I wonder where the 2nd “festive” edition of The Wall is going to show up?
BBC Press states there were 2 for this Christmas, but we’ve only seen the EastEnders one.
As far as I’m aware, cannot see the other in the upcoming schedules. Unless it’s not really festive so they’ll attach it to the main series.
Somebody mentioned earlier in the thread (probably me, probably months ago) about a double double drop on Tipping Point:
https://twitter.com/benshephard/status/1...8905807879
As it turns out, its actually quite generous when it happens, so imagine that with a really jammy drop of lots of counters.
Ppresumably the same logic applies if the Jackpot counter falls out with both doubles...
Interesting they had the extra sound effect for the double double bank!
This is probably a dumb question but I wonder when a contestant gets a question right but it's not the exact answer whether the 'I'll accept' by the host is due to their being more than one answer on their screen or if the producers have to verify whether they can accept that answer.
Multiple choice answer. No argument.
I'm sure I read from John Humphries, that sometimes on his cards on Mastermind, when there is a degree of ambiguity with how the contestant can answer a question, but still be correct, then on his cards then the acceptable either/or wording is provided to him.
If the question is "Which car manufacturer made the Beetle?", they'd accept both VW and Volkswagen, right? And if they're asking for the name of an person, and only one famous person has that name, they might accept just the surname.
It's certainly been stated that on The Chase they often have more than one acceptable answer, and sometimes they may either stop the clock or review it after the cash builder if an answer given can be deemed to be correct, but wasn't initially. The process usually gets edited out but occassionally it is explained afterwards a given answer deemed incorrect initially was correct and they add a grand to the cashbuilder.
Lingo noteably explain unusual words or words which seem to be misspelt but are actually words in their own right. They had one yesterday where somebody for a 5-letter Lingo stated and spelt "Please" but they accepted "Pleas" and ignored the E as that was a correct 5 letter word (but not the answer in this case).
FWIW I think (but haven't checked) the answer Alex gave last night was incorrect as it was a mispronounciation, but it was closer to the answer than the given correct answer - which wasn't what Jimmy asked to Google at all. We do see similar in Pointless sometimes where they'll accept what might be deemed technically incorrect (pronounciation is always a grey area) in the final round where it is deemed not to affect the outcome of the game, either as it's not Pointless or another answer is pointless.
An example there on The Chase asking which broadcaster launched their TV service in 1936, with Bradley stating they'll "accept" the contestants answer of "BBC1".
Brekkie post_id=61003 time= user_id=976 Wrote:An example there on The Chase asking which broadcaster launched their TV service in 1936, with Bradley stating they'll "accept" the contestants answer of "BBC1".
See I wouldn't have accepted that answer because BBC One is the channel not the broadcaster.
It did technically launch in 1936 though. It was just called the BBC Television Service (later abbreviated to BBC tv) until BBC 2 launched in the 1960s.
XIII post_id=60983 time= user_id=894 Wrote:This is probably a dumb question but I wonder when a contestant gets a question right but it's not the exact answer whether the 'I'll accept' by the host is due to their being more than one answer on their screen or if the producers have to verify whether they can accept that answer.
Most game shows aren't that anal about the answer. Its general knowledge, not specific knowledge. Long as its a valid answer its usually fine.
Mastermind may be a bit more strict about it particularly in the specialist round though I believe and maybe University Challenge as well. Beyond that though...
The example on The Chase about the broadcaster launching their TV service in 1936 and the given answer as BBC One - its technically correct (see Jas84's post above). All they had to say was the BBC, anything else is surplus to requirements. If they'd just said Oneness, that's wrong.
This happened quite a bit on Weakest Link (usually some smart arse gives a response to a "what decade/generation/whatever" question and says number 4 or whatever, which is still technically correct, if a bit arsey - and if they answer H20 to a question that they want the answer "water" to, then "I'll accept", as the same answer), and there are the moments on Only Connect where somebody gets the a correct link between the clues - but it wasn't the link they were expecting the team to come to. If its valid, they'll get it.
Someone on another forum did the graphics on the original version of Mastermind and said that the contestants always had the right to challenge if they thought their answer was correct, stopping the clock while it was confirmed, and if you saw a lot of cutaways to Magnus during the round there had been a lot of challenges edited out. I think that's still the case these days.
I remember Bothers Bar a few years ago complaining about the daytime show The Link for being incredibly pedantic about the answers, once not accepting "rappers" as an answer when it was "real names of rappers", and "cuts of meat" when it was "cuts of pork". David J Bodycombe, a quiz expert of some repute, said he absolutely hated programmes doing that, saying they were absolutely no fun for the viewer, which is the point of the whole thing.
The Chase are certainly pretty tight on making sure their answers are fair.
I attended a celebrity edition (the last one at TLS, IIRC) and for the life of me, I can't remember the question (last round, I think) but they quibbled with their adjudicators for about fifteen minutes over whatever the celebrity answered, was quite acceptable or not.
Whatever semantics they quibbled over, I do remember the audience was just about ready to revolt when the answer offered, was not accepted on some minor ground. Not just cos we'd been sat there for five hours, more it felt entirely unfair that the team probably lost because of that one question...
A well reknowned adjudicator of British game shows gave her view on the recent US Wheel of Fortune controversy, making the point that not only do rules need to be fair they also need to be seen to be fair, so generally speaking being pedantic does not fit in with viewers expectations.
https://twitter.com/oliviavdw/status/147...5506103297
