TVSquad

I don't watch game shows, except for Jeopardy. I actually consider Jeopardy more of a quiz show because it requires some actual intelligence in order to win. That's not to say guessing the price of a bag of sponges or calling out one of the letters of the alphabet doesn't require a certain level of intelligence. I'm sure Wheel of Fortune has to weed out a lot of unqualified candidates:

M.C.: Okay, Steve, pick a letter.

Steve: Abraham Lincoln!

If you watched Jeopardy yesterday, you saw the first three way tie in the show's history. Each player ended up with $16,000. The three players had a rematch, which will air this Monday.

But some were immediately asking: why did champ Scott Weiss, who was in the lead at the end of "Double Jeopardy," wager just enough for a tie? Well, Weiss gives the answer on his friend's blog. Seems that Weiss, well, is just a great guy, and thought it would be cool for all of them to end up with a bunch of money! I guess it's our cynical nature to immediately think that Weiss had made a mistake in betting the way he did. So good for him.

Now, I'm not sure if I would have done the same thing, but then again I don't see myself every being in that position, so...

That's not me saying that, it's The Los Angeles Times. But I have to agree.

As several of us here have pointed out in the past, just look at the shows that pass for game shows nowadays. Deal Or No Deal has the gimmick of hot chicks and shiny suitcases. So far, so good (every show needs something). But then we get the most annoying guests in the history of television. Seriously, these people are so OUTGOING and have big PERSONALITIES, all of them, that the producers must give them a test before the show and won't pick anyone normal. Even their family members are this way. This was never the case on game shows before, and if you got an episode where it was like that, it stood out.

Now all of these contestants are the same, and so are the shows. After all, what is Identity but Deal Or No Deal, only with humans instead of suitcases? More annoying guests, more luck, and more stupid decisions (honestly, quit while you're ahead). And the l.......o......n.....g, drawn out pauses and "suspense" each show tries to build. Ugh.

This is either big news for game show fans or much to do about nothing.

The show sent out a note this week that promises something major is going to happen on the show tomorrow (Friday) that has never happened on the show before:

"This Friday, March 16, 2007...for the first time in 23 years, Jeopardy history will be made...it was such a remarkable event we consulted a game theory expert, and he said it may never happen again!"

OK, now they have me curious, and since they mention game theory, I think I've narrowed it down to three possible events.

(S05E09) This week's episode provided some revelations, just like the title promises. There are answers to questions about Gene Purdy's past that the show has only hinted at prior to now.

(S01E06) Despite their best efforts so far, the powers-that-be at the Village can't seem to break Number 6 and ascertain the reason as to why he resigned from being a spy. In this instance, the new Number 2 gets a call from (presumably) Number 1 who implores him to get information from Number 6. We see a clearly agitated Number 2 acknowledge to his boss that he "is not indispensable", so it would be safe to assume that more drastic measures will be taken to get Number 6 to talk.

We are then introduced to Number 14, an attractive female doctor who has developed a means to get Number 6 to talk via the combination of mind-altering drugs and dream analysis. In other words, Number 6 is knocked out and then placed on a table with electrodes hooked up to his head and the doctor administers a shot whereby we see his dreams on a television screen. Number 2 hopes that he can get the answer he is looking for so he can get Number 1 off his back.