Ok, this show is getting frustrating to watch. There are so many flaws to this gameshow, and it's sad.
1.) It seems that the players are unaware of the time left on the clock, so instead of "banking", they end up letting the time expire. This happens way too much.
2.) "Banking" should not be done before the player's question is asked, it should be done afterwards instead. Here's why: when a player says "Bank", he is really saying that he thinks he'll be stumped on his question without knowing what the question is. It would be far more interesting if he could "bank" after his question so that he'll be indicating that he feels the player to his left will screw up.
3.) Questions should be weighted by difficulty based on dollar value, and not randomized - as it appears to be. Some extremely easy questions (true/false and other 50/50 questions, math questions, etc.) should be eliminated entirely. That is, unless the point of these questions is to expose the stupidity of some people.
4.) The strongest link statistically from each round should be immune to be voted off. Way too often, strong players are voted off because they are strong players! What's the point? What's the incentive to do well, when you'll be likely to be voted off in the later rounds?
5.) This one I'm not sure of...it seems to me that players aren't aware of how high in the chain they are (dollar value of question). I say this because I've seen people bank on $1000 and even more pathetic, bank on nothing. If this is the case, they should be able to see how high in the chain they are. I find that on average, people bank after 2 or 3 correct answers. Are they really that dumb? How do they expect to bank any real money banking $1000 and $2500 at a time? Is it any wonder why Ann ALWAYS says after each round, "you have banked a pathetic xxxx dollars out of a possible xxxxxx"?
Thoughts, comments?
1.) It seems that the players are unaware of the time left on the clock, so instead of "banking", they end up letting the time expire. This happens way too much.
2.) "Banking" should not be done before the player's question is asked, it should be done afterwards instead. Here's why: when a player says "Bank", he is really saying that he thinks he'll be stumped on his question without knowing what the question is. It would be far more interesting if he could "bank" after his question so that he'll be indicating that he feels the player to his left will screw up.
3.) Questions should be weighted by difficulty based on dollar value, and not randomized - as it appears to be. Some extremely easy questions (true/false and other 50/50 questions, math questions, etc.) should be eliminated entirely. That is, unless the point of these questions is to expose the stupidity of some people.
4.) The strongest link statistically from each round should be immune to be voted off. Way too often, strong players are voted off because they are strong players! What's the point? What's the incentive to do well, when you'll be likely to be voted off in the later rounds?
5.) This one I'm not sure of...it seems to me that players aren't aware of how high in the chain they are (dollar value of question). I say this because I've seen people bank on $1000 and even more pathetic, bank on nothing. If this is the case, they should be able to see how high in the chain they are. I find that on average, people bank after 2 or 3 correct answers. Are they really that dumb? How do they expect to bank any real money banking $1000 and $2500 at a time? Is it any wonder why Ann ALWAYS says after each round, "you have banked a pathetic xxxx dollars out of a possible xxxxxx"?
Thoughts, comments?