Jump to content

Talk:The Price Is Right/Archive 4: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
RadioKirk (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 40: Line 40:


:Try asking at [http://www.twoplustwo.com], Probability forum. You'll probably find some takers. - [[User:PhilipR|PhilipR]] 13:06, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:Try asking at [http://www.twoplustwo.com], Probability forum. You'll probably find some takers. - [[User:PhilipR|PhilipR]] 13:06, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I hadn't seen this request when I posted the optimal strategy, but I hope I did a decent
job of hitting the high points. I did the full analysis and then looked through
old Usenet threads and found an earlier example whose end results matched my own.
--JMike, 17:02 ET, 13 Jan 2006


== Is: Major word ==
== Is: Major word ==

Revision as of 22:02, 13 January 2006

This article has recently been posted on fark.com. Please watch out for any trolls that may target this article. 17:15, September 8, 2005 (UTC)


International Versions

Is it about time we create an international version's article, explaining in more detail how they were/are played with detailed information on the more famous ones like, UK, Australia, Mexico.

Remlap 21:46, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Clean up of Talk:The Price is Right

This talk page is out of date! Let's make The Price is Right a great page! If I clean up anything by mistake, just copy it back from the page history. And please use : ~~~~ to sign and date your comments. Plinko 15:37, 23 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Removed out of date talk. Plinko 15:43, 23 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I applaud your initiative, but it seems to be convention to move old talk to an archive and then link the archive. I suppose you can go through history if you really want to see archived talk, but you might want to consider having a prominently-linked archive just so people don't feel like their comments have gotten suppressed - PhilipR 19:08, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Proposed Changes to The Price is Right

Let's rearrange the main page sections to have the Overview first: Overview > 1956 Show > 1972 Show > New Life in Primetime. Plinko 15:48, 23 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reorganized page outline. Plinko 05:17, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pricing Game Section

I've got a question about the pricing game section... one of the external links (GScentral) has a lot of the starting dates for pricing games... where exactly would I put those? Also, should the pricing games section be divided into retired and currently played games? It's already unwieldy as is, and there's a lot of them missing (a bunch of retired ones, really). Mo0 22:01, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

GoldenRoad.net's FAQ [1] has a more accurate list of when each game premiered. As for the pricing games, I'd wait until the active games are completed before adding any more retired ones. Right now the only active games that don't have descriptions are: Master Key, On the Spot, Poker Game, Secret "X", Side by Side, Step Up, Swap Meet, Switch?, Time is Money, and 2 For the Price of 1. But with 70+ games in the rotation and almost 100 games having been played in the history of the show, I realize that this section is getting long. Iowahwyman 01:12, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Well, I'll get cracking on those tomorrow. I guess adding just a temporary list of which games are retired and which aren't wouldn't be a bad place to start on dividing them, would it? Mo0 09:40, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I plan to upload more small photos of pricing games from the official CBS websites. Plinko 05:19, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be a good idea to put the most recent air-date on each game's page? -- Eddie 16:09, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
NO. 71.31.68.107 05:50, 3 January 2006 (UTC)(Steve Gavazzi)[reply]

Probability and Records

“Questions of strategy natuarlly arise from this situation: When should you choose to spin again?”

I’d like to see someone well-versed in probability perform a more rigorous analysis. For example, assuming that the number you land on is random and assuming my calculations are correct (a big assumption), if the first spinner gets 60c in his first spin, he wins 9% of the time by staying and 16% of the time by spinning again, neglecting tying situations. I’m not sure at all about these numbers, though, which is why I ask someone more experienced for help.

On a related noted, I hope to add historical facts (eg, "This is the first time that...") that Bob Barker himself sometimes points out during the show. It would be cool to have a list of those facts on Wikipedia and they also often relate to probability. Plinko 05:23, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Good God, PLEASE don't do that. Most of those "records" that Bob mentions are made up on the spot and are totally inaccurate. User:Steve Gavazzi of Golden-Road.net 12:20 ET, 27 May 2005
Really?? Okay, that's good to know. Plinko 23:04, 27 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Try asking at [2], Probability forum. You'll probably find some takers. - PhilipR 13:06, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I hadn't seen this request when I posted the optimal strategy, but I hope I did a decent job of hitting the high points. I did the full analysis and then looked through old Usenet threads and found an earlier example whose end results matched my own. --JMike, 17:02 ET, 13 Jan 2006

Is: Major word

I thought for the purposes of English capitalization, "Is" was a major word. Shouldn't all words in the article's (and game show's) title be capitalized? - PhilipR 13:04, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Good point, in fact the official CBS website currently capitalizes "Is." Perhaps people have historically based the lowercase "is" on the the logo. I vote for capital "Is." Plinko 18:38, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Is should be capitalized, since it is a verb and not an article or preposition, with those two not being capitalized. See Talk:My Name Is Earl. It's the same deal for that show and its article. --/ɛvɪs/ /tɑːk/ /kɑntɹɪbjuʃ(ə)nz/ 16:21, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Update: The official website no longer capitalizes "is". RadioKirk 18:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Then the official website is wrong – just like it usually is. 71.31.68.107 23:42, 23 December 2005 (UTC) (Steve Gavazzi)[reply]

Showcase Showdown: Bonus Spin

What year did they introduce the bonus spin (creation of the two green spaces and the $10,000 prize)?

As far as is known, the bonus spin was added sometime around December of 1978. --Steve Gavazzi

Showcase tie?

A recent edit by 67.140.39.183 indicates that there has never been a tie in the Showcase, while the previous revision says it happened exactly once. I'm curious as to whether anyone can cite a source for this one way or another. (I'm not implying vandalism or anything; just wondering where the information comes from.) SFT 18:28, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

According to multiple people on the newsgroup alt.tv.game-shows, there was a tie on the '70s nighttime run. We can't actually confirm it either way, since Bob's fur ban includes all of that run's episodes, but the general consensus is that it happened. --Steve Gavazzi
Forgive my ignorance, but how would a ban on fur affect the ability to confirm it? Or is it a ban on episodes featuring fur? Apofisu 21:08, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, yes, that's what it means. No daytime shows with fur coats are allowed to be aired, nor is any episode at all from the '70s nighttime run. 71.31.68.107 04:45, 26 December 2005 (UTC)(Steve Gavazzi)[reply]

Who composed the main theme?

It says Sheila Cole in one place and Bob Cobert in another. Which one is correct?

According to everything I've ever heard from anyone who knows anything about this topic, the composer was Sheila Cole. In fact, this is the first time I've ever even heard "Price's theme" and "Bob Cobert" mentioned in the same discussion. 67.140.39.183 03:26, 16 December 2005 (UTC) (Steve Gavazzi)[reply]

Separating Articles

Shouldn't we have two separate articles, one for the Cullen Version and one for the Barker Version? We should say (1956 show) and (1972 show) for the different articles. Also, they should both link to the separate article somewhere in each of them. Wikider 01:43, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why? SFT | Talk 05:59, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree with The Penultimate Trombone: That's why articles like this one have subsections. RadioKirk talk to me 06:04, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]