The Colour Of Money

AnnieHall · Post by **AnnieHall** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:13 pm

Is anyone else watching this new game-show on ITV now introduced by Chris Tarrant? It's a bit like Deal or No deal with varying amounts of "Cash" in different machines, you have to aim for a set amount in total. What I hate about shows like this and "Deal or no Deal" is all the cheesiness. seems you have to have a big sob-story to be seen as being "Worthy" of winning some money. I think this is wrong, anybody should be allowed to take part (Well, maybe not a millionaire- did Judith really need the money when she was on Who wants to be a Millionaire?).
It's nice and easy to understand, anyway.
There was another game-show once when you had to say "stop" before going bust- does anybody remember which one I'm thinking of?

Craig Beevers · Post by **Craig Beevers** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:23 pm

It's another reality TV generation pile of brainless tripe I'm afraid.

AnnieHall · Post by **AnnieHall** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:34 pm

You are right, Chris, but, unfortunately I've not been invited out anywhere tonight so I'm stuck in watching mindless TV trivia shows, Casualty and CSI NY!

Kai Laddiman · Post by **Kai Laddiman** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:36 pm

AnnieHall wrote:You are right, Chris, but, unfortunately I've not been invited out anywhere tonight so I'm stuck in watching mindless TV trivia shows, Casualty and CSI NY!

So, Tarrant's on the forum now?

George Jenkins · Post by **George Jenkins** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:41 pm

Craig Beevers wrote:It's another reality TV generation pile of brainless tripe I'm afraid.

I've just escaped from it. I couldn't stand any more. I thought that I would talk to my friends on the Foram, and with a bit of luck, I might get involved in an argument.

Seriously though, I like to keep my Wife company in the evenings but there are limits to what I am prepared to suffer for Love.

AnnieHall · Post by **AnnieHall** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:42 pm

OOps- thanks, Kai for pointing out that it's CRAIG not CHRIS (Think it's time I went to Specsavers!)

Jimmy Gough · Post by **Jimmy Gough** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:53 pm

AnnieHall wrote:OOps- thanks, Kai for pointing out that it's CRAIG not CHRIS (Think it's time I went to Specsavers!)

How dare you? You do know that is THE Craig Beavers!

AnnieHall · Post by **AnnieHall** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 8:03 pm

Bring back re-vamped versions of the 70's quiz shows, I say! (Most of the members on this forum weren't even around in the 70's!

Kai Laddiman · Post by **Kai Laddiman** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 8:17 pm

Jimmy Gough wrote:
AnnieHall wrote:OOps- thanks, Kai for pointing out that it's CRAIG not CHRIS (Think it's time I went to Specsavers!)
How dare you? You do know that is THE Craig Beavers!

And yet you spell his surname wrong.

Jojo Apollo · Post by **Jojo Apollo** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 8:32 pm

Terrible game show, won't be watching that again.

Les Butterworth · Post by **Les Butterworth** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 9:00 pm

AnnieHall wrote:Bring back re-vamped versions of the 70's quiz shows, I say! (Most of the members on this forum weren't even around in the 70's!

Some of the early quiz shows had excellent concepts that only need an update such as Concentration Take your pick Sale Of The Century(Nicholas Parsons is still arround) The Price Is Right What's My Line Animal Vegetable Mineral Double Your Money Name That Tune The Sky's The Limit The Golden Shot Every Second Counts Catchtphrase Big Break Strike It Lucky Bullseye Familly Fortunes Winner Takes All Ask The Familly Move On Up Criss Cross Quiz Crosswhich etc etc etc

Some from the 50's even when life did exist for some of us LOL

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 9:10 pm

Les Butterworth wrote:
AnnieHall wrote:Bring back re-vamped versions of the 70's quiz shows, I say! (Most of the members on this forum weren't even around in the 70's!

Some of the early quiz shows had excellent concepts that only need an update such as Concentration Take your pick Sale Of The Century(Nicholas Parsons is still arround) The Price Is Right What's My Line Animal Vegetable Mineral Double Your Money Name That Tune The Sky's The Limit The Golden Shot Every Second Counts Catchtphrase Big Break Strike It Lucky Bullseye Familly Fortunes Winner Takes All Ask The Familly Move On Up Criss Cross Quiz Crosswhich etc etc etc

Some from the 50's even when life did exist for some of us LOL

I think this post puts the argument about use of commas firmly to bed.

Jojo Apollo · Post by **Jojo Apollo** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 9:15 pm

I quite liked that Paul Ross quiz: Win My Fee (or something like that).

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 9:29 pm

Jojo Apollo wrote:I quite liked that Paul Ross quiz: Win My Fee (or something like that).

Win My Wage. It was a pretty interesting experiment in social stereotyping but mainly succeeded in convincing me that my prejudices were all correct.

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 9:30 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Les Butterworth wrote:
AnnieHall wrote:Bring back re-vamped versions of the 70's quiz shows, I say! (Most of the members on this forum weren't even around in the 70's!

Some of the early quiz shows had excellent concepts that only need an update such as Concentration Take your pick Sale Of The Century(Nicholas Parsons is still arround) The Price Is Right What's My Line Animal Vegetable Mineral Double Your Money Name That Tune The Sky's The Limit The Golden Shot Every Second Counts Catchtphrase Big Break Strike It Lucky Bullseye Familly Fortunes Winner Takes All Ask The Familly Move On Up Criss Cross Quiz Crosswhich etc etc etc

Some from the 50's even when life did exist for some of us LOL
I think this post puts the argument about use of commas firmly to bed.

That, or that's one *awesome* gameshow.

Jojo Apollo · Post by **Jojo Apollo** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 9:40 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Jojo Apollo wrote:I quite liked that Paul Ross quiz: Win My Fee (or something like that).
Win My Wage. It was a pretty interesting experiment in social stereotyping but mainly succeeded in convincing me that my prejudices were all correct.

Nah it's not that one, come to think of it I think it was called: No Win, No Fee.

Daniel O'Dowd · Post by **Daniel O'Dowd** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:51 pm

AnnieHall wrote:Is anyone else watching this new game-show on ITV now introduced by Chris Tarrant? It's a bit like Deal or No deal with varying amounts of "Cash" in different machines, you have to aim for a set amount in total. What I have about shows like this and "Deal or no Deal" is all the cheesiness. seems you have to have a big sob-story to be seen as being "Worthy" of winning some money. I think this is wrong, anybody should be allowed to take part (Well, maybe not a millionaire- did Judith really need the money when she was on Who wants to be a Millionaire?).
It's nice and easy to understand, anyway.

There was another game-show once when you had to say "stop" before going bust- does anybody remember which one I'm thinking of?

You're thinking of the bong game, probably its use in The People Versus Mk II.

Jacob Sutton · Post by **Jacob Sutton** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 11:27 pm

I thought it was better than Deal or No Deal, if only slightly. But then again I enjoyed DoND for the first few weeks so this might be a similar thing.

Though its label as 'the most stressful gameshow on TV' was a bit of an exaggeration, I thought. I wonder if it was because of the 'STOP! Oh for love of god please stop! stop!' sort of thing the contestants were going for. I think 'dramatic' would be more appropriate than stressful, what with the emotional interview with the contestants beforehand telling them what they are going to be doing with the money when they win it, the build-up going into and coming out of ad breaks, and then they go and fail to win anything.

I think it's also a bit silly to have people going for different amounts of money, surely everyone should have a chance of winning the same jackpot in a gameshow like this?

Overall, I thought it was a poor programme that doesn't replace Millionaire as a credible Saturday night gameshow IMO (or even the much better Duel that was on last year which doesn't seem to have been recommissioned).

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 11:49 pm

From what I've seen of the descriptions, it sounds at least like a fun exercise in game theory - do the sums of money in each machine change? And are they told anything about the probability of it stopping at any point? (if you can assume it's uniformly distributed across all possibilities that would make working out the optimal strategy pretty easy)

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Sat Feb 21, 2009 11:51 pm

They should televise the Daily Duel. That has loads of drama.

Phil Reynolds · Post by **Phil Reynolds** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 12:33 am

Charlie Reams wrote:
Jojo Apollo wrote:I quite liked that Paul Ross quiz: Win My Fee (or something like that).
Win My Wage. It was a pretty interesting experiment in social stereotyping but mainly succeeded in convincing me that my prejudices were all correct.

Nope, Win My Wage was Nick Hancock. Jojo (as has subsequently been pointed out) was thinking of No Win, No Fee.

I quite liked Identity, which Donny Osmond presented - anyone know if that's coming back?

Joseph Bolas · Post by **Joseph Bolas** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:38 am

I thought it was an okay gameshow and will probably continue to watch it.

I did turn over half-way through so I missed the female contestant and only saw the gentleman's game from machine 3 of 10. I also assume that the contestants have to pick a target over £55,000 as thats the total of the 10 lowest-valued cash machines?

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:49 am

Phil Reynolds wrote:I quite liked Identity, which Donny Osmond presented - anyone know if that's coming back?

I remember that - my main memory of it was Donny Osmond being a terrible presenter, and the really weird things the participants had to say when they were correctly identified (I can't think of an actual example, but it'd be something like "You're making all the right moves! I *am* a choreographer!" - very very weird).

Joseph Bolas · Post by **Joseph Bolas** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 3:20 am

Michael Wallace wrote:
Phil Reynolds wrote:I quite liked Identity, which Donny Osmond presented - anyone know if that's coming back?
I remember that - my main memory of it was Donny Osmond being a terrible presenter, and the really weird things the participants had to say when they were correctly identified (I can't think of an actual example, but it'd be something like "You're making all the right moves! I *am* a choreographer!" - very very weird).

This was a good show and they should definitely bring this back.

Donny is an okay host IMO. I also thought that the contestants were told what to say when they were correctly identified. Kirk would know though as he was spotted as the trainspotter in his game.

AnnieHall · Post by **AnnieHall** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:03 am

The ITV website has an inter-active version of The Colour of Money on its website, and it's complete rubbish- you are supposed to click on stop with the mouse when you want it to stop, but it just goes up one or two grand then stops anyway! Then does a sort of "Look at what you could've won" (going into Jim Bowen's bullseye mode again!) (I really must go & get a life, I know!)

Les Butterworth · Post by **Les Butterworth** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:18 am

Some of the early quiz shows had excellent concepts that only need an update such as Concentration Take your pick Sale Of The Century(Nicholas Parsons is still arround) The Price Is Right What's My Line Animal Vegetable Mineral Double Your Money Name That Tune The Sky's The Limit The Golden Shot Every Second Counts Catchtphrase Big Break Strike It Lucky Bullseye Familly Fortunes Winner Takes All Ask The Familly Move On Up Criss Cross Quiz Crosswhich etc etc etc

Some from the 50's even when life did exist for some of us LOL[/quote]
I think this post puts the argument about use of commas firmly to bed.[/quote]

Sorry Charlie but having miserably failed my English O''level circa 1969 or should I have used semi colon's? and now failing to be able to type which is also limiting my use of Apterus unfortunately or text properley I thank God I was good at something Golf and Bullshit.

Joseph Bolas · Post by **Joseph Bolas** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 12:50 pm

Les Butterworth wrote:Some of the early quiz shows had excellent concepts that only need an update such as Concentration Take your pick Sale Of The Century(Nicholas Parsons is still arround) The Price Is Right What's My Line Animal Vegetable Mineral Double Your Money Name That Tune The Sky's The Limit The Golden Shot Every Second Counts Catchtphrase Big Break Strike It Lucky Bullseye Familly Fortunes Winner Takes All Ask The Familly Move On Up Criss Cross Quiz Crosswhich

Going by your list, they should definitely bring back Concentration, Every Second Counts and Catchtphrase. They should also bring back Wheel of Fortune, Crosswits, Lingo and Win Lose or Draw.

Roxanne · Post by **Roxanne** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:45 pm

I think they should definately bring back Your Pick Sale, My Line Animal, Tune The Sky, Shot Every Second, Lucky Bullseye, Fortunes Winner, and Up Criss.

Kirk Bevins · Post by **Kirk Bevins** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 3:32 pm

Joseph Bolas wrote:
Donny is an okay host IMO. I also thought that the contestants were told what to say when they were correctly identified. Kirk would know though as he was spotted as the trainspotter in his game.

Yeah, you're told what to say. Mine was "Well spotted, I'm your trainspotter". Also there were 3 lifelines they could have used and you're told what to say if she uses the lifeline which lets 3 people say something about themselves. I was told to say "I'm Kirk and I can't drive" (although I can now). Along with the fact I was wearing a coat in the studio, this was supposed to give the game away that I travel on the train a lot but the woman was convinced that I was a window cleaner and the coat supported that fact. She said I was too young to be a trainspotter. Ha ha. Anyway, she eventually got me right.

Joseph Bolas · Post by **Joseph Bolas** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 6:26 pm

Kirk Bevins wrote:
Joseph Bolas wrote:
Donny is an okay host IMO. I also thought that the contestants were told what to say when they were correctly identified. Kirk would know though as he was spotted as the trainspotter in his game.
Yeah, you're told what to say. Mine was "Well spotted, I'm your trainspotter". Also there were 3 lifelines they could have used and you're told what to say if she uses the lifeline which lets 3 people say something about themselves. I was told to say "I'm Kirk and I can't drive" (although I can now). Along with the fact I was wearing a coat in the studio, this was supposed to give the game away that I travel on the train a lot but the woman was convinced that I was a window cleaner and the coat supported that fact. She said I was too young to be a trainspotter. Ha ha. Anyway, she eventually got me right.

I found that so funny when she thought you were a Window Cleaner.

I remember watching on Outtake TV that there was an outtake in your game, where Donny couldn't remember the title of the programme (if I saw that right

). Was there any other bloopers? or was there just that one?

Kirk Bevins · Post by **Kirk Bevins** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 6:32 pm

Joseph Bolas wrote: I remember watching on Outtake TV that there was an outtake in your game, where Donny couldn't remember the title of the programme (if I saw that right ). Was there any other bloopers? or was there just that one?

I didn't even notice that he did that. I'm sure there are loads of bloopers like that - like on Countdown when the presenter says "good morning" or "if you watched yesterday's show" when the broadcast day of this show is a Monday.

Jojo Apollo · Post by **Jojo Apollo** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:41 pm

Jeopardy was a good one (based on the US show) was Daphne from Eggheads on the British version or was that Jackie McLeod , also regular tv contestant Mandi Hale(sp)?

Joseph Bolas · Post by **Joseph Bolas** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 7:41 am

Jojo Apollo wrote:Jeopardy was a good one (based on the US show) was Daphne from Eggheads on the British version or was that Jackie McLeod , also regular tv contestant Mandi Hale(sp)?

According to Wikipedia, Daphne was on Jeopardy and she won £2,000.

Jason Larsen · Post by **Jason Larsen** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:49 pm

I think Chris Tarrant is the perfect host for "The Color of Money!"

And Annie, you are thinking of "Press Your Luck." On that show, contestants had to "stop" a big board which contained random amounts of money and prizes. In the UK, it was hosted by Paul Coia, who, ironically, introduced Channel 4 and the very first program on it. We know it is Countdown.

Here, Press Your Luck was much more successful, and lasted three years.

Karen Pearson · Post by **Karen Pearson** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:55 pm

I agree. The Colour of Money is simply atrocious. It was so bad that James and I spent Saturday evening sorting out our wardrobes!!! How sad is that?? Now that we're finally over the jetlag, we plan to start having a life again and I think I can safely say that will include finding something to do on Saturday nights other than watch TV.

Joseph Bolas · Post by **Joseph Bolas** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 5:00 pm

I must be the only person then who really likes this new gameshow. Maybe it's because there are no general knowledge questions

.

Dinos Sfyris · Post by **Dinos Sfyris** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 5:07 pm

Karen Pearson wrote:Now that we're finally over the jetlag, we plan to start having a life again.

Is this after an epic spree following your windfall?

Jason Larsen · Post by **Jason Larsen** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 5:12 pm

Could that not possibly be Chris Tarrant's style?

Phil Reynolds · Post by **Phil Reynolds** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 5:12 pm

Joseph Bolas wrote:I must be the only person then who really likes this new gameshow. Maybe it's because there are no general knowledge questions .

I found it interesting to watch inasmuch as I would like someone who's better at probability than I am to explain what the best tactics to adopt would be. At first I thought, just stop at the next multiple of £1,000 up from the required average (which they helpfully tell you) each time. But that's probably not the best way to do it, as if you "bust" and score zero on any machine, you have a greater average to hit on the remaining ones. Maybe it's better to expect high numbers early on - if you bust you will at least have eliminated the low numbers and can "play the gaps" as Chris Tarrant said at one point - it took me a moment to work out what he meant, but actually this could be a very useful tactic.

Over to the statisticians...

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 5:14 pm

Phil Reynolds wrote:
Joseph Bolas wrote:I must be the only person then who really likes this new gameshow. Maybe it's because there are no general knowledge questions .
I found it interesting to watch inasmuch as I would like someone who's better at probability than I am to explain what the best tactics to adopt would be. At first I thought, just stop at the next multiple of £1,000 up from the required average (which they helpfully tell you) each time. But that's probably not the best way to do it, as if you "bust" and score zero on any machine, you have a greater average to hit on the remaining ones. Maybe it's better to expect high numbers early on - if you bust you will at least have eliminated the low numbers and can "play the gaps" as Chris Tarrant said at one point - it took me a moment to work out what he meant, but actually this could be a very useful tactic.

Over to the statisticians...

Could someone give me an explicit description of, say, a particular round and I'll have a think about it whilst I'm waiting for my programs to run? I've tried using the web to work out how it works, but it's a bit vague.

Karen Pearson · Post by **Karen Pearson** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 5:15 pm

Dinos Sfyris wrote:
Karen Pearson wrote:Now that we're finally over the jetlag, we plan to start having a life again.
Is this after an epic spree following your windfall?

Not really, we always go to Florida for about 3 weeks in January or February. Our extravagance was more the trip to Las Vegas in October.

And the thing about getting a life again was related to the fact that we moved house last year, had to do a load of work on it, and seemed to work every weekend (we're both self-employed). We vow to be more balanced this year (no cheeky comments please!).

Phil Reynolds · Post by **Phil Reynolds** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 5:31 pm

Michael Wallace wrote:Could someone give me an explicit description of, say, a particular round and I'll have a think about it

Need to describe the whole game really. The contestant first chooses one of three cards which determines their target winnings. The target is some amount over £50,000 - in the first programme, the two contestants had targets of £64,000 and £66,000 respectively. They then have to reach that exact target in ten stages, by choosing 10 "cash machines" from a bank of 20. The 20 machines are pre-loaded with amounts £1,000, £2,000 and so on up to £20,000; the contestant doesn't know which amount is in which machine. Having chosen a machine, a display then starts slowly ticking up in increments of £1,000; the contestant has to say "stop" before the count exceeds the amount in that machine. If they're successful, the amount at which they stopped the machine is added to their accumulated total; if they fail, they gain no money for that round. After choosing 10 machines, if they fail to reach the target, they win nothing.

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 5:45 pm

Phil Reynolds wrote:
Michael Wallace wrote:Could someone give me an explicit description of, say, a particular round and I'll have a think about it
Need to describe the whole game really. The contestant first chooses one of three cards which determines their target winnings. The target is some amount over £50,000 - in the first programme, the two contestants had targets of £64,000 and £66,000 respectively. They then have to reach that exact target in ten stages, by choosing 10 "cash machines" from a bank of 20. The 20 machines are pre-loaded with amounts £1,000, £2,000 and so on up to £20,000; the contestant doesn't know which amount is in which machine. Having chosen a machine, a display then starts slowly ticking up in increments of £1,000; the contestant has to say "stop" before the count exceeds the amount in that machine. If they're successful, the amount at which they stopped the machine is added to their accumulated total; if they fail, they gain no money for that round. After choosing 10 machines, if they fail to reach the target, they win nothing.

Ah, so there is definitely one machine of each different amount? That's something I hadn't picked up from reading around - to make sure I have this straight, that means that supposing with your first go you went 'bust' and the ticker had reached £7k, that means that £7k definitely *isn't* something another machine could have in it? That makes things a little trickier, but I'll have a go later (unless someone who isn't terrible at probability comes along and does so first). Thanks for the explanation, Phil.

Jason Larsen · Post by **Jason Larsen** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 5:46 pm

So, the game is more complicated than we think!

Phil Reynolds · Post by **Phil Reynolds** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:38 pm

Michael Wallace wrote:Ah, so there is definitely one machine of each different amount? That's something I hadn't picked up from reading around - to make sure I have this straight, that means that supposing with your first go you went 'bust' and the ticker had reached £7k, that means that £7k definitely *isn't* something another machine could have in it?

That's right. After each round, we (and presumably the contestant) are shown a graphic with the amounts in the machines selected so far blanked. Also, just to clarify: each time the contestant successfully stops the count for a machine before going bust, it is then revealed how much the machine actually contained.

We've already seen some classic examples of Deal or No Deal-style claptrap from contestants on the first show. E.g. having been told that to reach their target they need to collect an average of £9,000 from each of the remaining machines, with the very next machine they're panicking and shouting "Stop!" when the count reaches £7,000, before adding rather sheepishly, "I don't want to be too greedy too soon". Come again?

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:55 pm

Phil Reynolds wrote:Also, just to clarify: each time the contestant successfully stops the count for a machine before going bust, it is then revealed how much the machine actually contained.

Ah, well that makes it a little simpler. I'm not too optimstic, since I was never too great at this, but I reckon it should be possible to work out a theory, even if trying to work it out on the show would be a bit impractical (there are185,000 ways of choosing 10 from 20, so that's a lot of memorising or some fast arithmetic). Although that said, it may well boil down to "just aim for the average" - I haven't thought about it hard enough yet, but there are some other good mathsy people here who will hopefully lend a thought too.

Phil Reynolds · Post by **Phil Reynolds** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 7:30 pm

Michael Wallace wrote:Although that said, it may well boil down to "just aim for the average"

Like I said, that was my first thought. The problem as I see it with that approach is this. Suppose (sorry Kirk) you have a target of £60,000, and hence you begin the game with a notional average to be accumulated per machine of £6,000. To begin with, it is statistically more likely that you will pick a machine containing more than the average, since 14 of the 20 machines contain greater than £6,000. If you shout "stop" when your first machine's counter reaches £6,000, and it is then revealed that the machine contained more than £10,000 (which there is a 50/50 chance of happening), your average will remain the same but you have now "thrown away" one of the higher value machines which may become essential to you later on if (as will almost certainly happen) you bust on some subsequent rounds.

I was about to say that it seems to me to make more sense not to aim for the average of your remaining target over the number of machines you have left to pick (which is the statistic the contestant is given before each pick), but instead to go for the average of the total money amounts in the remaining unpicked machines - but then I realised that, when you said "just aim for the average", maybe that's what you meant. So, regardless of what your target is, always go for £10,000 on the first pick, since there's a 50/50 chance of achieving it and, if you do bust, there's one fewer low value machine remaining to trip you up later. None of this is based on mathematically sound reasoning, really, just my own instinct.

Craig Beevers · Post by **Craig Beevers** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 8:33 pm

Well for the first safe the best strategy based on average amount is to stop on 10 or 11 thousand. For that amount you average £5,500. But the averages only drop very slowly either side of that, it's nearly all down to luck really.

AnnieHall · Post by **AnnieHall** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:08 pm

Whatever, it is a total waste of air-time and I think I'd rather watch paint dry than sit through another "Colour of Money" (Off to B & Q tomorrow, then!)

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:11 pm

Phil Reynolds wrote:I was about to say that it seems to me to make more sense not to aim for the average of your remaining target over the number of machines you have left to pick (which is the statistic the contestant is given before each pick), but instead to go for the average of the total money amounts in the remaining unpicked machines

I was discussing this with CF the other day on the topic of The People Versus (which, IIRC, had a similar mechanic at the end).

Here's a fun problem for everyone to try at home:

Suppose you have a machine that counts up to 20, and will stop at any one of the numbers with a probability of 1 in 20. Your score is the value you stop it at, and if you don't stop it you get 0 (or 20, if it gets there).

So, you decide that you will stop if/when it gets to 11. This way your expected score is 11 multiplied by the probability it gets there, which is just 10/20, so your expected score is 5.5. Aiming for 10 yields you the same expectation (the function of expectation against stopping point is symmetrical about 10.5).

Let's suppose you go for the 10 strategy and get there. You're sitting with 10, and now you're in the same position you were at the start, but with fewer steps. So now you should aim for 15, right?

(Obviously this is flawed, so I thought I'd see if anyone wanted to explain why it's wrong - I've no idea if this is beneath the mighty minds of the Countdown forum or not, though, so no-one is allowed to be offended, ok?)

Jojo Apollo · Post by **Jojo Apollo** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:11 pm

Joseph Bolas wrote:
Jojo Apollo wrote:Jeopardy was a good one (based on the US show) was Daphne from Eggheads on the British version or was that Jackie McLeod , also regular tv contestant Mandi Hale(sp)?
According to Wikipedia, Daphne was on Jeopardy and she won £2,000.

Cheers, Daphne must have made a small fortune with all those quizzes/wins. Very nice.

Joseph Bolas · Post by **Joseph Bolas** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:13 pm

It is unfair that the targets are going to be different for everyone.

The most fairest target I believe you should be playing for in this game is around £63,000. How I have worked this out is that you take the average of the 20 amounts, which is £10,500 and say you allow for 4 busts, that leaves 6 which is £10,500 x 6 = £63,000.

Phil Reynolds · Post by **Phil Reynolds** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:49 pm

Michael Wallace wrote:I was discussing this with CF the other day

CF

Dinos Sfyris · Post by **Dinos Sfyris** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:40 am

Michael Wallace wrote:Here's a fun problem for everyone to try at home:

Suppose you have a machine that counts up to 20, and will stop at any one of the numbers with a probability of 1 in 20. Your score is the value you stop it at, and if you don't stop it you get 0 (or 20, if it gets there).

So, you decide that you will stop if/when it gets to 11. This way your expected score is 11 multiplied by the probability it gets there, which is just 10/20, so your expected score is 5.5. Aiming for 10 yields you the same expectation (the function of expectation against stopping point is symmetrical about 10.5).

Let's suppose you go for the 10 strategy and get there. You're sitting with 10, and now you're in the same position you were at the start, but with fewer steps. So now you should aim for 15, right?

(Obviously this is flawed, so I thought I'd see if anyone wanted to explain why it's wrong - I've no idea if this is beneath the mighty minds of the Countdown forum or not, though, so no-one is allowed to be offended, ok?)

Easy: From 10K, probability of you reaching 15K is 0.5 with 5K to be gained. Probability of you not reaching 15k is also 0.5 where you lose the 10K you were on originally. Average yield of gambling from 10K to 15K is 0.5x5 + 0.5x-10 = -2.5K, QED

Joseph Bolas · Post by **Joseph Bolas** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 7:16 pm

AnnieHall wrote:Seems you have to have a big sob-story to be seen as being "Worthy" of winning some money. I think this is wrong, anybody should be allowed to take part (Well, maybe not a millionaire- did Judith really need the money when she was on Who wants to be a Millionaire?).

Are you sure they need a sob-story to get on?

21-year old Nick from Hull who was just on, won, so he could go on holiday and buy his grandma a new car (which to me doesn't sound too much of a sob story). I know the guy who lost last week was going to propose if he won, but can anyone remember what the woman from last week wanted to do with the money?

Gary Male · Post by **Gary Male** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 7:22 pm

Joseph Bolas wrote: can anyone remember what the woman from last week want to do with the money?

She was going to buy 32,000 loaves of bread and 64,000 packs of ham to test some wacky question she'd read about on the internet with the people on the streets of Bromsgrove. Or something. I might have made that up in my sleep-deprived state.

JimBentley · Post by **JimBentley** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 7:33 pm

Didn't she want to buy crack? I'm pretty sure that was it, she wanted to set up a network of crack dealers and needed a lump sum to get her started.

AnnieHall · Post by **AnnieHall** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 8:34 pm

She said her hubby was being called back to the army- sob, sob- they looked pretty well-to-do to me, don't the army pay wages, then?
Needless to say, I DIDN'T bother watching this tripe today!

Joseph Bolas · Post by **Joseph Bolas** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 9:14 pm

AnnieHall wrote:She said her hubby was being called back to the army- sob, sob- they looked pretty well-to-do to me, don't the army pay wages, then?
Needless to say, I DIDN'T bother watching this tripe today!

Thats what it was, thank you

After hearing some of the stories, I think I might try applying to get on the show, if there is another series.

Adam Dexter · Post by **Adam Dexter** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 9:29 pm

Gary Male wrote:
Joseph Bolas wrote: can anyone remember what the woman from last week want to do with the money?
She was going to buy 32,000 loaves of bread and 64,000 packs of ham to test some wacky question she'd read about on the internet with the people on the streets of Bromsgrove. Or something. I might have made that up in my sleep-deprived state.

How do you know about Bromsgrove? Unlucky enough to have lived there?