Talk:1 vs. 100 (American game show)/Archive 1

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

{{Dubious}} tag

The article asserts that the next contestant is taken from the pool of 100. In the show that aired today, this didn't seem to happen. Can we get a clarification please? --Roninbk _{t c e #} 05:36, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the next contestant is *NOT* chosen from the pool of 100, but I believe mob members are eligible to be chosen as players.

Third column?

It is mentioned as a table of values for the 3rd episode and after, but it's not there... Can someone who knows it add it in? 64.121.55.220 05:59, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Why don't we wait until the third episode airs first, that way we can verify that it actually exists? --Roninbk _{t c e #} 07:31, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

In both cases, the money ladder different from what was originally posted in this article, in any case... it maxes out at $10,000 after 12 questions instead of 13. But like it's been said, perhaps we should wait for more episodes to air before making a judgment. --Scani 14:05, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Members of the Mob section

Considering the mob rotates frequently enough (and only players that carry between games), I don't really see the purpose of this section, and think that chronicling the people in the mob from episode to episode will be far too difficult. If anything, any particular mob members should be included in an Episode Guide for the show - so I've condensed this down to a "Notable Mob Members" section where Megan and Ken are listed. This can be edited to include Millionaire winners, etc. when we get to the episodes where they appear directly. --Scani 14:05, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I removed the following members from the page, inviting comment

Rebecca (An Outdoor Educator) [#42] (Episode 2)

Kristen [#50] (Episode 2)

Eric Ricco (#79) Episode 2

Darren Esman (Mensa Member) from Episode 2

Debby (#64) A Brain Surgeon from Episode 2 of the Show

Just because they are mentioned in the show does not establish notability. We don't even know the last names of some of these. If any of these people can be shown to be notable in their own right, they can go back. --RoninBK_ETC 07:11, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Merge

I think that the American section of the 1 vs. 100 article should be merged into this article. Then, the information can be removed (and/or summarized in the 1 vs. 100 article), with a

at the top of the 1 vs. 100 article, and keeping the

at the top of the section in the main article. Thoughts? If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 20:23, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree that these should be merged, though I am not sure which way. The (US game show) article seemed to be a mere copy of the parent article section, with an added list of contestants that might not survive a WP:CRUFT challenge. I even considered an AfD for the American page. I like the idea of only editing one copy. --RoninBK_TCE# 04:53, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

A question I have is whether or not the main page needs some work done on it before it is merged. It seems to duplicate a lot of the same text in all the subheadings (various rules seem to appear again and again). Things that are common with each version of the gameshow should be included before listing all the various different country versions of the article. After that is done it would be easier to see if it should be merged, or if the "US game show" page should be "merged" into the main page. Radagast83 21:42, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest that this article needs to be merged into the main 1 vs. 100 article. At this point, there is no reason for the American version to have a separate page. Erechtheus 16:36, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Rules Summary

Let me get this straight, once the contestant's pot reaches $1,000,000, the game is over?Apple1013 21:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Mathematically, yes. Even in an extremely unlikely scenario where no mob members were eliminated in the first eleven rounds, $1,000,000 is the maximum possible prize pool, ($10,000 x 100) --RoninBK_ETC 22:12, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm unsure, but I believe that if a contestant eliminates all 100 mob members, he or she automatically wins $1,000,000. (Although it does seem that it would be highly unlikely for a contestant to opt to try for the million, as it would be statistically as difficult to get the mob from 4 to 1 as it would be 100 to 25. Should this be included as a criticism?) Matt 01:19, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't, unless I could find a source that asserts it as one. Let's try to avoid as many unsourced opinions as possible here. --RoninBK_ETC 02:55, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Ehh, looks like they changed the question values on the third episode, which should fix the problem anyways. Matt 20:00, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

{{fact}} tag

I'm removing the {{fact}} tag from the sentence, "When a contestant chooses to leave the game, the remaining mob members continue on to the next contestant. Members who were eliminated are replaced." though I don't know how to back up the fact, except to echo Mr. Saget's direct words to that effect. --RoninBK_ETC 04:25, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

New prize structure

now, it appears that the first three questions get you $1000 per each mob member eliminated, then "you move out" and go on to 2000 per member, 3000 per member, etc--Chiyocide 01:08, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

25% guarantee

What is this "25% guarantee" that is mentioned in the Trivia section? "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." If this is outdated/obsolete, please let me know what it is anyway. Vuongc 10:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)vuongc

This is my first post ever on Wikipedia, so I am not sure that I am doing this right, but I also see absolutely NO mention of any sort of guarantee in the article. I believe this refers to a different version of the show in another country, and as such, should probably be edited out of this article 128.255.107.7 15:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)Chris

Agreed. In all of the episodes so far, a 25% guarantee was never given. I believe this information was added to the article sometime near the premiere of 1 vs 100, and was never edited out. I'm removing it. Matt 04:46, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Criticism

Is this really necessary? It doesn't add any substance to the article, and seems only to bring up things that are applicable to most game shows.I elliot 05:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

My personal opinion, (take it for what it is worth,) is that if there is verifiable criticism out there, especially criticism that shows up prominently in a Google search, it probably should be at least mentioned in the article. Failing to do so would arouse POV suspicion. --RoninBK_ETC 07:43, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

In addition, I find the following passage strange: "Some answers, particularly in later phases of the game, are phrased in a manner that increases the difficulty level. For instance, a question about the first President of the United States required the player to know his colony of birth, not just his identity. A contestant lost $263,000 on the February 16, 2007 episode when he failed to answer a question about the capital of the United States which involved identifying the mayor of the city. Another contestant was given an advance look at a cooking question asking which dish would PETA be most offended by (in other words, which of three Greek dishes has meat). He took the money instead of advancing; when asked which answer he would have selected, he chose incorrectly." Saying that the answers are "phrased in a manner that increases the difficulty level" is, to me, inaccurate; instead, what is being done is taking a "normal" trivia question ("Where was George Washington born? Virginia/Pennsylvania/Connecticut") and turning it into something (perhaps mildly) more interesting, because knowing that George Washington was the first president is seen as a liability. Sorry if I'm not getting my point across more clearly, but I'm expressing it the best I can. In addition, the penultimate sentence is totally out of place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AOEU Warrior (talk • contribs) 23:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

^Actually the first President was Peyton Randolph under the First Presidental Congress... the United States had Heads of State (known as Presidents) prior to George Washington; Washington was the fifteenth in succession, he just merely happened to be the first president under the new constition; in other words he was the first constitutional president. But both George Washington and Peyton Randolph were born in Virginia. Wolfpeaceful 165.138.95.59 (talk) 14:54, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

External Link

I dunno about the policy on this, but it doesn't seem very Wikipedia-ish to have an external link to another wiki up at the top of the article. I'm moving it to the bottom, but I'll check back later to see what others say. It's just strange to me that it's been on this article for so long. Atchius 01:48, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Speculation removed

A comment was added stating that it is theoretically possible for no money to be awarded. Since the claim requires unverified and possibly unwarranted assumptions, I removed it. Samer 22:33, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Not to defend putting the comment in the article, but would that situation occur if the player missed the first question, or a question before anyone in the mob missed a question? Matt 04:36, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

It can be assumed but not verified until it happens. For instance, the game show Wheel of Fortune gives a cash prize of $500 to a contestant if they end up not winning any money before one person heads to the bonus round. This is known because it has happened several times, but if it never had, you would at first assume the person gets nothing. — CobraWiki ^{( jabber | stuff )} 05:37, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Good point. Matt 02:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

As per the official rules (as posted on NBC.com) if everyone (solo player and all mob players) misses a question then no one gets any money. If no money has been won then the total ammount to be divided among the surviving members is $0. Those are the two ways to get to no money being awarded in a game. Cyberjoek 06:41, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Should 1 vs. 100 do a Canadian version in English?

I would like to see if 1 vs. 100 will do five shows in Toronto later in the year, since a Canadian company acquired the rights to 1 vs. 100.

If a version is successful and they get several hundred people as mob members and the solo players, the host of the show would have to be either a Canadian native, or someone who has a relative that is Canadian.

I think Pat Bullard should host the Canadian version because of his humor.

Just remember, when the host says up to $1,000,000 they would actually mean $1,000,000!

Is the ratings section really necessary?

I've tagged the "Episodes and U.S. Television Ratings" section as unencyclopedic. Developing it as a table is getting really long-winded (it takes up an entire screenful for me) and really doesn't contribute much at all to the article. If we do choose to keep it, I'd rather see it as a brief prose description of the ratings (and even then, I think it has potential to be merged into the "criticism" section). Anyone have an opinion on this? --Scani 00:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd rather keep it. It's verifiable data that could be useful to someone. If it helps, I'm okay with it being moved a separate ratings page.--G.B. Blackrock 03:26, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Out of curiosity..

What happens when the contestant answers correctly, but the entire mob also answers correctly? --pile0nades(t,c) 06:12, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Then the contestant wins no money for that question and the game moves on to the next question, it's happened a couple of times on the show Cyberjoek 06:44, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Australian Version

There should be another page for the aussie version of the game. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.49.216.57 (talk) 10:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

There is. --Scani 11:41, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Contestants are now required to answer three questions before they can exit the game

Is this still true? I didn't hear Saget mention it once in the recent season opening episode. --Mjrmtg (talk) 04:22, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Regular Mob Members

The 2008 Season also features regular mob members. [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Estuff (talk • contribs) 06:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Does the Mob Have a chance to win money?

Does the Mob Have a chance to win money? Ahassan05 (talk) 18:22, 10 March 2009 (UTC)ahassan05

NPOV tag

There was one, minor, POV violation. It was the sentence "Even in the second season the questions were easy." There are no official sources that say the questions were easy, and easy to whom? A doctor? A Housewife? A child? And idiot? They all have different opinions of what is or isn't an easy question. Thus I have removed the offending sentence and cleared the NPOV tag.D^rewS^mith 06:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)