to bet if told beforehand that if they lose you would get nothing most contestants would have still shown up. Ilana?


They literally said those words, and I still showed up to tape.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

firerose818 said:


> They literally said those words, and I still showed up to tape.


You need a better agent! Show her the money!


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

This seems to be the norm, from what I was reading. So, I guess, if that's the way it is, you either are OK with it or you aren't and decide from there. Years ago, if you went on a game show you got the "parting gifts", a copy of the game, maybe a case of Rice a Roni or whatever the sponsor would pony up and stuff like that. I guess they just don't do that anymore. Maybe there's some legal or tax reasons?


----------



## snerd (Jun 6, 2008)

TonyD79 said:


> Circular logic. Claim that they are playing for a reward then claim they would play if they knew they were getting nothing for certain?


Nobody said "lose for certain." This is what gamblers call a "freeroll." It is a shot at winning big with no real downside.


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

The new Name That Tune gives one player a really random prize in the middle of the game and if they don't win anything they also get a "commemorative Name That Tune plate" that has a picture of the hosts and logo on it


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

DancnDude said:


> The new Name That Tune gives one player a really random prize in the middle of the game and if they don't win anything they also get a "commemorative Name That Tune plate" that has a picture of the hosts and logo on it


and I wonder if they *really* get that plate, or if it's a joke? (like the Zonk "prizes" on Let's Make a deal)


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

ABC surely sells a few million dollars worth of ads during the airing of this show. I realize the purpose is to profit and that they can find contestants willing to play for nothing, but it still seems like a minimum prize of $1,000 wouldn't break the bank and would make it more palatable, given that it's extremely hard to win.


----------



## Hot4Bo (Apr 3, 2003)

For lack of a better place to put this question, I will put it here but I will spoilerize it since it is from tonight's episode. The host finished reading the question but they ran out of time before the player could answer it and now I am curious:



Spoiler: What is the Answer?



Like Mah Jongg, what other fruity-sounding tile game is played with 144 tiles?


----------



## realityboy (Jun 13, 2003)

Hot4Bo said:


> For lack of a better place to put this question, I will put it here but I will spoilerize it since it is from tonight's episode. The host finished reading the question but they ran out of time before the player could answer it and now I am curious:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Spoiler



Bananagrams


----------



## MauriAnne (Sep 21, 2002)

Hot4Bo said:


> For lack of a better place to put this question, I will put it here but I will spoilerize it since it is from tonight's episode. The host finished reading the question but they ran out of time before the player could answer it and now I am curious:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It took a bit of googling, but the answer is:


Spoiler: Answer



Bananagrams


----------



## Hot4Bo (Apr 3, 2003)

Thanks. I have never heard of that. I tried googling but I didn't see it.


----------



## MauriAnne (Sep 21, 2002)

Glad to help. I get a bit OCD when I want to find something like that --- I don't like to give up until I find it and that one took a bit of looking.


----------



## BluesFools (Apr 5, 2000)

It seems like they've made the questions a lot easier than at the beginning of the season. Back then, 3 was about the average score in the cash builder. This week, without giving too much of a spoiler, it was way higher. And that was with leaving some easy questions on the table (Hellmann's??). I used to know, or be able to guess from the choices given, a bit over half of the questions in the chase round. This week I got over 90%. I'm pretty sure I haven't got any smarter in the last month.

A big difference from the GSN version is the speed which the host asks questions. Brooke Burns would speak as fast as she could, and even then she'd speed up to try to squeeze in one final question when the clock was running down. It created a sense of excitement and energy. Sarah plods along with questions, and there's a noticeable gap between the answer and starting the next question. 5 seconds left on the clock? Eh, she'll take a breath, then drag out the question to the full 5 seconds so there's no time for the answer, where Brooke would have asked it in 2 seconds.

That also means you can't compare scores between the two versions. In the final chase Brooke could do close to 30 questions in 2 minutes, which meant the Beast could beat a score of 19 even with 3 or 4 pushbacks. Sarah barely reaches 20 questions in the same time. Of course it means the contestants get fewer questions too, but the snappy question-and-answer format gave an advantage to the chaser to overcome all the advantages the contestants are given, and that's gone now.


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

Last night’s episode was the first one taped. I was the alternate for that episode and Karen and I are now friends!

I do wonder if they realized the questions were too easy by the time I taped (episode seven of nine.)


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

Seven of Nine, where have I heard that?


----------



## BluesFools (Apr 5, 2000)

Ouch! I'm sorry you didn't make it onto the episode with the easier questions. You may have had a better chance at a more lucrative outcome.


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

Yeah it does seem like they adjusted some things. It looks like the graphics on the board where the chaser was moving down was clearer in some episodes than others.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Darn, there was another question that the host read basically all of but didn't give the answer.. (not the one from above). but now I don't remember what it was.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

mattack said:


> Darn, there was another question that the host read basically all of but didn't give the answer.. (not the one from above). but now I don't remember what it was.


You're probably thinking of the question about the founder of Trader Joe's.

Edit: Or maybe the one about 48 stars on the US flag from 1912 to 1959.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

no now I remember trader joes (and I guessed that one).. now maybe I'm misremembering and it was last week? But it was a pop culture related question IIRC. oh well, never mind.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

I’ve come up with a twist that would tie the middle of the game to the final chase and may make it more likely to win a bit. The head start the played should get should be based on how many questions ahead of the chaser they are when they bank the money. That means the better you do in the head to head, the better off you are in the final chase. It may even entice players to take the lesser money as they would get an extra step in the final chase.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

TonyD79 said:


> I've come up with a twist that would tie the middle of the game to the final chase and may make it more likely to win a bit. The head start the played should get should be based on how many questions ahead of the chaser they are when they bank the money. That means the better you do in the head to head, the better off you are in the final chase. It may even entice players to take the lesser money as they would get an extra step in the final chase.


I like it. The one thing that has bugged me about this show is that they offer them a low-ball offer and and a high-end offer and what they earned. I think I've only seen ONE person take anything other than the middle offer. They need better incentive. Something like what you are suggesting though would mean they would almost never want to go for the high end offer because it handicaps them double. But I think it could make some sense if thought out a bit more.


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

How about if the Chaser also offers them one "help" if they take the high offer, so they can ask their teammates for help on one question they might not know? It might not even help if the teammates don't know but it's more tempting.


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

On the GSN version, the contestants seem to take the high offer much more often-with varied degrees of success-I would love to see someone take the high offer here on the ABC version. We shall see. Love the ideas-keep 'em coming-maybe the producers are reading!


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I've never seen the GSN version but on this show the chasers are too good, and the question difficulty too variable, to risk the high offer IMO.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

madscientist said:


> I've never seen the GSN version but on this show the chasers are too good, and the question difficulty too variable, to risk the high offer IMO.


That's the issue. You are up against the GOATs, and it's too risky. You need that cushion.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

On a recent show in the UK, three Chasers (The Beast, Mark Labatt; The Dark Destroyer, Sean Wallace and The Governess, Ann Hegerty (yes, I know Mark is the only one most US viewers will know) all took an IQ test among many other challenges, which I won't go into here. Mark was by far the highest and had an IQ of 151 - genius level is 150 with Sean coming in at a lowly 96 and Ann somewhere in between. Ann is actually autistic, but is a quizzer of above average ability.

Of course, IQ tests only measure certain areas of intelligence, but I wonder what the Jeopardy GOATs would score.


----------



## bryhamm (Jun 30, 2004)

TonyD79 said:


> I've come up with a twist that would tie the middle of the game to the final chase and may make it more likely to win a bit. The head start the played should get should be based on how many questions ahead of the chaser they are when they bank the money. That means the better you do in the head to head, the better off you are in the final chase. It may even entice players to take the lesser money as they would get an extra step in the final chase.


I like the concept, but it should be reversed to me. Like if you take your original offer and bank it, you get the number of steps that you are ahead. But, if you take the higher offer, you get an extra step (or 2) if you bank it. And if you take a lower offer, you get one less step (or 2) if you bank it.


----------



## bryhamm (Jun 30, 2004)

Regina said:


> On the GSN version, the contestants seem to take the high offer much more often-with varied degrees of success-I would love to see someone take the high offer here on the ABC version. We shall see. Love the ideas-keep 'em coming-maybe the producers are reading!


I wonder if that's because the base offer is so much more now vs the GSN version


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

bryhamm said:


> I like the concept, but it should be reversed to me. Like if you take your original offer and bank it, you get the number of steps that you are ahead. But, if you take the higher offer, you get an extra step (or 2) if you bank it. And if you take a lower offer, you get one less step (or 2) if you bank it.


In theory, I like that. But it also has to be something the host can easily explain in a sentence or two so viewers understand and don't get confused. That seems like it would be very easy to confuse people.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

bryhamm said:


> I like the concept, but it should be reversed to me. Like if you take your original offer and bank it, you get the number of steps that you are ahead. But, if you take the higher offer, you get an extra step (or 2) if you bank it. And if you take a lower offer, you get one less step (or 2) if you bank it.


I can live with that. I just want to see a better shot at winning at the end and some connection between the rounds. The builder round is obvious as it sets the money but other than survival, the head to head round doesn't contribute to the overall show.

At the same time, taking the lower offer means you win less as well.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Some good ideas here. And they need to do something. Because...

It's depressing to watch an entire show, have some really strong contestants (like that guy tonight), and they walk away with zilch. I'm not sure I want to keep watching a show, that about half the time, the contestants walk away empty-handed. It leaves a bad taste in your mouth, and that's not the way a TV show should end. I enjoyed 55 minutes of tonight's episode, and yet all I remember is that no one won money.

They don't need to handicap it different, they need to make sure they have _something _at the end of the night.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

The questions on this week's episode seemed to be harder than average overall.


----------



## DVR_Dave (Apr 19, 2017)

astrohip said:


> It's depressing to watch an entire show, have some really strong contestants (like that guy tonight), and they walk away with zilch. I'm not sure I want to keep watching a show, that about half the time, the contestants walk away empty-handed.


I bailed a couple weeks ago.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

DVR_Dave said:


> I bailed a couple weeks ago.


Because...


----------



## DVR_Dave (Apr 19, 2017)

astrohip said:


> Because...


What I quoted from your post. It's not very exciting to watch when the contestants lose most of the time. Plus, the show is pretty boring. I liked the few episodes of the UK version that I've watch, when I was vacationing across the pond.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I just watched the most recent episode and it was more tolerable by FFing through all the non-question parts. But even still, it's got about 15 minutes of decent show filling a one-hour time slot. That's just not a good formula for success.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Wow, I really like this show. (Though I watch it at 1.7x like a lot of game shows or reality shows.. I watch Survivor, The Amazing Race, Tough as Nails at regular speed. Even Jeopardy usually gets 1.5x (and FF through the contestant chat the vast majority of the time).)

It's one of the more question-filled shows out there, and I think it's actually fairly "exciting".


----------



## debtoine (May 17, 2001)

We felt bad for Jimmy this week. His answer of 10 to the 9th was correct, and when she responded that it was incorrect, it was clear after that his rhythm was off. I'd have been mad too, and I think he should get a chance to come back on.

deb


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

DVR_Dave said:


> What I quoted from your post. It's not very exciting to watch when the contestants lose most of the time. Plus, the show is pretty boring. I liked the few episodes of the UK version that I've watch, when I was vacationing across the pond.


Oops, I missed the quote part. Yeah, same reason.

I now FF thru everything but the actual contests. I'm not sure I'll stick around much longer.


----------



## lambertman (Dec 21, 2002)

I hope Sara breaks her habit of going “Ooooooh!” when the times-up sounds in the builder round. This week, she also did it at the board, and the player had just answered correctly!


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

This week on some shots of James, I got a Christopher Pike vibe.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I don't know if his statements are scripted for him or not but James Holzhauer comes across as a jerk. He actually insults some of the contestants. 

In my lifetime of watching tv game shows, I've never before cared whether the losing contestants get compensated in any way but for some reason knowing that the losers don't even get cheap parting gifts really bugs me about this show.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> I don't know if his statements are scripted for him or not but James Holzhauer comes across as a jerk. He actually insults some of the contestants.


Despite James evidently being a great guy (does a lot of charity work, has varied and neat interests, has friends and family that truly care about him), he has an off putting personality that is okay when being a contestant on jeopardy but hurts his performance on a show like this. It's a shame.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

James behavior is pretty much in line with the original "Beast" from the Gameshow Network (GSN) version of the show. The Beast was meant to be a menacing figure and he would taunt the contestants along the way.

In that regard I actually think James Holzhauer is a good chaser for the show.

That said, I still think contestants that make it through the cash builder round and the 1v1 round with the chaser should get some minimal payback for their effort and that contestants that don't make it past the 1v1 with the chaser should get some minimal parting gift (maybe a supply of Rice-a-Roni  )


----------



## lambertman (Dec 21, 2002)

Yeah, if anything, it's Ken and Brad who aren't good fits because they're too nice. America seems to love Brits coming over and being mean to us, but we struggle with Americans trying to be mean to other Americans in the same role.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

terpfan1980 said:


> James behavior is pretty much in line with the original "Beast" from the Gameshow Network (GSN) version of the show. The Beast was meant to be a menacing figure and he would taunt the contestants along the way.
> 
> In that regard I actually think James Holzhauer is a good chaser for the show.
> 
> That said, I still think contestants that make it through the cash builder round and the 1v1 round with the chaser should get some minimal payback for their effort and that contestants that don't make it past the 1v1 with the chaser should get some minimal parting gift (maybe a supply of Rice-a-Roni  )


No. The Beast taunted but was funny and seemed more human. James is disconnected in his affectation. Just who he is. The Beast made fun of himself (particularly his weight).


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

lambertman said:


> Yeah, if anything, it's Ken and Brad who aren't good fits because they're too nice. America seems to love Brits coming over and being mean to us, but we struggle with Americans trying to be mean to other Americans in the same role.


I'm not talking about meanness. Despite how good a person he is, James comes off robotic.

I'm done with this. I am not trying to insult him or demean him so I'm done.


----------



## lambertman (Dec 21, 2002)

general observation, not an attack.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

lambertman said:


> general observation, not an attack.


Yes. That's my intent.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

On the subject of James, I hate the fact that he's ruined Jeopardy, possibly forever!

By this, I mean his system of starting at the bottom of the board, which was extremely successful for him because of his fact-spewing intellect, is being copied by far less clever contestants.They inevitably blow out, ruining the board.

In some cases, the clues are meant to be revealed from the top down and in most, they get harder as the values increase. When they bomb, they ruin the flow.

Also, why do they go searching for the DD from the start when the payoff is minimal?


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

There is a bit of a preventative strategy in getting the DD early. You prevent your opponent from capitalizing on it. It was an effective strategy in Ken winning the greatest of all time tournament. He and Brad kept it from James.


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

TonyTheTiger said:


> On the subject of James, I hate the fact that he's ruined Jeopardy, possibly forever!
> 
> By this, I mean his system of starting at the bottom of the board, which was extremely successful for him because of his fact-spewing intellect, is being copied by far less clever contestants.They inevitably blow out, ruining the board.
> 
> ...


I agree that searching for the DD in the Jeopardy! Round is silly-but in Double Jeopardy! it can be wise-and people are making bigger and bigger bets and getting the responses correct! I love it!


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

TonyD79 said:


> There is a bit of a preventative strategy in getting the DD early. You prevent your opponent from capitalizing on it. It was an effective strategy in Ken winning the greatest of all time tournament. He and Brad kept it from James.


I was just popping in to say basically the same thing. It can be a highly effective defensive move. Even if you don't get the question right, you prevent someone else from getting the DD and possibly keep the game far closer. (For example, if someone else has say a $6,000 lead, and they hit the DD, they could easily bet that $6,000 lead and extend it to a $12,000 lead. If there's no DD available they can perhaps extend the lead, but they'll have to do it in smaller amounts. On the offense side, yeah, if the DD is burned it makes it harder for the player to potentially make up the distance, but it can still be done slowly but surely.)

Personally, I don't mind the gimmick of a category that was meant to flow from top to bottom, but by the same token the questions should be independent of each other and not really matter all that much as to order. So if someone hops around the bottom of the board and quickly builds up a lead, or uses the bottom of the board to make up ground, that is a perfectly acceptable strategy.


----------



## jeetkunedo (Jul 24, 2006)

Regarding the insults, I'm sure they're scripted by the producers. And several contestants have given their share of (I assume) scripted insults as well. I don't fault him for not being great at the delivery. 

As for James' strategy on Jeopardy, I respect the hell out of him for it. It's not like he broke any rules. He just found a better way to play the game. If you were him, and you found a way to make a bunch of money on a game show, wouldn't you do it?


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

jeetkunedo said:


> As for James' strategy on Jeopardy, I respect the hell out of him for it. It's not like he broke any rules. He just found a better way to play the game. If you were him, and you found a way to make a bunch of money on a game show, wouldn't you do it?


For sure. Of course, it is hard to say that the strategy really had a huge affect. James is quick on the button and has very few knowledge gaps. Even when he doesn't KNOW the answer, he has shown how quickly he analyzes a question by some of his explanations on the Chase. So, would he destroy the field anyway?


----------



## jeetkunedo (Jul 24, 2006)

TonyD79 said:


> For sure. Of course, it is hard to say that the strategy really had a huge affect. James is quick on the button and has very few knowledge gaps. Even when he doesn't KNOW the answer, he has shown how quickly he analyzes a question by some of his explanations on the Chase. So, would he destroy the field anyway?


Agreed. I think there is a trifecta of skills needed for trivia gameshows. Here's my opinion, for best to, well, third-best ('cuz they're all really good imo).

KNOWLEDGE: Ken, Brad, James
DEDUCTION: James, Ken, Brad
GAMEPLAY: James, Ken, Brad

So I kinda think Ken is the Trivia Master, but James is the best gamer. (Sorry, Brad.)


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I wonder how much the chasers get paid and if they all make the same amount or if Ken Jennings makes more since he's more of a household name.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> I wonder how much the chasers get paid and if they all make the same amount or if Ken Jennings makes more since he's more of a household name.


I would bet they have a favored nations-type deal and all get paid the same. Given the way the show was marketed, I'll bet they joined the show as a package deal.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

jeetkunedo said:


> Agreed. I think there is a trifecta of skills needed for trivia gameshows. Here's my opinion, for best to, well, third-best ('cuz they're all really good imo).
> 
> KNOWLEDGE: Ken, Brad, James
> DEDUCTION: James, Ken, Brad
> ...


You may want to rethink that knowledge list after watching the chase.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

cheesesteak said:


> I don't know if his statements are scripted for him or not but James Holzhauer comes across as a jerk. He actually insults some of the contestants.


I think it's funny (not quite hilarious). Like was discussed earlier in this thread, I think both of them (the host and the chase) have basically admitted that their lines are scripted. Though it also *seemed* like he came up with one of the retorts on the fly right after the round (I don't remember what it was).. I also realize it may be clever editing or something.. (e.g. a lot of us didn't realize it was all scripted on "Hollywood Squares".. and heck, I didn't realize @Midnight was all scripted until someone posted it here too.)

Him being a jerk who wants to crush the competitor is his schtick.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

mattack said:


> I think it's funny (not quite hilarious). Like was discussed earlier in this thread, I think both of them (the host and the chase) have basically admitted that their lines are scripted. Though it also *seemed* like he came up with one of the retorts on the fly right after the round (I don't remember what it was).. I also realize it may be clever editing or something.. (e.g. a lot of us didn't realize it was all scripted on "Hollywood Squares".. and heck, I didn't realize @Midnight was all scripted until someone posted it here too.)
> 
> Him being a jerk who wants to crush the competitor is his schtick.


Yeah. It's part of the show. Always has been. From the UK days and the GSN days.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

I didn't know what they'd do if all 3 contestants got caught in stage 2. Wow, $250K seems like a ridiculously high amount for a 'consolation (potential) prize' for round 3.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

So last night's two episodes were the "season finale." If that's all we ever see of this show, I won't shed a tear. It's poorly designed and poorly executed. The only draw of this show is the three Jeopardy! GOATs, yet having them there actually ruins the game because it makes very difficult for the players to win anything. Hopefully KJ gets the permanent Jeopardy! hosting gig and this show just never comes back.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

mattack said:


> I didn't know what they'd do if all 3 contestants got caught in stage 2. Wow, $250K seems like a ridiculously high amount for a 'consolation (potential) prize' for round 3.


The only alternative would be not to air the episode. Chaser starts even. Chaser beat the contestant earlier in the show. I'd say the contestants chances are near zero. Results were expected


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

mattack said:


> I didn't know what they'd do if all 3 contestants got caught in stage 2. Wow, $250K seems like a ridiculously high amount for a 'consolation (potential) prize' for round 3.


I know that answer!

If all three contestants are eliminated they choose one of the three to play for $25K in the final chase.


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

firerose818 said:


> I know that answer!
> 
> If all three contestants are eliminated they choose one of the three to play for $25K in the final chase.


I'd make it $25,000 each - that's more in line with how the GSN version worked (if the contestant won, each contestant won the value of a question in the 60-second round).


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

firerose818 said:


> I know that answer!
> 
> If all three contestants are eliminated they choose one of the three to play for $25K in the final chase.


Looks like you haven't watched one of the episodes from last night yet. This happened and they picked one of the three and allowed Ken to say how much he'd "give" them if they were to win. I'm sure it was a producer that determined the amount, but they made it look like Ken decided it. He said he'd give them $250,000.


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> Looks like you haven't watched one of the episodes from last night yet. This happened and they picked one of the three and allowed Ken to say how much he'd "give" them if they were to win. I'm sure it was a producer that determined the amount, but they made it look like Ken decided it. He said he'd give them $250,000.


I haven't watched any except the one I was on. But what I said is what the producer told us.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> allowed Ken to say how much he'd "give" them if they were to win. I'm sure it was a producer that determined the amount, but they made it look like Ken decided it. He said he'd give them $250,000.





firerose818 said:


> I haven't watched any except the one I was on. But what I said is what the producer told us.


Should we conclude then policy was $25,000 as per fire rose but Ken was able to override that by a factor of 10.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

lew said:


> Should we conclude then policy was $25,000 as per fire rose but Ken was able to override that by a factor of 10.


I'm guessing it's more a matter of the producers saying to themselves, "The chances of one of these three people that couldn't even get out of the chase round beating Ken Jennings in the final chase round is infinitesimal. Therefore, we can throw any amount out there and it won't matter. Let's make it seem exciting."


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

Episode 9 was fun! I loved the guy who gave the episode its name.."I'm used to men chasing me!" LOL!
Then when the wrestling question came up, he said, "Sounds like fun!" He was hilarious! Let him guest host if Sarah is busy sometime!


----------



## samsauce29 (Nov 30, 2007)

Agreed. This was a very good, very enjoyable and funny episode. To avoid spoilage, I'll leave it at that.


----------



## Grasshopper AZ (Apr 29, 2005)

Regina said:


> Episode 9 was fun! I loved the guy who gave the episode its name.."I'm used to men chasing me!" LOL!
> Then when the wrestling question came up, he said, "Sounds like fun!" He was hilarious! Let him guest host if Sarah is busy sometime!


We said the same thing. That guy is the contestant that game show producers dream of.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> So last night's two episodes were the "season finale." If that's all we ever see of this show, I won't shed a tear. It's poorly designed and poorly executed. The only draw of this show is the three Jeopardy! GOATs, yet having them there actually ruins the game because it makes very difficult for the players to win anything. Hopefully KJ gets the permanent Jeopardy! hosting gig and this show just never comes back.


Wow! We love this show. I think it's mostly well done. I'd tweak a few things, but I just think it's fun, and the Jeopardy hook works. My son calls the other two Jeopardy guys watching from the background the "two old guys from the Muppet Show". The couple of things I'd do would be to eliminate the three choices of money to play for in the chase round. Just let them play for what they earned (which is what they almost always do...I think twice they played for lower). If nobody won, like what happened last week, I'd give each a chance to play for 25k, but it should be 250k, that's too much. And lastly there needs to be a consolation prize for not winning, at least if you make the finals. That's the biggest to me. I'd say they go into the final round and you don't win, you get half of what you earned.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

In the next to last episode in which all three contestants were eliminated, there were about 30 minutes left in the show when that happened. I wondered how they would fill out the remaining time.

It was nice to see the final episode's contestants win the big money especially after the three duds in the previous episode.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

firerose818 said:


> I haven't watched any except the one I was on. But what I said is what the producer told us.


I'm curious as to why you didn't watch any of the other episodes. Feel free to not answer if you don't want to but I think I would have been curious to know how things went with other contestants.


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> I'm curious as to why you didn't watch any of the other episodes. Feel free to not answer if you don't want to but I think I would have been curious to know how things went with other contestants.


Mostly because 1) I don't watch much television 2) I hate game shows and 3) I'm often driving on Thursday night at 9PM.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

firerose818 said:


> I hate game shows


So I take it you just did the show because it was a unique opportunity offered to you?


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

LoadStar said:


> So I take it you just did the show because it was a unique opportunity offered to you?


That is correct.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> So last night's two episodes were the "season finale." If that's all we ever see of this show, I won't shed a tear. It's poorly designed and poorly executed. The only draw of this show is the three Jeopardy! GOATs, yet having them there actually ruins the game because it makes very difficult for the players to win anything. Hopefully KJ gets the permanent Jeopardy! hosting gig and this show just never comes back.


Wow, definitely disagree. Yes, the GOATs add a lot to it, and I previously said I like the little bits added in from the non-playing-GOATs commenting on the episode.

At least of shows currently on, this is maybe #3.. I almost said #2, but then I remembered Jimmy Kimmel's WWTBAM episodes are still on.

The show has a reasonably high amount of actual questions in it, and the gimmick of the show makes it exciting.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

lew said:


> The only alternative would be not to air the episode. Chaser starts even. Chaser beat the contestant earlier in the show. I'd say the contestants chances are near zero. Results were expected


No, another alternative would just be to start a new set of players and continue it on.. eventually editing it enough to end up with an integral number of full episodes. Just like WWTBAM continues from one episode to another.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

firerose818 said:


> I know that answer!
> 
> If all three contestants are eliminated they choose one of the three to play for $25K in the final chase.


Obviously I *knew* the player was going for $250K! so you *didn't* know the answer.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

firerose818 said:


> Mostly because 1) I don't watch much television 2) I hate game shows and 3) I'm often driving on Thursday night at 9PM.


1) you're on a tivo forum and don't watch TV?
2) you hate game shows yet you were on one
3) goes back to #1.. presumably you have SOME way to record TV.. (and/or you can at worst presumably watch it on abc.com)


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

TonyTheTiger said:


> On the subject of James, I hate the fact that he's ruined Jeopardy, possibly forever!





jeetkunedo said:


> He just found a better way to play the game.


Holzhauer was not the first Jeopardy contestant to use that strategy. He may have popularized it somewhat because of the success he had with it.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

terpfan1980 said:


> . . . but by the same token the questions should be independent of each other and not really matter all that much as to order. . . .


The questions are designed from easiest to hardest and the first questions can often give clues about what they're looking for, etc. Personally I think Jeopardy flows better when the questions are revealed that way, but I have no problem with contestants jumping around as it adds a touch of excitement.

(AT had commented that he didn't particularly like when contestants jumped around.)


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

mattack said:


> 1) you're on a tivo forum and don't watch TV?
> 2) you hate game shows yet you were on one
> 3) goes back to #1.. presumably you have SOME way to record TV.. (and/or you can at worst presumably watch it on abc.com)


But why do I have some weird obligation to watch it if I don't enjoy game shows?

Also why this bizarre gatekeeping about why I choose to spend my time on a TiVo forum.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

mattack said:


> No, another alternative would just be to start a new set of players and continue it on.. eventually editing it enough to end up with an integral number of full episodes. Just like WWTBAM continues from one episode to another.


Except the Chase doesn't air episodes in the order they're taped.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

lew said:


> Except the Chase doesn't air episodes in the order they're taped.


obviously they would if they had chosen this strategy.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> So last night's two episodes were the "season finale." If that's all we ever see of this show, I won't shed a tear. It's poorly designed and poorly executed. The only draw of this show is the three Jeopardy! GOATs, yet having them there actually ruins the game because it makes very difficult for the players to win anything. Hopefully KJ gets the permanent Jeopardy! hosting gig and this show just never comes back.


The GSN version is much better. I attribute it to the Beast being the expert rather than the jeopardy champions. It just seemed funnier.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

TonyD79 said:


> The GSN version is much better. I attribute it to the Beast being the expert rather than the jeopardy champions. It just seemed funnier.


Brooke is also a better host and keeps things moving on a faster pace, building up more excitement along the way.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

Yes, but neither of them come close to Bradley Walsh on the UK version! If you search for some of the UK bloopers, I guarantee you'll be crying with laughter. His corpsing is legendary!


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Writers Go On Strike At ABC's Quiz Show 'The Chase' - Deadline


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

weird.. though from that article:
It has not been renewed for a second season though there may be additional produced episodes from Season 1.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

The Chase is back. And not for the better.

The dropped the first round money from $25,000 to $10,000. So right off the bat, should you somehow manage to win, you'll get 60% less. They added a fourth chaser, so now we'll see these guys every four weeks instead of three. Seems an incredible waste of trivia talent. And you still walk away with nada if you lose.

Instead of tweaking the game, or doing something to make it better, they lessened the prize money and added a third body to the waiting room.

Meh.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Drop the former jeopardy champs. They are a gimmick. Stick with the Beast.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

TonyD79 said:


> Drop the former jeopardy champs. They are a gimmick. Stick with the Beast.


I enjoy watching the episodes with The Beast and would be happy if it was just him, or perhaps a rotation with him and James. Hell, if you want it gimmicky, offer the contestants their choice of chaser to go up against and randomly assign the amount that the questions are valued at between 10k and 25k (with difficulty scaled appropriately).

As is, knowing the contestants get nothing if they lose just turns me off for the show. Even if it was just a minimal amount for each question they got right with the requirement that they must get past the chaser and into the final chase to see even that, well, at least it would seem that the contestants were getting something for their time and effort. Getting absolutely nothing just seems too harsh.


----------



## lambertman (Dec 21, 2002)

TonyD79 said:


> Drop the former jeopardy champs. They are a gimmick. Stick with the Beast.


SPOILER FOR JUNE 6


Spoiler



You're saying that right after that performance from Ken last night?


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

terpfan1980 said:


> I enjoy watching the episodes with The Beast and would be happy if it was just him, or perhaps a rotation with him and James. Hell, if you want it gimmicky, offer the contestants their choice of chaser to go up against and randomly assign the amount that the questions are valued at between 10k and 25k (with difficulty scaled appropriately).
> 
> As is, knowing the contestants get nothing if they lose just turns me off for the show. Even if it was just a minimal amount for each question they got right with the requirement that they must get past the chaser and into the final chase to see even that, well, at least it would seem that the contestants were getting something for their time and effort. Getting absolutely nothing just seems too harsh.


They don't even get a couple boxes of Kraft macaroni and cheese as parting gifts.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

lambertman said:


> SPOILER FOR JUNE 6
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...


No. I loved the GSN version with the Beast. He plays his character so well.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I agree that the structure of the game is flawed, with the contestants having no chance to win anything unless they win everything. I'd rather see them bank some portion of their initial cashbuilder winnings that they'll get to keep regardless, and then get the opportunity to play for the big jackpot at the end. Or maybe give the players left at the finale the opportunity to walk with their winnings or gamble it for the chance at a lot more. Although the structure of the game, as it's currently set up, would mean the players would be stupid to gamble their winnings, and then we'd be left with no final round for the show.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

astrohip said:


> The dropped the first round money from $25,000 to $10,000. So right off the bat, should you somehow manage to win, you'll get 60% less.


Sara is talking faster, though, and my perception is that they made the cash builder questions easier. I suspect it'll end up being a wash in terms of the amounts of money that are being played for and won.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

trainman said:


> *Sara is talking faster*, though, and my perception is that they made the cash builder questions easier. I suspect it'll end up being a wash in terms of the amounts of money that are being played for and won.


I usually watch this show with TiVo Quick Mode (1.3x speed) but during the latest episode I noticed I had to slow down to regular speed during the Cashbuilder round because she was talking too fast for me to understand what she was saying.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

You know, I don’t care if they win $1 or $1 million. The weakness is that they lose too often. The show is not really competitive.

I enjoy it more with the Beast but when he isn’t the Chaser, then the losing stands out to me more.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

TonyD79 said:


> You know, I don't care if they win $1 or $1 million. The weakness is that they lose too often. The show is not really competitive.
> 
> I enjoy it more with the Beast but when he isn't the Chaser, then the losing stands out to me more.


I think that's the real problem. It's not a show where approximately half the time the "show" wins and half the time the players win. It's a show where about 90% of the time the show wins. That's not fun for viewers.

Imagine if 90% of Jeopardy! episodes ended with all three players betting everything they had and then missing FJ, leaving all three with $0 and no winner. Boring!


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

I'd like to see something like the guarantee on The Wall, where, after their final round but before the Chaser's turn, the contestants get the option to secretly chose between the full amount if the chaser fails or a guaranteed 10% of the total won to that point. If they take the offer and the the Chaser does miss the mark, they get the 10% sure thing and if anyone did NOT take the offer gets their share of the full amount (or all of it depending on the other person.

Example: Total for all three contestants - $200,000
Contestant 1 takes the guaranteed 10% and walks away with $20,000, regardless of what the Chaser does.
Contestants 2 & 3 do NOT take the offer and the Chaser fails, so they get $90k each ($200k - $20k /2). If Chaser wins, C1 is the only one who gets $20k and C2 & C3 get nothing.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> I think that's the real problem. It's not a show where approximately half the time the "show" wins and half the time the players win. It's a show where about 90% of the time the show wins. That's not fun for viewers.
> 
> Imagine if 90% of Jeopardy! episodes ended with all three players betting everything they had and then missing FJ, *leaving all three with $0 and no winner*. Boring!


This can't happen. In the event of a tie, there's a one question play off to determine a winner!


----------



## alpacaboy (Oct 29, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> I think that's the real problem. It's not a show where approximately half the time the "show" wins and half the time the players win. It's a show where about 90% of the time the show wins. That's not fun for viewers.


For me, The Chase is one of the few things I like the journey more than the outcome.
I enjoy the mechanics/gimmicks of the different stages of the game.
I recently realized I'm generally always rooting for them to answer correctly, whether it be contestant or chaser.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Watched the new episode last night and I don't know if the questions got easier or what, but on the chase round (the one in the middle), I was able to answer everyone of the questions correctly, either by knowing the answer or from process of elimination. And all three contestants made it to the final round, so maybe that's what they were going after? I don't know. 

I agree, this show needs some tweaking. Give them the money they earned up until the final round and then significantly raise the money for the final round to make it worth it. The problem with the final round is there's little control over the chaser and those questions so it feels like it's possible that you have too arbitrary a chance to win. They got like 20 questions right, which is a lot, but they were able to be chased down, even with the chaser having trouble with a few questions, either missing or hesitating on the answers.


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

I always wondered when their were 3 champs, and 3 contestants why not have 1 different champ for each round. Like many game shows they tape multiple shows in 1 day, so they are just sitting around anyway.

And i agree, just having the beast would be ok with me.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

TonyTheTiger said:


> This can't happen. In the event of a tie, there's a one question play off to determine a winner!


If all three contestants wind up with $0 at the end of Final Jeopardy!, there's no possible winner in that situation -- there will be no tiebreaker question, and there will be three new contestants on the next show.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

^^^^^

Citation needed, or is this your speculation?


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

TonyTheTiger said:


> ^^^^^
> 
> Citation needed, or is this your speculation?


Google "jeopardy has no winner"


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

The "Jeopardy!" tiebreaker rule was instituted in November 2014, and this is the most recent time all three contestants finished with $0, in January 2016:


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

trainman said:


> The "Jeopardy!" tiebreaker rule was instituted in November 2014, and this is the most recent time all three contestants finished with $0, in January 2016:


Thanks for posting that. I vaguely remember when that happened, and my response is I'm sure the same as seven years ago... WTF was 3rd place thinking? Are you a bloomin' idiot?


----------



## dtle (Dec 12, 2001)

I remember an old The Price is Right episode, where after the two final contestants went over on their bid, and Bob Barker just walked up the audience area and left.


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

TIVO_GUY_HERE said:


> I always wondered when their were 3 champs, and 3 contestants why not have 1 different champ for each round. Like many game shows they tape multiple shows in 1 day, so they are just sitting around anyway.


Probably because they want the same person the contestants faced in the earlier round to face them in the final chase, which is hard to do if there are two or three contestants that made it that far.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

astrohip said:


> The Chase is back. And not for the better.
> 
> The dropped the first round money from $25,000 to $10,000. So right off the bat, should you somehow manage to win, you'll get 60% less.


wait, you mean per question? Wow ok.. still I was seeing some people get pretty high scores in the first round.

yeah adding a 4th seems weird.. but I still think they're entertaining, with the peanut gallery comments.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> I usually watch this show with TiVo Quick Mode (1.3x speed) but during the latest episode I noticed I had to slow down to regular speed during the Cashbuilder round because she was talking too fast for me to understand what she was saying.


hah, yeah this is the kind of show I watch sped up (but I do it at 1.7x -- you do know you can speed up quick mode right? hit select play select 7 NUMBER select -- and that will change the speed to 1.NUMBERx.. e.g. select play select 7 9 select makes it play at 1.9x).

IF I watch something sped up, I basically never go below 50% sped up, and for things like American Idol, I watch the actual singing at normal speed (until I get bored of the song), then the banter at 1.9x (unless I skipped the vast majority of the song and/or it's country/etc, so I FF past the banter too).


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

I haven't seen new episodes for this season yet, but my wife and I did see a preview for it while watching something else. My wife came in and said "it's 2021 and this show is adding a 4th white man as a chaser?"


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

I just watched the June 20th episode and WOW!



Spoiler



I can't believe TWO people went for the high amount and got it! And then they beat James! WOW! 
Although I will admit the questions are easier this season. But still, you are there, under a tremendous amount of pressure-and anything is "easy" when you are at home, in your easy chair!


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Regina said:


> I just watched the June 20th episode and WOW!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And the only person who didn't go for the higher amount could have. She beat James easily, with room to spare.

It was fun to see people make some money. Finally.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Yes, this was by far the best episode of the show so far. I was surprised at how poorly James did, and yet he still had a chance to win with just three questions to go in the final 10 seconds, but then he missed again and that killed his shot.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

yeah this was by far the best.. finally someone went for the higher amount... though I thought a week or two ago that the person who did really poorly on the first round should have gone for the higher amount as sort of a last ditch effort to improve things.. (Though I think on that ep, they actually came back and did well on the other rounds)


----------



## spear (Oct 11, 2006)

Wow, the overall quality wasn't as high as last week but that was still an impressive performance.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

spear said:


> Wow, the overall quality wasn't as high as last week but that was still an impressive performance.


Yeah, she was phenomenal. Hindsight... shoulda gone for the higher amount.

Episode title was something like "I don't think we've seen that before". After the first two went down in flames, I figured the third would too. And that was the "never seen before". But there was too much time left, so I knew something else must happen.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

astrohip said:


> Yeah, she was phenomenal. Hindsight... shoulda gone for the higher amount.
> 
> Episode title was something like "I don't think we've seen that before". After the first two went down in flames, I figured the third would too. And that was the "never seen before". But there was too much time left, so I knew something else must happen.


Last season all 3 failed. One was picked for the final chase for a fixed dollar amount. Read earlier in this thread for details.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

lew said:


> Last season all 3 failed. One was picked for the final chase for a fixed dollar amount. Read earlier in this thread for details.


Thanks, I forgot that.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

Loved her backhanded insult to Brad. You aren't usually this good--or something like that.  Turned out to be true.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

That was an exciting episode. I was amazed she got up to 20 on the final chase, especially since she was by herself and didn't start with 3 like they do when there are three of them there. But even still, it seemed like Brad was going to catch her until he had a run of wrong answers toward the end and just lost all his momentum. Great episode.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

The first 2 players were duds, but yeah the last player was good.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Why play for $5,000? As the other's chasers said in the green room, what's the point? I'm stunned someone would actually choose that option.

The first contestant was actually pretty good, her knowledge base was broader than first appearances would make you think. She had some tough questions in her money builder round, although she did miss a couple easy ones. But later, she showed her trivia cred.

I won't discuss the second contestant.

The third contestant was good. Lots of trivia knowledge.

And between #1 and #3, they easily beat Ken in the finals. Shame they didn't have more money.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

The person who played for $5K won $30k+

Why okay for $5k? To advance.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

TonyD79 said:


> The person who played for $5K won $30k+
> 
> Why okay for $5k? To advance.


I *think* it was $75K total (50+20+5), so $25K each if I'm remembering correctly.

And if someone intentionally chooses the lower amount only to be part of the winning team, that's Olympic Gold level chickenshyt. I have no way of knowing, but it just seemed like he was very unsure of himself, and wasn't sure he could advance otherwise. But maybe he is a gold-level wimp. I can only recall someone choosing the lower amount once before?


----------



## spear (Oct 11, 2006)

The total was $95k (20 + 5 + 70).

I suppose they could change it so that each contestant could only win how much they contributed to the pot, but that wouldn't take into account how they performed in the final chase.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

spear said:


> The total was $95k (20 + 5 + 70).
> 
> I suppose they could change it so that each contestant could only win how much they contributed to the pot, but that wouldn't take into account how they performed in the final chase.


Fixed, thanks.


----------



## bryhamm (Jun 30, 2004)

astrohip said:


> I can only recall someone choosing the lower amount once before?


Pretty sure James Holzhouser (sp?) chose the lower amount when he was a contestant on the show. It's all about the risk/reward and what is the optimal play.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Was there a new episode last night? My TiVo didn't record it. Bummer.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

bryhamm said:


> Pretty sure James Holzhouser (sp?) chose the lower amount when he was a contestant on the show. It's all about the risk/reward and what is the optimal play.


Nope. From wiki...
*
The Chase*

Holzhauer appeared on the American version of the quiz show The Chase on September 2, 2014, internationally produced by ITV Studios. In his first round, a one-minute round called the Cash Builder, he correctly answered 12 questions out of 13 posed by host Brooke Burns; the last question was asked just before time expired and was quickly passed on by Holzhauer. His score set a record for the Cash Builder that was never surpassed during the show's run.

In his second round, he faced Mark Labbett to determine whether he would advance to the final round and add money to the team prize pool. Holzhauer had a choice of three amounts to play for: $60,000 based on his score in the Cash Builder, $30,000 to reduce the difficulty of the round; and $120,000, which would increase the difficulty. He chose to play for $60,000; after the show he said that the odds did not favor playing for the maximum amount and that it was not worth the gamble.

The Chase was played head-to-head, with the players using hidden buttons to select multiple-choice answers. Holzhauer advanced to the finals and added to the prize pool with a score of five right and one wrong. Labbett scored a perfect five, with his final answer not revealed since Holzhauer had already achieved the necessary points to win the round.

In the Final Chase round (as team leader with two other contestants also participating), Holzhauer's team defeated Labbett by a score of 26 to 9, earning him a $58,333.33 share of the $175,000 team prize pool. By answering 19 questions correctly for his team, he set a Final Chase record, which was also never surpassed.

Bob Boden, the producer of The Chase, was impressed by his performance and had Holzhauer audition to join the show as a colleague of Labbett. In July 2020, Holzhauer and several other famous game show contestants were said to be in negotiations to become chasers for a potential reboot of The Chase, which would be produced for ABC. The reboot starring Holzhauer, Ken Jennings, and Brad Rutter premiered January 7, 2021 on ABC.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> Was there a new episode last night? My TiVo didn't record it. Bummer.


Yes. Part of this discussion is we had a contestant finish the Money Builder round with {I don't even remember now; $30K? $50K?). In any case, when they offered the two alternatives, he chose the lower amount of $5,000. Everyone was stunned, with comments like "Why even play?".


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

I might remind people here that this isn't marked as a spoiler thread. Maybe we need to get it changed, but as of now we should only be having spoiler-tagged discussions for episode details.


----------



## bryhamm (Jun 30, 2004)

astrohip said:


> Nope. From wiki...
> *
> The Chase*
> 
> ...


Thanks. I wasn't real sure. I guess what I remembered was him NOT going for the highest amount. Thought for some reason he went for the lower amount.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

DancnDude said:


> I might remind people here that this isn't marked as a spoiler thread. Maybe we need to get it changed, but as of now we should only be having spoiler-tagged discussions for episode details.


We've been having non-spoiler-tagged discussions for eight months and 254 posts. Is it really worth raising this issue now? Does anyone come and read new posts and not expect current episode discussions?

Nonetheless, I'm happy to PM the OP and request a title mod.


----------



## firerose818 (Jul 21, 2003)

Yeah, I can ask - but anyone can? Right?


----------



## skypros (May 19, 2015)

DevdogAZ said:


> Was there a new episode last night? My TiVo didn't record it. Bummer.


My Tivo didn't catch it either.....


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> Was there a new episode last night? My TiVo didn't record it. Bummer.


Yes. It was a delay from last week.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Welcome to the new "Spoilers Allowed" *The Chase* thread...


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

The first two players seemed like total bozos in their first two rounds.. then the third round was good.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

The Chase Shakes Up Its Roster of Chasers (Who's In? Who's Out?), as ABC Sets Upcoming Reality Slate


Three new adversaries will join in The Chase, and two familiar foes will depart, when the ABC quiz show premieres its new season in May.




tvline.com





On the Sara Haines-hosted _The Chase_, Ken Jennings and Mark “The Beast” Labbett will step down as Chasers, making way for Victoria Groce (“The Queen” of all things trivia), speed-quiz titan Brandon “The Lightning Bolt” Blackwell and _Jeopardy!_ vet Buzzy Cohen, who will join returning Chasers Brad Rutter and James Holzhauer.


----------



## samsauce29 (Nov 30, 2007)

astrohip said:


> The Chase Shakes Up Its Roster of Chasers (Who's In? Who's Out?), as ABC Sets Upcoming Reality Slate
> 
> 
> Three new adversaries will join in The Chase, and two familiar foes will depart, when the ABC quiz show premieres its new season in May.
> ...


Oof. This leaves only James that is at all interesting to me. Couple that with the super low number of winners, and I may just cancel the SP.

Does anyone happen to know how many teams have ended up winning? It just seems like very few, but curious to see the real stats.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

So they're going from four chasers to five? That seems like the wrong direction. The others who are not on the episode just sit there and have to watch. Seem like a waste. But since they're hardly having to pay anything out in winnings, I'll bet the show is cheap to produce so they might as well keep going as long as it's profitable.


----------



## SnakeEyes (Dec 26, 2000)

The Beast was just the focus of S2 hype and departs after. Lame. He’s the one I like the most.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

SnakeEyes said:


> The Beast was just the focus of S2 hype and departs after. Lame. He’s the one I like the most.


Having seen the original series and seeing the Beast on it regularly, I don't much care who else they try in that role, like you said he's the most entertaining there.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

terpfan1980 said:


> Having seen the original series and seeing the Beast on it regularly, I don't much care who else they try in that role, like you said he's the most entertaining there.


Yep. The Beast is what attracted me to the old show originally. His character is perfect.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1503773915629252612


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Rumors abound that Ken left The Chase because he will be the new Jeopardy host.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

astrohip said:


> Rumors abound that Ken left The Chase because he will be the new Jeopardy host.


Fingers crossed!


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

astrohip said:


> The Chase Shakes Up Its Roster of Chasers (Who's In? Who's Out?), as ABC Sets Upcoming Reality Slate
> 
> 
> Three new adversaries will join in The Chase, and two familiar foes will depart, when the ABC quiz show premieres its new season in May.
> ...


that SUCKS!!!!

I will still watch the show..


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

astrohip said:


> Rumors abound that Ken left The Chase because he will be the new Jeopardy host.


Though the way they word Ken's opening compared to Mayim's made it sound like she was really the host...?


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

mattack said:


> Though the way they word Ken's opening compared to Mayim's made it sound like she was really the host...?


Mayim is a host, albeit for specials & prime time events. So she gets to be announced as "the host of Jeopardy".

Ken is a guest host, so he's "hosting Jeopardy".

And $50 bucks says you said those in Johnny Gilbert's voice.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

astrohip said:


> Mayim is a host, albeit for specials & prime time events. So she gets to be announced as "the host of Jeopardy".
> 
> Ken is a guest host, so he's "hosting Jeopardy".


BTW, I didn't actually notice the wording myself, until I read about it in an Aaron Barnhart article (linked to from email stories he sends out).


----------



## debtoine (May 17, 2001)

astrohip said:


> Rumors abound that Ken left The Chase because he will be the new Jeopardy host.





DevdogAZ said:


> Fingers crossed!


I guess we're in the minority because we don't care for him at all.

deb


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

DevdogAZ said:


> The others who are not on the episode just sit there and have to watch. Seem like a waste.


My theory is that those scenes are recorded separately so not every Beast has to be present at every taping.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

pdhenry said:


> My theory is that those scenes are recorded separately so not every Beast has to be present at every taping.


They are chasers. There is only one beast. 

But how would that work? They’d have to be there to watch the show. Seems the same to me. You have to get the three who aren’t being the chaser together either during taping or some other time. Given that most shows are taped in strips, seems easier to just get all four together for the tapings rather than have all kinds of other scheduled times.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

TonyD79 said:


> They are chasers. There is only one beast.
> 
> But how would that work? They’d have to be there to watch the show. Seems the same to me. You have to get the three who aren’t being the chaser together either during taping or some other time. Given that most shows are taped in strips, seems easier to just get all four together for the tapings rather than have all kinds of other scheduled times.


Yeah, I was thinking about that taping schedule too. I figure they are likely only there taping for a few weeks (give or take) as they likely tape multiple shows per day. They might have the same group of chasers sitting and watching a fellow chaser on day 1, then switch to another chaser for day 2, etc., but they likely all just sit there and watch/ comment, etc, so they can do it all over just a few days time.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

TonyD79 said:


> They’d have to be there to watch the show.


I didn't think they commented on every question (so their part can be accomplished quicker than real-time*), but perhaps they do. But it still allows the Chaser to be asynchronous from the other three.

*I also believe that Casey Kasem recorded the intros to American Top 40 and the production staff interleaved the actual music after Casey was done.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Do the losing contestants still not even get a parting gift for a day's work?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

terpfan1980 said:


> Yeah, I was thinking about that taping schedule too. I figure they are likely only there taping for a few weeks (give or take) as they likely tape multiple shows per day. They might have the same group of chasers sitting and watching a fellow chaser on day 1, then switch to another chaser for day 2, etc., but they likely all just sit there and watch/ comment, etc, so they can do it all over just a few days time.


I would bet they film a whole season (9-12 episodes) within just a few days. Probably only a week of taping in order to get 12 episodes in the can.


pdhenry said:


> I didn't think they commented on every question (so their part can be accomplished quicker than real-time*), but perhaps they do. But it still allows the Chaser to be asynchronous from the other three.


I would bet that the other Chasers sit in that room and their job is to just make as many snarky comments as possible and the whole thing is recorded, and then the editors pick the best bits to intercut with the action taking place on the floor. Whether they do that in real time or after the fact doesn't really matter, but as Tony said, it doesn't really make sense for the other three Chasers to schedule a different time to record their "watch" session, when they're likely all on set at the same time for the taping of multiple episodes back to back.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

pdhenry said:


> I didn't think they commented on every question (so their part can be accomplished quicker than real-time*), but perhaps they do. But it still allows the Chaser to be asynchronous from the other three.
> 
> *I also believe that Casey Kasem recorded the intros to American Top 40 and the production staff interleaved the actual music after Casey was done.


What makes you think that every comment makes it to air. More likely they are chatting the whole time and selected comments make it to the show.

The logistics you suggest are just too complicated.


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

Contestant on the most recent episode: "My husband married me because I can cook and I can do other stuff" James' face and "It's a family show"


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

DancnDude said:


> Contestant on the most recent episode: "My husband married me because I can cook and I can do other stuff" James' face and "It's a family show"


That was a great line.

She had a twisty night. She did poorly in the first game, only get one correct, missing some easy ones, earning $10,000. Yet in the Final Chase, she knew a fair amount of difficult questions, helping her team get (I think) twenty on the board. Maybe she was nervous at first?


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Wow, what an ending!


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Yeah, I had to rewind and watch a couple times to see if she actually got the last answer in before the time ran out. It must have just been a fraction of a second.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

My son was featured in a question on the UK version of the show!


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

The pot last night should have been $350,000.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Regina said:


> The pot last night should have been $350,000.


Agree. And yet... same result. The Queen rules.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Not only that but she had 18 seconds left on the clock. She could have beat them even if they had 22 or 23 on the board.

Did anyone else find it odd at how much praise they gave the players for getting 20 on the board, saying that was one of the best ever? I seem to recall there were several episodes where the finalists got 20 or more.


----------

