Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
How the money was divided:
Spoiler
Luke: $3,377
Korama: $6,754
Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall
I honestly didn't think it was possible. The format is dreadful; adding Weakest Link-style elimination voting makes it even worse, but makes a twisted sort of sense...IronNeck wrote:It's funny that I made a topic about how odious I found the British version of the show...but the American one is much worse.
...because the producers care more about the potential for conflict among the contestants than the actual trivia. They think it's entertaining, and in any event, poor contestants don't win much money.dhkendall wrote:Why do so many of these shows put people on that are clearly not Jeopardy! material?
There are two new episodes on both 2/22 & 2/23 at 9 and rerunning the same ones at midnight PST. A rerun of one of the 2/16 eps. is on at 10:30 tonight PST. One a day rerun eps. will air on Sunday & Monday at various times.Bamaman wrote:When does this air next?
Well, unless they asked a bunch of boxing fans/historians this question! Then, Ali might not even make the 5 greatest boxers pound-for-pound, let alone top 5 athletes in any sport.MarkBarrett wrote: Sure, you would think Muhammad Ali absolutely has to be there for sure no matter who they asked and when.
To make the TV audience feel better about themselves when playing at home.dhkendall wrote:Why do so many of these shows put people on that are clearly not Jeopardy! material?
Fair points about Ali and I hear you. For game show purposes he had to be correct or that question would have been even worse than it was.IronNeck wrote:Well, unless they asked a bunch of boxing fans/historians this question! Then, Ali might not even make the 5 greatest boxers pound-for-pound, let alone top 5 athletes in any sport.MarkBarrett wrote: Sure, you would think Muhammad Ali absolutely has to be there for sure no matter who they asked and when.
But yes, horrible question. Obviously, comparing athletes from different sports is dumb, but I even hate the idea of comparing athletes in the same sport from different eras. Like, how can anyone possibly do that?!
In general, athletes will be bigger, stronger, more athletic, have better training, better nutrition, and better drugs as time goes on. Which is unfair to the older legends. On the flip sides, if one only goes by accomplishments, dominance, championships, etc. that's unfair to modern titans, since there was so much less competition back in the day.
One would think so, but then why is Jeopardy!, one that has really smart contestants answering well-written difficult trivia questions, be so incredibly popular (way more so than "Divided" or any of those other ones that have dumb people answering easy, poorly-written trivia)? Most "average" viewers get maybe 5 or 6 J! clues a day if they're lucky (just look at TPH, who I suspect would definitely represent the "average" viewer in his get rate (if not for his constant bitching about it), but J! has way more viewers and way longer longevity.ihavejeoprosy wrote:To make the TV audience feel better about themselves when playing at home.dhkendall wrote:Why do so many of these shows put people on that are clearly not Jeopardy! material?
Also, it introduces more conflict and makes for better TV.
Keep that up and I'll report you to the DORD.dhkendall wrote:... and way longer longevity.
I'm wondering...does it also depend on the type of target demographic? To me, Divided and Jeopardy!'s target demographic seem like polar opposites, if you just look at the material.dhkendall wrote: One would think so, but then why is Jeopardy!, one that has really smart contestants answering well-written difficult trivia questions, be so incredibly popular (way more so than "Divided" or any of those other ones that have dumb people answering easy, poorly-written trivia)? Most "average" viewers get maybe 5 or 6 J! clues a day if they're lucky (just look at TPH, who I suspect would definitely represent the "average" viewer in his get rate (if not for his constant bitching about it), but J! has way more viewers and way longer longevity.
What are their demographics? Hanging out on this board and in the community, I tend to think that the target demographic is the 30-50 crowd with a masters degree. But, going by actual viewer data and the ads that run on the show, it's the over 50 retired crowd. That isn't the type that would do well on the show itself generally, but enjoy watching it.SweepingDeveloper wrote:I'm wondering...does it also depend on the type of target demographic? To me, Divided and Jeopardy!'s target demographic seem like polar opposites, if you just look at the material.dhkendall wrote: One would think so, but then why is Jeopardy!, one that has really smart contestants answering well-written difficult trivia questions, be so incredibly popular (way more so than "Divided" or any of those other ones that have dumb people answering easy, poorly-written trivia)? Most "average" viewers get maybe 5 or 6 J! clues a day if they're lucky (just look at TPH, who I suspect would definitely represent the "average" viewer in his get rate (if not for his constant bitching about it), but J! has way more viewers and way longer longevity.
It's gotta be asked somewhere, I've always wanted to ask it, and now I'm going to with the above mentioned being the perfect opportunity to do so...how on Earth can GSN stay afloat when they can keep churning out such craptastic original programming? I can give GSN this much credit where due: They are one of the very, VERY remote few networks remaining that have managed to keep their intended overall format intact. Yes, they have had one or two diversions on/off through the last sixteen/seventeen years, but have altogether and for the most part kept the 'everything game show' format. BUT that's where my kudos for GSN begin and especially end...most particularly with the likes of Divided on there currently. And yes, there does appear to be an apparent aversion to programming that is either 'dated'* and/or intellectual.dhkendall wrote:One would think so, but then why is Jeopardy!, one that has really smart contestants answering well-written difficult trivia questions, be so incredibly popular (way more so than "Divided" or any of those other ones that have dumb people answering easy, poorly-written trivia)? Most "average" viewers get maybe 5 or 6 J! clues a day if they're lucky (just look at TPH, who I suspect would definitely represent the "average" viewer in his get rate (if not for his constant bitching about it), but J! has way more viewers and way longer longevity.ihavejeoprosy wrote:To make the TV audience feel better about themselves when playing at home.dhkendall wrote:Why do so many of these shows put people on that are clearly not Jeopardy! material?
Also, it introduces more conflict and makes for better TV.
Because they are extremely cheap to produce.Maven wrote:...how on Earth can GSN stay afloat when they can keep churning out such craptastic original programming?
Both are very different games with different motivations to watch. Divided is more of a reality show where the fun is watching people argue. J is the classic quiz show. There is a lot of overlap between the two imo.dhkendall wrote:One would think so, but then why is Jeopardy!, one that has really smart contestants answering well-written difficult trivia questions, be so incredibly popular (way more so than "Divided" or any of those other ones that have dumb people answering easy, poorly-written trivia)? Most "average" viewers get maybe 5 or 6 J! clues a day if they're lucky (just look at TPH, who I suspect would definitely represent the "average" viewer in his get rate (if not for his constant bitching about it), but J! has way more viewers and way longer longevity.ihavejeoprosy wrote:To make the TV audience feel better about themselves when playing at home.dhkendall wrote:Why do so many of these shows put people on that are clearly not Jeopardy! material?
Also, it introduces more conflict and makes for better TV.
And always have been...I am honestly amazed GSN managed to keep the classic rerun train running as long as they did before succumbing to almost all original programming and recent reruns all the time. The sharks* were already circling around 1999 when they had things like Inquizition, All New Three's A Crowd, and Burt Luddin's Love Buffet crammed into the schedule in a [sing-song]'Three of these things don't belong here!'[/sing-song] manner.IronNeck wrote:Because they are extremely cheap to produce.Maven wrote:...how on Earth can GSN stay afloat when they can keep churning out such craptastic original programming?