Does who your ATE is make a big difference in your success?

[AlphaDummy]

But they're also running a business, and we as contestants can't ignore the fact that they have to do what they think will increase ratings (that's their job)--so I agree that the ATE is the new ratings-grabber for them. I have no idea if it's actually helped ratings. The fact that it can be off-putting to us hard-core quiz people isn't their problem--we're going to watch anyway.

Maybe...maybe not. I never thought I would say this, but - unless there is a BB on, or there is something like, ohh, say a $500K winner in the works , BAM has really fallen off of my radar the past few years. I understand that they are operating under a budget, that the ad revenue is not what it would be were BAM pulling the ratings of Wheel or J!, and that they cannot afford a fast-paced Q&A format or weekly 250K winners given that there is only so much money to work with...but something happened along the way that caused this particular game-show fanatic to drift away. And, although I do find the new graphic changes attractive, I am not so fond of the changes in gameplay. In short, the gimmicks have not helped in the case of this one viewer. And, to be honest, I am not sure what it will take to get me back as a full-time viewer given the show's budgetary constraints.

That said...many thanks, Lyn, for your insights! It is always very interesting to hear the behind-the-scenes take from somebody who has "been there" in any capacity, and yours was a very unique and interesting perspective...thanks for sharing!

[frogman042]

Lyn, thanks for taking the time to post your thoughts and reflections - I also appreciate your kind words regarding myself. As I said earlier, there really has been only one aspect of my game that kept me up and that was on the baby name question and using the ATA lifeline (BTW, I really enjoyed your article and smiled when you regretted using your lifeline on your 8K question - the same level that I misused my own lifeline). The only thing I regret about our question was that I didn't try to interact with you as much as I could have, bouncing off my ideas while I had you there as opposed to doing that with the clock was running and I didn't have you as a second opinion. That said, I don't think it would have effected the outcome - this is why I haven't 'kicked myself' over the question I missed - nor do I think you should torture youself over my question - if it doesn't bother me, it shouldn't bother you.

There was one line in your latest post that I want to elaberate on:
"They should also contain some contextual clues so that an excellent contestant at least has a shot at figuring them out."
This is why I think you should not have any regrets - the word 'poutine' doesn't translate to anything that would help in solving it - it might be a variation of the word pudding or a messy food - once you already have the cheese curds and gravy, you have the mess - so nothing in the word would lead you to French Fries or Frites - nor is any dish with French Fries reminiscent of pudding. In addition the term dates to the late 1970's and widespread in Quebec in the 1980's - so when I did my analysis (brief, of course due to the clock) I actually nailed it by figuring out that cheese curds and gravy over French Fries would be a modern dish and not a traditional dish (in the traditional usage of the word 'traditional). It was just unfortunate for me that they question included the word traditional which caused me to eliminate the correct answer. So, trying to figure it out from the information provided was actually not possible with the wording of the question - and probably counterproductive because of the way it was worded. So, in my mind I have only kicked myself for mistakes I've made and I thought on our question I played it as best as I could have. In my post game analysis - there was nothing I think you could have drawn upon in the question to guide us to the correct answer.

I guess my point is that lifelines are not supposed to be a guarantee of the correct answer, just an opportunity to dip into an additional source to provide assistance. If it doesn't pan out - that is just the luck of the game, so please be happy to know that I enjoyed having you as my expert, even more now that you have reappeared on the bored.

Shake, shake, shake. Shake, shake, shake. Shake your lulav, shake your etrag - Have a good New Year and a good Succos.

---Jay

[secondchance]

this change was not to add a better for the contestant, less controversial lifeline, but simply to add an opportunity for Meredith to chat with a celebrity (former contestant or not).

I didn't vote in the poll here but I do think the new lifeline has drastically changed the structure of the game. I know I would not have gotten to $500K without Switch the Question, and I'll always be grateful that I was on last year before the change. And that ticking clock is going to make a lot more contestants nervous and prompt them to make hasty decisions without thinking them through. When I was on, the staff told us that we had as much time as we needed, not to worry, but that if we took longer than, say, four minutes and didn't seem to be getting close to a decision, they might come out on stage and gently prod us along (all that contestant dithering gets edited out, of course). They did say that had rarely happened before.
I will always remember the kindness and encouragement the staff showed to all the contestants--they and Meredith really do want you to win big and they do their best to pamper and cosset you so that you're relaxed and comfortable. I couldn't have asked for better treatment. But they're also running a business, and we as contestants can't ignore the fact that they have to do what they think will increase ratings (that's their job)--so I agree that the ATE is the new ratings-grabber for them. I have no idea if it's actually helped ratings. The fact that it can be off-putting to us hard-core quiz people isn't their problem--we're going to watch anyway.
I'm coaching a friend who wants to be on the show and I have yet to figure out the best strategy to tell her about the ATE. It really is the luck of the draw. You have to build up your own knowledge in as many areas as you possibly can, study unfamiliar subjects so that you at least recognize a lot of terms, and think about your strategy ahead of time--rehearse various scenarios at different dollar amounts in your head and know which lifeline might help you at any given time--you won't have that luxury when you're in the hot seat. And study the kinds of questions that have been used recently, which I find top-heavy with definitions of little-known foods, medical terms, etc. (Get out those specialized dictionaries...)
I still find the PAF the most valuable, since you've hand-picked your friends and they can google. I truly saw no acceptable way I could google when I was on camera as the ATE. I don't have any way of knowing, but I think the Millionaire people wouldn't have wanted that to show up on tape.
The contestants do get information that the ATE's have filled out about their strengths and weaknesses--most of what I know about food is what I've studied for quiz shows, so asking me that category may or may not work. But I do speak French, so I think that's why Jay hoped I'd know "poutine." That's a problem he might not have had with a phone a friend whose background was more familiar. Millionaire's writers have come up with some great questions, but I find many of them in the $16K-$50K range so obscure and random across such disparate categories, making that area the trickiest part of the game. I think that's why most contestants end up winning somewhere in there. When I was on, I happened to get really lucky questions--for me--but people have told me that they wouldn't have known *any* of my upper tier. So when you're on, just remember to play your own game and make the best decisions possible for yourself--then whatever happens you can at least leave hearing the echo of Sinatra's "My Way."
My own main criticism of the show is exactly that $16K-$50K range. To me, the under-$8K or so range should be basic common-knowledge questions that require increasing thought as they go up, but that most adults can get if they paid attention in school, have a reasonably well-rounded life and keep up with current events.
The upper range, $100K and up, have been pretty good (the few we've been able to see over the years)--to me, these should span a wide range of academic, historical and current events knowledge and be truly challenging, but none of them should require minute specialization. They should also contain some contextual clues so that an excellent contestant at least has a shot at figuring them out. My million $$$ question (name the country that angered Krushschev so much he banged his shoe at the 1960 UN meeting), even though it stumped me, is really one of the better ones, and was just right for that level. It really should be possible for a truly exceptional and very well-read contestant (i.e., the readers of this bored) to earn in the upper range.
The thing that keeps that from happening, I think, is that tricky middle range that knocks them off prematurely. To me, it's simply a minefield of random "gotcha" questions that I was lucky enough to pick my way through. I think the writers are looking for material that will engage the audience and create drama, but it's just not working on the contestant side. For the middle range, I'd write questions that are challenging and increasingly tricky, but that give more context so that you can at least use your knowledge to figure them out, in the way that many of the upper-level Jeopardy! questions are written. As it is, too many of them throw a little-known word on the table and simply ask for a definition. When I was on, another player was asked at $25K to define the "zonule of Zinn" (with no context other than that it was a body part)--a part of the eye that even my ophthalmologist didn't recognize. Another person used one or two lifelines on a $25K dealing with Italian terms for pasta and beans--I know some Italian and had specifically read up on the various kinds of pasta, and I'd only heard of one of the four choices. The writers need to have a better sense of what's easy and what's obscure--I see too much inconsistency and not enough thought put into creating and ranking the questions. (Hint, hint: Maybe they could invite former winners to consult on the writing of the questions...)
If anyone wants to read a piece I wrote about my Millionaire experience, it's on my blog (the first story you see) at http://www.lynpaynejournalist.blogspot.com. (It's a human interest piece written for the general reader rather than the quiz show player, but it shows where my thinking was.)
Ciao!
Lyn Payne

Hey, Lyn- I really enjoyed your article and I'm so glad you popped in to share it, your insights and experiences. You're a terrific writer and a lovely lady. I hope TPTB will indeed contact you to utilize your "expertise" on the question writing end, and that we'll see you on the show again soon.

[lv42day]

Thank you for sharing Lyn. Especially of interest to me was your comment about the "Don't ask, Don't tell" policy of googling for experts. So can we assume that if they didn't tell you not to google, that you could have? That is, if you could without being too obvious about it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming you for not googling. I guess I'm only asking just out of curiosity. And with regard to the obscure questions... I think as long as WWTBAM has a budget of around 6 million dollars, which they seem to have based on the data of wwtbam.biz, seasons 3-6, I am afraid they will do what it takes to stay within budget. And I don't blame WWTBAM. We all have to stay within budgets. I had a few (what I thought were) obscure questions headed my way once I got beyond 25,000. But I am just thankful that I simply had the experience, and I got as far as I did.

[LynPayne]

Thank you for sharing Lyn. Especially of interest to me was your comment about the "Don't ask, Don't tell" policy of googling for experts. So can we assume that if they didn't tell you not to google, that you could have? That is, if you could without being too obvious about it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming you for not googling. I guess I'm only asking just out of curiosity. And with regard to the obscure questions... I think as long as WWTBAM has a budget of around 6 million dollars, which they seem to have based on the data of wwtbam.biz, seasons 3-6, I am afraid they will do what it takes to stay within budget. And I don't blame WWTBAM. We all have to stay within budgets. I had a few (what I thought were) obscure questions headed my way once I got beyond 25,000. But I am just thankful that I simply had the experience, and I got as far as I did.

As for the show's opinion about googling, I have only my own experiences to base my thoughts on, nothing they have ever shared with me. I think if I could have done it without being obvious, they wouldn't have said anything, and wouldn't have scrutinized the tape to check whether I was or not. Also, I'm sure I recall a few times when PAFs have said "Wait, let me google it," or a contestant has said, "Can you google it?" and Meredith has just smiled or made a joke about it. They can't control how a PAF obtains the info., whether it's by googling or by whipping a roomful of librarians with almanacs into a researching frenzy.
Now, my experience as an "expert" was very different, and I'd love to hear the opinions of other ATEs. I had to spend the entire day working with Millionaire and Skype staff to set it up on my computer desk, with them watching me the whole time. They gave me minute instructions for where and how to sit, how much to lean toward the camera, even telling me to wave slowly and not to make any sudden movements lest the Skype signal get blurry. Now that we're talking about it, I can imagine someone using a Blackberry concealed in their lap, but given those logistics, and the fact that you'd be looking down on camera, I think they wouldn't have liked it, simply because it would have looked weird on the Skype, as it would have had I leaned over and typed something on the computer. Millionaire was promoting its partnership with Skype, and they had to make sure Skype looked good.
I can also imagine (being a writer, I'm probably getting carried away here...) stationing a friend outside my window, behind the computer and the Skype but in my own line of vision. This friend would hear me read the question aloud, google it on his laptop, and hold up a sign or a number of fingers indicating the answer. The time element wouldn't matter, since the clock had stopped. Whether this would work or not, I have no idea. I tend to think they would have noticed poor sound quality coming from the open window and asked me to close it (they did ask me to rearrange lighting in the room). Even if you hid the friend in the room itself, behind the Skype, he would be trapped there for the entire day unless there was a door back there, too, and I didn't have that arrangement. So, given my set of logistics, it looked impossible and impractical.
Being in sort of the same business as the Millionaire people (creating entertainment/information for people to consume), I am guessing that their point of view is to create a seamless, engaging experience for the viewer, and that anything that would come off as appearing to make things obviously too easy for the contestant would not have worked for them. I do think that the average viewer isn't going to know, as we would, when a PAF is obviously googling, but they would certainly know something was up if they saw it on camera. And I also felt that my role, in addition to being a friend and coach for the contestants, was to represent the show and its producers in the most professional way possible, and to please them as much as I could.
Irony of ironies: The reason I was only on for three days is that my connection to the Skype was getting progressively weaker, and the images less clear, so they said they'd have to go to another ATE. I was especially sad because I wanted two more days to try to help someone, and as luck would have it, all the other ATE questions that week were things I immediately knew. *sigh*
I have eaten my share of humble poutine.
Lyn Payne

[earendel]

My opinion is that who your ATE is does indeed affect your success. Look at this week's contestants, for instance. Their "experts" have been in the area of pop culture (Entertainment Weekly), meaning that their area of expertise is likely to be limited. Indeed yesterday's expert said as much. That's not to say that this week's experts might not be useful in certain situations, but they are not likely to be of much value at the high dollar levels when their expertise would be most valuable (pop culture questions usually falling in the middle tier). Expanding the examination, former contestants might be good, but each of them has "blind spots", and there's always the chance of hitting one of them (Lyn had an unfortunate run of such questions - I hope she gets to come back and redeem herself). And sometimes the expert might surprise you - I didn't think that Jay Thomas would be all that knowledgeable, but he proved to be a good expert indeed.

[MarleysGh0st]

Now, my experience as an "expert" was very different, and I'd love to hear the opinions of other ATEs. I had to spend the entire day working with Millionaire and Skype staff to set it up on my computer desk, with them watching me the whole time. They gave me minute instructions for where and how to sit, how much to lean toward the camera, even telling me to wave slowly and not to make any sudden movements lest the Skype signal get blurry.

Lyn, do you mean that the staff actually traveled to your home? Or were they supervising you from NY, using Skype?

[LynPayne]

Lyn, do you mean that the staff actually traveled to your home? Or were they supervising you from NY, using Skype?

Oh no, no, sorry for the confusion: They were watching me through the Skype (a la Winston Smith being watched by Big Brother in 1984). From about 9 am until we started taping at 12 pm, there was a lot of back-and-forth through the Skype as they told me how to position myself, and even asked me to rearrange things in the background to make for a better look on camera, and they could see me moving stuff about in the room--we were joking about it as I did so.
When the camera actually got to focusing on me, I was extremely careful to stay in the limited range they'd asked me to, as I could see when I saw my shows afterward--I think it comes across that I didn't feel I had much range of movement. Had I moved my arms to type or looked over at something, I think it would have looked really strange.
While I'm sure they had better things to do than watch me through it when it wasn't my time to be "on," as long as I had the Skype turned on and ready, I think they could have. I could have signed off and turned it off until they were ready for me, but we'd already had so many connection problems with my line that I was afraid to. I'd be interested to know if ATEs with better connections had a different experience.
I'm hoping all this analysis is helpful for someone out there, but I do want to say that in spite of all the technical problems and the horrid questions I got, I loved the experience. The Millionaire people, and of course Meredith, are an absolute pleasure to work with: They were professional, kind and encouraging when I was feeling awful about not getting any of the questions. They really know what they're doing, and I understood why they made all the decisions they did about lighting, positioning, and finally giving up when my connection just wasn't showing off the Skype capabilities properly. I'd do it again any time!
Lyn

[earendel]

I'm hoping all this analysis is helpful for someone out there, but I do want to say that in spite of all the technical problems and the horrid questions I got, I loved the experience. The Millionaire people, and of course Meredith, are an absolute pleasure to work with: They were professional, kind and encouraging when I was feeling awful about not getting any of the questions. They really know what they're doing, and I understood why they made all the decisions they did about lighting, positioning, and finally giving up when my connection just wasn't showing off the Skype capabilities properly. I'd do it again any time!
Lyn

Is that why you didn't get a full week - because your "connection just wasn't showing off the Skype capabilities properly"? In any event I do hope you get the chance to be an expert again and show that you really do know your stuff.

[LynPayne]

I'm hoping all this analysis is helpful for someone out there, but I do want to say that in spite of all the technical problems and the horrid questions I got, I loved the experience. The Millionaire people, and of course Meredith, are an absolute pleasure to work with: They were professional, kind and encouraging when I was feeling awful about not getting any of the questions. They really know what they're doing, and I understood why they made all the decisions they did about lighting, positioning, and finally giving up when my connection just wasn't showing off the Skype capabilities properly. I'd do it again any time!
Lyn

Is that why you didn't get a full week - because your "connection just wasn't showing off the Skype capabilities properly"? In any event I do hope you get the chance to be an expert again and show that you really do know your stuff.

Well, that's what they said, and I believe them because we'd had a real go-round all morning with them working with me to try to fix things and saying the picture was still coming through too blurry and "pixilated" I guess they could have wanted to get rid of me and were just being tactful, but I don't think so: They knew I was good and seemed really excited to have me, so I don't think it was because I wasn't getting those questions. Remember that their partnership with Skype is what makes the ATE part possible, and they told me they were obligated to show it off to its fullest, which is completely understandable. I'm just hoping that if I do get to do it again, I get some better "Lyn Payne" questions. Not only is that better for the contestants, but it would certainly help sales when my book comes out (no, it's still in the proposal stage, so it will be awhile).
XOXO
LP

[NellyLunatic1980]

Thanks for all of your insights, Lyn... and good luck on your book.

[earendel]

I'm hoping all this analysis is helpful for someone out there, but I do want to say that in spite of all the technical problems and the horrid questions I got, I loved the experience. The Millionaire people, and of course Meredith, are an absolute pleasure to work with: They were professional, kind and encouraging when I was feeling awful about not getting any of the questions. They really know what they're doing, and I understood why they made all the decisions they did about lighting, positioning, and finally giving up when my connection just wasn't showing off the Skype capabilities properly. I'd do it again any time!
Lyn

Is that why you didn't get a full week - because your "connection just wasn't showing off the Skype capabilities properly"? In any event I do hope you get the chance to be an expert again and show that you really do know your stuff.

Well, that's what they said, and I believe them because we'd had a real go-round all morning with them working with me to try to fix things and saying the picture was still coming through too blurry and "pixilated" I guess they could have wanted to get rid of me and were just being tactful, but I don't think so: They knew I was good and seemed really excited to have me, so I don't think it was because I wasn't getting those questions. Remember that their partnership with Skype is what makes the ATE part possible, and they told me they were obligated to show it off to its fullest, which is completely understandable. I'm just hoping that if I do get to do it again, I get some better "Lyn Payne" questions. Not only is that better for the contestants, but it would certainly help sales when my book comes out (no, it's still in the proposal stage, so it will be awhile).
XOXO
LP

Truth to tell I don't think video calls over a computer look good over a TV screen no matter what they do. The experts have looked distorted, there is a definite lag in response time, etc. There's just not enough bandwidth available to make a video call look good. Notwithstanding that, I thought you looked good despite the technological drawbacks. And it's certainly understandable that Skype wants to put its best foot forward and if the connection isn't doing the job, it would be time to move on.

[Thousandaire]

If Skype couldn't get Lyn's connection to work, it doesn't say much for their "capabilities," does it? Reminds me of the time I signed up for DSL - went through all the rigmarole of having the equipment installed, only to have them tell me I was a few feet too far from their data center for it to work! Of course I never tried to get DSL again after that.

IMO, Lyn does not have to redeem herself; the questions she got were pretty obscure. Luck of the draw. I do think the middle tier questions are specifically designed to trip people up - wouldn't want to give away too much money, ya know.

Also I'm surprised they don't tell the expert not to Google - that makes it just another PAF. I have no problem with the experts they pick, once again, luck of the draw for the contestant. Although as a viewer it is more fun when they know the answer.

[TheConfessor]

I agree that it is probably an unspoken rule that an Expert can't Google, but I wonder what other props and visual aids might be acceptable. Like on today's question about the Rio de la Plata, if I had already arranged to have a world globe within reach, I'd be tempted to look at it and maybe even hold it up to the camera to point out where the estuary is.

[frogman042]

I agree that it is probably an unspoken rule that an Expert can't Google, but I wonder what other props and visual aids might be acceptable. Like on today's question about the Rio de la Plata, if I had already arranged to have a world globe within reach, I'd be tempted to look at it and maybe even hold it up to the camera to point out where the estuary is.

My sense is if the expert has a resource readily available because of their expertiese then it would be pretty cool for them to use it - especially in the following scenario:

Expert reads the question and says the James Joyce novel is Ulysses. The contestants asks are they sure, and the expert takes the book off the bookshelf and holds it up.

I think that would make great television - another case is where the expert doesn't know it cold but has the specific resource handy because that is their area - e.g. Bill Nye gets a question about the periodic table while the chart is behind him. Nancy has on her teachers desk a globe (I don't know if she does, just saying) and spins it to reveal the answer - that sort of thing.

I agree that googling would probably be a bad idea and if not officially forbidden would not look good at all for that type of lifeline, it would also make for bad TV and I think would reflect poorly on the expert - I can't imagine an expert doing it. Also, I was amused at Lyn's various proposals on how to get help without 'being caught', but to be honest I see no incentive for an expert to go through with such an elaborate scheme - other then for the fun of the challenge - but they couldn't share it!

---Jay