Chasers are better at knowing answers (or using their knowledge to guess intelligently) than acting slow/dumb. They don't want to win by a mile even when it's easy for them because fewer ordinary people would come forward to try their luck, the format would fail and they would be out of a job! So when it is easy, they throttle back, hesitate and make it a closer contest to keep things going nicely.
Some difficult questions for Rachel but Zero is rather embarrassing. Interesting that there is no minus offer, with no money in the pot yet, as this point was made on here last week.
it would be quite amusing if there was a minus offer when there was no money in the pot (or the minus was bigger than the pot so far),and somebody took it (presumably hoping the rest of the team would put in some money) and got through,and the rest of the team got knocked out.
Then there would theoretically be a final chase where if you won,you ended up owing the production company money.
I presume the solution would be to not try too hard in the final chase...maybe get three right or something.:)
Then see if the Chaser could possibly do even worse and lose with a target of three to catch.:D
it would be quite amusing if there was a minus offer when there was no money in the pot (or the minus was bigger than the pot so far),and somebody took it (presumably hoping the rest of the team would put in some money) and got through,and the rest of the team got knocked out.
Then there would theoretically be a final chase where if you won,you ended up owing the production company money.
I presume the solution would be to not try too hard in the final chase...maybe get three right or something.:)
Then see if the Chaser could possibly do even worse and lose with a target of three to catch.:D
You made me think, it is funny. I wondered why Bradley said they cant offer a minus offer.
What if she had 'won' her 0 pounds and the others had gone. Would the player be expected to play for nothing?
You made me think, it is funny. I wondered why Bradley said they cant offer a minus offer.
What if she had 'won' her 0 pounds and the others had gone. Would the player be expected to play for nothing?
In theory she would. In practice I suspect they would make the prize fund £1,000. This is what they play for if they all get knocked out and they nominate one player to play for them,they get £1,000 each. In practice of course it is very difficult to win this,even with the team nominating their best player. I think it's only ever been done once,if at all.
it would be quite amusing if there was a minus offer when there was no money in the pot (or the minus was bigger than the pot so far),and somebody took it (presumably hoping the rest of the team would put in some money) and got through,and the rest of the team got knocked out.
They would never offer a minus offer if there was nothing in the pot
I think I remember a seat 1 player getting 0 in their cash builder and they didn't have the option of a lower offer
They would never offer a minus offer if there was nothing in the pot
I think I remember a seat 1 player getting 0 in their cash builder and they didn't have the option of a lower offer
Yes,I fully realise that they could not offer a minus amount of money if there was nothing in the pot,just in case the scenario I outlined above actually happened,and the player was playing for a minus amount of money in the final chase.
I just thought it would be funny if they did,and it did.
They would never offer a minus offer if there was nothing in the pot
I think I remember a seat 1 player getting 0 in their cash builder and they didn't have the option of a lower offer
Interesting if a seat 1 player got zero in their cashbuilder. The seat 1 player is usually one of the better players,the weaker players are usually in seat 3 or 4. In fact I think I remember a Chaser (can't remember which one) commenting after a seat 4 player had done well in their cashbuilder that, "That was a good score for a seat 4".
I am pretty sure the order that they play in is not random,that they are "seeded",if you like.
Devised by Bill Wright, the basic format of Mastermind has never changed — four and in later contests five contestants face two rounds, one on a specialised subject of the contestant's choice, the other a general knowledge round. Wright drew inspiration from his experiences of being interrogated by the Gestapo during World War II.
Well if he really is a mind reader he just needs to wait for Chaser to press then do what's in Paul's mind.
Paul is taking Mike's mind reading very seriously and hiding his face before pressing
Another Chase contestant, using it to showcase their talent? Seems like, as with Big Brother, they're not getting the right type of applicants, so they're going to agents now.
That's the highlight of the show for me - I just detest the ones that take a minus amount - just plain greed.
Although sometimes, it's the minus player that's played a blinder in the final round and has been enough to even beat the chaser.
I didn't see it last night,how much did he get in the cashbuilder,the guy that took the minus?
It is not always "plain greed" to take the minus. Sometimes if the player hasn't scored that many in the Cashbuilder,and the minus isn't that big,then it is the correct decision for the team to take the minus. The difference in the money they will get each might not be that much. As you say,sometimes it is the minus player that makes the difference between winning and losing.
But I would not take this too far. If the player has had a good cashbuilder and scored six or seven,and the minus is something like minus five thousand,they really should not be taking the minus. I couldn't do it,it would be too shameful. If you're good enough to get seven right in the cashbuilder,you should be confident enough in your own ability to get home with it and not surrender what you've earned just to make sure you make the final for a share of the money that others,who may be no better players than you,have legitimately earned.
I didn't see it last night,how much did he get in the cashbuilder,the guy that took the minus?
It is not always "plain greed" to take the minus. Sometimes if the player hasn't scored that many in the Cashbuilder,and the minus isn't that big,then it is the correct decision for the team to take the minus. The difference in the money they will get each might not be that much. As you say,sometimes it is the minus player that makes the difference between winning and losing.
But I would not take this too far. If the player has had a good cashbuilder and scored six or seven,and the minus is something like minus five thousand,they really should not be taking the minus. I couldn't do it,it would be too shameful. If you're good enough to get seven right in the cashbuilder,you should be confident enough in your own ability to get home with it and not surrender what you've earned just to make sure you make the final for a share of the money that others,who may be no better players than you,have legitimately earned.
He got 8. £8000 and the lower offer was minus £3000. Even Paul was disappointed with his decision. Maybe it was the shame that distracted him in the H2H.
Comments
it would be quite amusing if there was a minus offer when there was no money in the pot (or the minus was bigger than the pot so far),and somebody took it (presumably hoping the rest of the team would put in some money) and got through,and the rest of the team got knocked out.
Then there would theoretically be a final chase where if you won,you ended up owing the production company money.
I presume the solution would be to not try too hard in the final chase...maybe get three right or something.:)
Then see if the Chaser could possibly do even worse and lose with a target of three to catch.:D
You made me think, it is funny. I wondered why Bradley said they cant offer a minus offer.
What if she had 'won' her 0 pounds and the others had gone. Would the player be expected to play for nothing?
In theory she would. In practice I suspect they would make the prize fund £1,000. This is what they play for if they all get knocked out and they nominate one player to play for them,they get £1,000 each. In practice of course it is very difficult to win this,even with the team nominating their best player. I think it's only ever been done once,if at all.
They would never offer a minus offer if there was nothing in the pot
I think I remember a seat 1 player getting 0 in their cash builder and they didn't have the option of a lower offer
Yes,I fully realise that they could not offer a minus amount of money if there was nothing in the pot,just in case the scenario I outlined above actually happened,and the player was playing for a minus amount of money in the final chase.
I just thought it would be funny if they did,and it did.
Interesting if a seat 1 player got zero in their cashbuilder. The seat 1 player is usually one of the better players,the weaker players are usually in seat 3 or 4. In fact I think I remember a Chaser (can't remember which one) commenting after a seat 4 player had done well in their cashbuilder that, "That was a good score for a seat 4".
I am pretty sure the order that they play in is not random,that they are "seeded",if you like.
Paul is taking Mike's mind reading very seriously and hiding his face before pressing
Devised by Bill Wright, the basic format of Mastermind has never changed — four and in later contests five contestants face two rounds, one on a specialised subject of the contestant's choice, the other a general knowledge round. Wright drew inspiration from his experiences of being interrogated by the Gestapo during World War II.
and : http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/57HKHLLYTBxhkyYCqJvJlL5/the-history-of-mastermind
Bill Wright I salute you
I love learning obscure stuff from quiz shows
Another Chase contestant, using it to showcase their talent? Seems like, as with Big Brother, they're not getting the right type of applicants, so they're going to agents now.
Think Paul could lose today.
After a good cash builder he totally blew it there.
At least he predicted 17
If there's a quote by a movie director, and Hitchcock is a possible answer, it's usually best to go for him.
Using the excuse that he's been told not to be greedy too. What about the potential prize money, you're taking off of the others?
Me as well.
Shame the team didn't win today though, after he went I was rooting for them.
That's the highlight of the show for me - I just detest the ones that take a minus amount - just plain greed.
Although sometimes, it's the minus player that's played a blinder in the final round and has been enough to even beat the chaser.
It is not always "plain greed" to take the minus. Sometimes if the player hasn't scored that many in the Cashbuilder,and the minus isn't that big,then it is the correct decision for the team to take the minus. The difference in the money they will get each might not be that much. As you say,sometimes it is the minus player that makes the difference between winning and losing.
But I would not take this too far. If the player has had a good cashbuilder and scored six or seven,and the minus is something like minus five thousand,they really should not be taking the minus. I couldn't do it,it would be too shameful. If you're good enough to get seven right in the cashbuilder,you should be confident enough in your own ability to get home with it and not surrender what you've earned just to make sure you make the final for a share of the money that others,who may be no better players than you,have legitimately earned.
He got 8. £8000 and the lower offer was minus £3000. Even Paul was disappointed with his decision. Maybe it was the shame that distracted him in the H2H.