1vs100 1/27/06

[mick66]

So does anybody still watch this? I forgot to actually delete the SP and I had nothing else to watch earlier. that I wanted to watch
I noticed that the dollar amounts have changed.

10/13/06...............10/27/06

100........................100
500........................250
1000......................500
2000......................1000
3000......................1500
4000......................2000
5000......................3000
6000......................4000
7000......................5000
8000......................6000
9000......................7000
10,000...................8000
N/A........................9000
N/A........................10,000

SP deleted.

[lambertman]

Huh.

I had deleted the pass after ep #2, but this makes me consider re-adding it. There was no game before - it was just "contestant racks up a mind-numbingly easy hundred grand and quits". With less money on the line, there's more incentive to actually play.

[Animgif]

I watched this and found it an interesting concept. I kept my attention enough to not change it but not enough to get caught up in the action. Like all in this genre, there is too much "drama" in will they go for it or take the money. That drives me insane. I don't care which they do, I just want the next f'ing question!

[newsposter]

I still dont get how it's 1vs 100 ( yes I know the math how it increases what they can take home but still......

If you answer all 10 questions correctly, you win it all regardless, right ? If true, then you really aren't fighting against the 100, just trying to answer 10 questions correctly. This show is misnamed and should be incinerated.

However it's 100x better than DND since they dont bring in their dogs, horses, kids 2nd grade teacher, husband from iraq, girl that helped them tie their shoes on the subway when they had their hands full when they were 15 years old and all geeky, brought along the first shoelace they ever broke as a lucky trinket, or the entire gospel section from the local church.

[SeanC]

This show started back in January?! Damn I could have sworn it's only been on a couple of times!

:D

[ufo4sale]

These shows should come with a warning. Must you a DVR in order to watch them. If not you may experience moments of temporarily insanity and extreme boredom. :)

[Amnesia]

If you answer all 10 questions correctly, you win it all regardless, right ? If true, then you really aren't fighting against the 100, just trying to answer 10 questions correctly.No, that's not my understanding.

You win it all if and only if you knock out all of the mob.

[SeanC]

So technically you can win on the first question. It's never going to happen but if all 100 answered wrong on the first question, bingo, a million bucks.

[Amnesia]

So technically you can win on the first question. It's never going to happen but if all 100 answered wrong on the first question, bingo, a million bucks.
That's right.

[jschuman]

The game itself is an interesting concept. However there are a few flaws:
- As others have mentioned, they take waaaaay too much time to get through the questions. Hasn't anybody figured out that Jeopardy has been on for sooo long because it gives us lots of interesting questions? All the pauses just turn people off.
- The way the show is setup right now it is a huge gamble to keep going for it. You have some to gain but much, much more to lose since you lose it ALL if you miss a question.

[pendragn]

I watched about half of one episode. It was a little interesting. I think I'll record it again on Friday and give it another chance.

tk

[MikeMar]

- The way the show is setup right now it is a huge gamble to keep going for it. You have some to gain but much, much more to lose since you lose it ALL if you miss a question.

exactly, i think it could be a great show, IF they had something like, if you get the question wrong you walk away w/ 1/3 of your money or something.

no one wants to go on a game show and leave with nothing.

[TheMerk]

exactly, i think it could be a great show, IF they had something like, if you get the question wrong you walk away w/ 1/3 of your money or something.

no one wants to go on a game show and leave with nothing.

They haven't mentioned it during the course of the show yet, but a contestant can walk away AFTER hearing their next question and receive 25% of their earnings.

[MikeMar]

They haven't mentioned it during the course of the show yet, but a contestant can walk away AFTER hearing their next question and receive 25% of their earnings.

really? well i would almost keep going then! :)

[jschuman]

They haven't mentioned it during the course of the show yet, but a contestant can walk away AFTER hearing their next question and receive 25% of their earnings.Um, that sure seems like something they should tell us, doesn't it??

They should push that up to 50% and they'd probably get more people going for it.

[Amnesia]

They haven't mentioned it during the course of the show yet, but a contestant can walk away AFTER hearing their next question and receive 25% of their earnings.How do you know that?

[newsposter]

totally nuts....i'll have to listen to bob as i swore he said 'if you answer all 10 questions right, you win 1 mil'

I guess the math of it all doesn't count as depending on when you eliminate people, no way does the math equal 1 mil. It must be more a 'reward' prize, not a calculated one.

http://www.nbc.com/1vs100/about.shtml

To stay in the game, the player must answer trivia questions and get every one right -- wrong answers from the mob eliminates them from the game, driving up the cash prize for the player. If the player can eliminate all 100 members of the mob, which will also be stacked with surprise opponents, such as geniuses, valedictorians, grandmothers and other game show champs, he will go home with the $1 million top prize. However, if the player gets one answer wrong, the game is over and "the mob" will split the player's winnings up to that point and a new contestant gets to take on "the mob."

[Amnesia]

I guess the math of it all doesn't count as depending on when you eliminate people, no way does the math equal 1 mil. It must be more a 'reward' prize, not a calculated one. Yes, that's right.

In the first show, when he was explaining the money-per-question bit, he said something like "if at any point you knock out all 100 mob members, you go home with $1 million"...

[newsposter]

no wonder this is faster than DND, they know you wont win!

[TheMerk]

How do you know that?

From the wikipedia entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_vs._100_%28US_game_show%29) :

Once these are exhausted, he/she can choose to leave the game after hearing a question with 25% of the current pot. The remaining mob members receive nothing. ...

...If the contestant refuses the 25% guarantee, there is a chance that it would be edited out in post-production, creating an illusion that the contestant wasn't offered the guarantee.

It's all subject to the wikiality, but it is written well enough to make me believe it. I couldn't find the official game rules on NBC's site.

[BrettStah]

I think that they should do away with the contestant's ability to quit. You either beat the 100 "mob members" and win the money, or the mob gets whatever money you've built up before you miss a question.

The British version is sort of like this... you can pass on up to 3 questions along the way, but your prize money is cut in half each time you choose to pass on a question. You have one opportunity to double the winnings if you feel very confident about the answer to the question. (I don't think there's a guaranteed $1 million prize at the end, however - you just win whatever money you've built up over the course of knocking out the 100 people you're playing against.

I think that if they adapted the rules to match the BBC's version a little more closely, it'd be a more compelling game.

[pmyers]

I've really been enjoying this show!

[MikeMar]

I think that they should do away with the contestant's ability to quit. You either beat the 100 "mob members" and win the money, or the mob gets whatever money you've built up before you miss a question.

The British version is sort of like this... you can pass on up to 3 questions along the way, but your prize money is cut in half each time you choose to pass on a question. You have one opportunity to double the winnings if you feel very confident about the answer to the question. (I don't think there's a guaranteed $1 million prize at the end, however - you just win whatever money you've built up over the course of knocking out the 100 people you're playing against.

I think that if they adapted the rules to match the BBC's version a little more closely, it'd be a more compelling game.

i like that, seems like a single contestant could go on longer but win less money. Be fine w/ me

[BrettStah]

i like that, seems like a single contestant could go on longer but win less money. Be fine w/ me
Yeah, I think it would improve things. If they kept the US version's rule that has the "mob" splitting the prize money that's been built up by the losing contestant, it would keep things more interesting for some folks (definitely more interesting if you're in the mob :)).

[classicX]

I would go on the show, and right before I answer, I would say....

"Hey mob, if you all get the next question wrong on purpose, I will win the $1M and give you half to split."

$500,000 is more than any one contestant has won so far.
$500,000 is more than any mob has ever split so far.

Then of course, you get the one genius that says "If everyone is gonna get it wrong on purpose, I'll be the only mob member to get it right and it will be 1 vs. 1 and I could win $1M!"

Add up how many people are 1) that smart and 2) that devious and that's how many people you have left.

Back to being a contestant: armed with this knowledge, I would get up to the $2000 per person, then make this offer. Assuming there are about 70 people left at that point and given that the totally made-up ratio of 1:10 people will purposely get it right, it would end up being 1 vs. 7, while adding $126,000 to your previous total, which should be around $25,000.

Now you have $151,000 in the bank and only 7 people to beat, with the still relatively easy $3,000 question.

And now I must erase this post from my mind, as I'm sure you want to do as well.

:D

[newsposter]

i would hope nbc was smart enough to have a collusion rule...then again, they keep on showing DND so how smart can they be ? :)

[MikeMar]

i would hope nbc was smart enough to have a collusion rule...then again, they keep on showing DND so how smart can they be ? :)

they would probably kick you out of the show and not air it :)

[dimented]

they would probably kick you out of the show and not air it :)

But would you get the money? I don't care if they air, so long as I get the money.

And they would be dumb not to air it, I have to imagine the ratings would be good for such a thing.

[MikeMar]

But would you get the money? I don't care if they air, so long as I get the money.

And they would be dumb not to air it, I have to imagine the ratings would be good for such a thing.

well it's probably near the top of the rules they have. There may also been a clause saying "if we don't air it, you don't get paid" so who knows.

They can do whatever they want really, as long as it's in writing and they aren't hurting small children

[dimented]

well it's probably near the top of the rules they have. There may also been a clause saying "if we don't air it, you don't get paid" so who knows.

They can do whatever they want really, as long as it's in writing and they aren't hurting small children

Agreed.

[DevdogAZ]

I just watched this last night. I still like the show, but there definitely need to be a few tweaks. I guess the first one was reducing the amount of money that can be won in a short amount of time. Now they need to add something that will increase the chances of people going for the bigger money and getting more difficult questions. The girl in this episode used up her lifelines early on and then bailed with about $35,000. That's not compelling TV.

I think the rule in the Wikipedia article is inaccurate, but should actually be instituted so that people will almost always move on to the next question. As a contestant, it's the possibility that you might know the answer to the next question that will keep you going, and make for some risk taking and more compelling TV.

[rich]

Now you have $151,000 in the bank and only 7 people to beat, with the still relatively easy $3,000 question.Nice. Of course you could also just walk away at that point with your $151,000, and on your way out, remind The Mob that since they did not play along, they're not getting a penny of it.

[newsposter]

imagine the task of getting together all the mob data to send checks to after waiting months to receive your own ;)

[tetspa]

The "help" feature is a bit flawed, in that when you ask a "mob" member why he picked an answer, since 1) the mob member assumes he is right, and 2) the mob member wants you to be wrong, he should always say something like "I just guessed I really don't know" instead of "I absolutely know I am right and I would bet my life on it".

[rich]

Nice. Of course you could also just walk away at that point with your $151,000, and on your way out, remind The Mob that since they did not play along, they're not getting a penny of it.Thinking more about it, I'm pretty sure I'd walk away at that point. Unless you manage to eliminate all 7 of the remaining players, you don't get much more money, and you're taking a huge risk each time.

[jschuman]

The "help" feature is a bit flawed, in that when you ask a "mob" member why he picked an answer, since 1) the mob member assumes he is right, and 2) the mob member wants you to be wrong, he should always say something like "I just guessed I really don't know" instead of "I absolutely know I am right and I would bet my life on it".Unless it is quite early in the contestant's game and she/he hasn't accumulated much money. In that case I'd rather the contestant get the question right then split $500 among 45 people.