WWTBAM Bored

Here's my incredible question, and I guess it's something that has always crossed my mind, but I don't think it's ever been done.

Let's say you're going for the $100k question, and you see the following question:

Which of the following numbers is prime?

a) 1
b) 351
c) 1031
d) 7011

and you know for sure that B and D are not prime. (Based on the rule that any number that's digits add up to 9 are a multiple of 9).

Would it pay, at all, to wonder aloud, saying... "I have it narrowed down to B and C, I'd like to take my 50/50"

In other words, are TPTB working the 50/50? Would it pay to knowingly include a wrong answer in your "outer monologue"?

If i'm not explaining this well, just yell at me, and I'll try explaining again.

Meredith makes clear every so often that the 2 wrong answers are removed at random, which I take to mean TPTB can't play which two wrong answers are removed.

Meredith has said many times that the 50/50 is random (and then uses the result of the 50/50, whatever that result is, to "prove" that it is). This is different from the primetime show, when we were told that they deliberately preselected the most likely distractor for the 50/50.

Of course, Meredith is giving hearsay testimony and has no direct knowledge about their computer and how it implements that "random" selection. But that's the official answer.

MarleysGh0st wrote:Meredith has said many times that the 50/50 is random (and then uses the result of the 50/50, whatever that result is, to "prove" that it is). This is different from the primetime show, when we were told that they deliberately preselected the most likely distractor for the 50/50.

Of course, Meredith is giving hearsay testimony and has no direct knowledge about their computer and how it implements that "random" selection. But that's the official answer.

On PTBAM contestants were advised that the "computer" would leave the correct answer and the one most likely to be mistaken for the correct answer. That meant to me that some human agency was involved. CindyBAM does seem to be more random so maybe it is computerized.

This was posted in the GC (still good for something!) during the 3rd season of syndicated WWTBAM (poster was some dweeb whose name I can't recall). Anyway, it is clear that the 50/50 was not random, despite Meredith's insistence, during the first two seasons of her show, as reported below. I believe it has been random starting with the third season, but the dweeb has not investigated this recently to my knowledge.


"50/50 Random? Stats Suggest Otherwise", Nov. 21, 2004

It seems whenever I see the syndicated BAM show, Meredith is always
insisting to skeptical contestants that the 50/50 randomly removes
two of the three wrong answers. I know the conventional wisdom is
that it's not random, but this is actually a testable proposition,
making use of the thorough transcripts compiled by dedicated fans
(and available in the links section here).

In particular, every time a contestant uses the ATA followed by the
50/50 on the same question, we get numerical data on the popularity
of the three wrong answers which can be compared to the one wrong
answer which the 50/50 actually leaves. If the 50/50 is truly
random, then the most popular wrong answer should be left 1/3 of the
time.

Looking back through the three seasons of syndicated show
transcripts, I identified 56 instances where a contestant used ATA
followed by 50/50 on the same question. Here are the results:

50/50 leaves most popular wrong answer: 25 times
50/50 leaves 2nd most popular wrong answer: 15 times
50/50 leaves least popular wrong answer: 16 times

(for this season's shows, I averaged the studio audience and AOL
results for ATA)

It is straightforward to calculate the chance that a random selection
would choose the most popular of three answers 25 or more times in 56
chances; this works out to be 5.1 %. So, if the 50/50 really is
random, there is only about a 1 in 20 chance that the results would
be skewed so much in favor of the most popular wrong answer.

The above probably overstates the chance that the 50/50 is random.
Consider that on many questions there is not a clear "best" wrong
answer, so the audience response is unpredictable. If we focus in on
only those questions where the audience clearly favored one wrong
answer over the other two, we might get a better idea of whether the
50/50 is random.

I looked at questions where the ATA resulted in one wrong answer that
got at least 25% of the total vote AND at least 15 percentage points
more than either of the other two wrong answers. These are likely to
be questions where the most popular wrong answer is easiest to
predict.

I found 21 such instances; results were:

50/50 leaves most popular wrong answer: 13 times
50/50 leaves 2nd most popular wrong answer: 4 times
50/50 leaves least popular wrong answer: 4 times

If the 50/50 is random, the chance that it would select the most
popular wrong answer 13 or more times out of 21 works out to be 0.7 %.

So, I feel pretty safe in saying that the 50/50 is not random. I
guess the question is, why do they insist that it is? Why not just
say that it is intended to leave the most plausible wrong answer and
let contestants deal with it that way (it still would be a valuable
lifeline)? Isn't it unethical to intentionally deceive contestants?


"50/50 Random? No Way", Nov. 23, 2004

I followed through on a trend I spotted in my previous 50/50 survey.
I'm a little surprised no dedicated viewers of the syndicated show
noticed it. Here is the key statistic:

In the first two seasons of syndicated BAM, the 50/50 was used 562
times (according to the transcripts) and the wrong answer it left was
letter D exactly 1 time (June 27, 2004). D was one of the two
remaining answers a total of 120 times, and was the correct answer
119 out of 120 times. Starting from the beginning of the first
syndicated season, when the 50/50 left D as one of the two possible
answers, D was the correct answer 111 times in a row. If you don't
believe me, check the transcripts yourself.

In addition, the two answers left by the 50/50 were C and D exactly 1
time out of the 562 (also June 27, 2004).

Now, if that's random, I'm a Hottentot!

Here are the complete numbers for the first two seasons:

Answers Left By 50/50
A&B: 103 times
A&C: 158 times
A&D: 35 times
B&C: 181 times
B&D: 84 times
C&D: 1 time

Correct Answer
A: 151 times
B: 138 times
C: 154 times
D: 119 times

*The bad news for those who may want to use this information to
improve their chances of success in the hotseat:

Starting with this season, there has been a dramatic change. The
show clearly became aware of the problem and has corrected it (and
maybe even overcompensated). In 62 50/50 usages this season, D has
been the wrong answer left 24 times, and the correct answer 12. C
and D have been the two answers left a total of 12 times.

So it's possible the 50/50 is now random, but it surely wasn't for
the first two seasons.[/b]

I'd looked at the 50/50 a few years ago, and it was indeed random. (Yeah, I'm a nerd. Computer science and test background.) I haven't seen anything that jumped out at me as odd since then, but it's one of the things I track on the spreadsheets I keep.

Here's all the ways that two answers could be left:
A&B
A&C
A&D
B&C
B&D
C&D

So if you're guessing randomly, about 1 time out of 6 that you've got it narrowed down to 2 choices, those will be the two left.

Now if you've done a good job guessing, selecting A and another one, and A is actually the correct answer, then the only ones that could be displayed would be:
A&B
A&C
A&D

So now it's 1 time out of 3 that the two you mentioned would be left. Those are also the most memorable cases, and that can skew the perception as well.

LoudmouthLee wrote: and you know for sure that B and D are not prime. (Based on the rule that any number that's digits add up to 9 are a multiple of 9).

You can further narrow down a prime number list by knowing that any number who's digits add up to a multiple of 3 is divisible by three. Don't even have to fool with 9s.

BackInTex wrote:

LoudmouthLee wrote: and you know for sure that B and D are not prime. (Based on the rule that any number that's digits add up to 9 are a multiple of 9).

You can further narrow down a prime number list by knowing that any number who's digits add up to a multiple of 3 is divisible by three. Don't even have to fool with 9s.

The question was one I made up just for the purpose of illustrating the example

...and call me cynical, but I find it increasingly difficult to believe (note: Conspiracy Theorist ahead) that they will leave their money to chance the way it seems to be stated.

If you're going for some hefty money, I have to believe that they're manipulating the 50/50 still. It seems to me... and I wish I had proof for this, whenever the hot seat member has it "narrowed down to two", the choices that are left are primarily the two that they're thinking.

Just because someone calls the animal a duck, doesn't necessarily mean that it's not a moose.

LoudmouthLee wrote:Just because someone calls the animal a duck, doesn't necessarily mean that it's not a moose.

Uly would change his avatar for this, but I'll just post the image here:

LoudmouthLee wrote:...and call me cynical, but I find it increasingly difficult to believe (note: Conspiracy Theorist ahead) that they will leave their money to chance the way it seems to be stated.

If you're going for some hefty money, I have to believe that they're manipulating the 50/50 still. It seems to me... and I wish I had proof for this, whenever the hot seat member has it "narrowed down to two", the choices that are left are primarily the two that they're thinking.

Just because someone calls the animal a duck, doesn't necessarily mean that it's not a moose.

Well, I'd hate to use the word "manipulating" since it could sound as if BAM was guilty of the same rigging that brought down the quiz shows of the 50s.

LoudmouthLee wrote:...and call me cynical, but I find it increasingly difficult to believe (note: Conspiracy Theorist ahead) that they will leave their money to chance the way it seems to be stated.

If you're going for some hefty money, I have to believe that they're manipulating the 50/50 still. It seems to me... and I wish I had proof for this, whenever the hot seat member has it "narrowed down to two", the choices that are left are primarily the two that they're thinking.

Just because someone calls the animal a duck, doesn't necessarily mean that it's not a moose.

Also remember that "their money" is not dependent on individual players and specific questions. The show buys insurance for the prizes and it is the insurance company that pays the winners. So the show is only affected by bigger prize winners in the long run because the insurance will get more expensive. Whether a particular contestant wins or does not win at a particular dollar amount has very little to do with costing the show money. Intentionally making questions more difficult by monkeying with the randomness of the 50/50 would save the company very little money in the long haul.

In fact, the show has much more to risk financially by saying that the 50/50 is random and not making it so.

LoudmouthLee wrote:...and call me cynical, but I find it increasingly difficult to believe (note: Conspiracy Theorist ahead) that they will leave their money to chance the way it seems to be stated.

If you're going for some hefty money, I have to believe that they're manipulating the 50/50 still. It seems to me... and I wish I had proof for this, whenever the hot seat member has it "narrowed down to two", the choices that are left are primarily the two that they're thinking.

Just because someone calls the animal a duck, doesn't necessarily mean that it's not a moose.

OK, you're cynical. And wrong.

Michael Davies knows he can make vastly more money by producing some of the most popular TV shows in history than he can by violating a show's rules to nickel and dime contestants out of chump change that they probably weren't going to win anyway. An added advantage to his ethical behavior is staying out of jail and not damaging his reputation in a way that would prevent him from ever again working in the industry.

Unless you have evidence, I'd suggest not throwing around reckless accusations on a public message board. But feel free to believe whatever you wish.

Back to your original question: does thinking out loud in the HS affect the 50/50?

Even back when the 50/50 was clearly not random, the choices to be eliminated were decided in advance. A producer didn't alter them on the fly, based on what the contestant said.

Nevertheless, being superstitious, I wouldn't tempt fate by thinking out loud befre using the 50/50.

LoudmouthLee wrote:...and call me cynical, but I find it increasingly difficult to believe (note: Conspiracy Theorist ahead) that they will leave their money to chance the way it seems to be stated.

If you're going for some hefty money, I have to believe that they're manipulating the 50/50 still. It seems to me... and I wish I had proof for this, whenever the hot seat member has it "narrowed down to two", the choices that are left are primarily the two that they're thinking.

Just because someone calls the animal a duck, doesn't necessarily mean that it's not a moose.

Look at it this way: if you have it narrowed down to two in your head, and you KNOW it's not the other two, there's a whopping 1 in 3 chance a random 50/50 will leave the two you are considering. So it might LOK like it's not random, but it is.

jarnon wrote:Back to your original question: does thinking out loud in the HS affect the 50/50?

Even back when the 50/50 was clearly not random, the choices to be eliminated were decided in advance. A producer didn't alter them on the fly, based on what the contestant said.

Nevertheless, being superstitious, I wouldn't tempt fate by thinking out loud befre using the 50/50.

Exactly, I agree. When I used my 50/50 I didn't say anything other than "I'd like to use my 50/50."

Plus think of it this way, if you say it's between two and they're both eliminated, you look less smart! So that's another good reason not to think out loud.

Definitely if you think you're going to follow it with ATA you are better off not saying anything, because they can definitely be swayed.

Everyone is hedging bets here.

The remaining two choices are locked in well in advance of the show. Musings in the Hot Seat have no effect whatsoever on which answers will be left.

As mentioned before, in the early days of the show, the answers remaining after the 50-50 were not random, The producer did select what they thought the most stressful distracting answer would be. But even then, these were locked in well before the show ever started.

Somewhere after the first couple of years of SyndiBam, the producers randomized it entirely; a point which Meredith makes quite frequently. We seem to remember the situations where the contestant is left with two viable choices but we also seem to forget the situations where the contestant is left to choose between two answers that don't present difficulty. (See Q9 of my stack).

There is no man behind the curtain here ...

bazodee wrote:Everyone is hedging bets here.

The remaining two choices are locked in well in advance of the show. Musings in the Hot Seat have no effect whatsoever on which answers will be left.

As mentioned before, in the early days of the show, the answers remaining after the 50-50 were not random, The producer did select what they thought the most stressful distracting answer would be. But even then, these were locked in well before the show ever started.

Somewhere after the first couple of years of SyndiBam, the producers randomized it entirely; a point which Meredith makes quite frequently. We seem to remember the situations where the contestant is left with two viable choices but we also seem to forget the situations where the contestant is left to choose between two answers that don't present difficulty. (See Q9 of my stack).

There is no man behind the curtain here ...

But see...the thing (for me anyway) is being able to live with yourself AFTER the show. In the post-show world of second guessing and what if's, you don't need anything else to feed the hysteria. Not musing out loud before I used it eliminated the post show "what if I didn't say them out loud...would it have changed the outcome...OMG I did this to myself...blah blah blah..."

sunflower wrote:

jarnon wrote:Back to your original question: does thinking out loud in the HS affect the 50/50?

Even back when the 50/50 was clearly not random, the choices to be eliminated were decided in advance. A producer didn't alter them on the fly, based on what the contestant said.

Nevertheless, being superstitious, I wouldn't tempt fate by thinking out loud befre using the 50/50.

Exactly, I agree. When I used my 50/50 I didn't say anything other than "I'd like to use my 50/50."

Plus think of it this way, if you say it's between two and they're both eliminated, you look less smart! So that's another good reason not to think out loud.

Definitely if you think you're going to follow it with ATA you are better off not saying anything, because they can definitely be swayed.

I cannot envision any circumstances (other than an imminent walk) where it makes sense to ATA <U>after</U> using the 50-50. If you think you're going to follow the 50-50 with ATA, you should always ATA first. That way, people who don't know the answer are spread among three wrong choices, rather than being funneled into a single wrong choice. --Bob

My head hurts now. These threads that use statistics to figure stuff out always do that to me. I even worked in the statistics dept at SMU for a while. It's a wonder I made it as long as I did....I think it was 3 months.

TheConfessor wrote:

LoudmouthLee wrote:...and call me cynical, but I find it increasingly difficult to believe (note: Conspiracy Theorist ahead) that they will leave their money to chance the way it seems to be stated.

If you're going for some hefty money, I have to believe that they're manipulating the 50/50 still. It seems to me... and I wish I had proof for this, whenever the hot seat member has it "narrowed down to two", the choices that are left are primarily the two that they're thinking.

Just because someone calls the animal a duck, doesn't necessarily mean that it's not a moose.

OK, you're cynical. And wrong.

Michael Davies knows he can make vastly more money by producing some of the most popular TV shows in history than he can by violating a show's rules to nickel and dime contestants out of chump change that they probably weren't going to win anyway. An added advantage to his ethical behavior is staying out of jail and not damaging his reputation in a way that would prevent him from ever again working in the industry.

Unless you have evidence, I'd suggest not throwing around reckless accusations on a public message board. But feel free to believe whatever you wish.

Who threw around any reckless accusations? It seems that someone woke up yesterday with their knickers in a bunch.

I was merely asking a question, followed by stating my opinion on it (aka - why I asked the question)

I'm just discussing the "grey area" of the randomness. There have been numerous other articles written about this subject. Calm down, confessor. I didn't do anything wrong.

LoudmouthLee wrote: Who threw around any reckless accusations?

Um, someone who posts as "Loudmouth Lee."

LoudmouthLee wrote: It seems that someone woke up yesterday with their knickers in a bunch.

Oops, you did it again!

LoudmouthLee wrote: I was merely asking a question, followed by stating my opinion on it (aka - why I asked the question)

Read your post again. Maybe you meant to ask a question, but you didn't. You just stated that you believe the show manipulates the 50/50. That is a serious charge. You also admitted that you have no proof. That makes your accusation reckless.

LoudmouthLee wrote: I'm just discussing the "grey area" of the randomness. There have been numerous other articles written about this subject. Calm down, confessor. I didn't do anything wrong.

Are you recklessly accusing me of not being calm?

Just a guess (notice that I'm being calm, and not making any reckless accusations), but I'd be willing to bet that LL has absolutely no idea who is behind TheConfessor's name here.

hermillion wrote:Just a guess (notice that I'm being calm, and not making any reckless accusations), but I'd be willing to bet that LL has absolutely no idea who is behind TheConfessor's name here.

Does that matter? Sometimes Mr. Confessor's knickers do seem to be in a bunch. I thought maybe that was because, after he did laundry, bunching them was faster than folding.

/:P\

AnnieCamaro wrote:

hermillion wrote:Just a guess (notice that I'm being calm, and not making any reckless accusations), but I'd be willing to bet that LL has absolutely no idea who is behind TheConfessor's name here.

Does that matter? Sometimes Mr. Confessor's knickers do seem to be in a bunch. I thought maybe that was because, after he did laundry, bunching them was faster than folding.

/:P\

No, it probably doesn't matter. I was just smiling to myself about TC leaping to the defense of TPTB. Of course, they did make things right for him . . . !