It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is Deal Or No Deal Rigged?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 10:51 AM
link   
I'm not a huge fan of the NBC show "Deal Or No Deal" but do watch occasionally. For those who aren't familiar with the show here are the rules...


Each night, the game of odds and chance unfolds when a contestant is confronted with 26 sealed briefcases full of varying amounts of cash - ranging from a measly penny to $1 million. Without knowing the amount in each briefcase, the contestant picks one -- his to keep, if he chooses - until its unsealing at game's end.


Rules

When the show first started I wondered if somehow the briefcases could be rigged somehow such that a predetermined outcome could be produced.

For instance, perhaps there is a contestant who has scratched his way through life and is down on his luck... perhaps the producers are able to change the monetary value inside the briefcase he chose to give him the $1,000,000 because it would be a "feel good story" and increase ratings for the show.

But after awhile, I figured how could they ever do that. How could they possibly rig the briefcases?

Then I saw last night’s episode (going off memory now)...

The contestant, Pyong Kong, had picked through all but four breifcases. The remaining dollar amounts left on the board were $75, $750, $500,000, and $750,000.

The host, Howie Mandel, kept bringing up the fact that Kong's parents, who were in the audience, had immigrated to the United States with only $750 in their pockets and how "weird" it was that there seemed to be a significance to the number "75" that night.

Kong then continued on and decided "No Deal" and selected his next briefcase. He ended up selecting the briefcase containing $500,000 leaving $75, $750, and $750,000.

So, at this point, my ATS sensors are going off and I'm thinking this is kind of strange.

At this point Kong decides to take the "Deal" and accept the cash payout of $211,000. Howie then asks Kong which briefcase would have been his next choice should he have continued on and not accepted the deal. Kong then chooses the briefcase containing, I think $750,000.

But then Howie asks to open the breifcase Kong originally chose (which contains the amount Kong would have ultimately ended up with had he continued on) and it contains $750... the exact amount his parents arrive in the United States with.

So, now I have to ask you... "Coincidence Or No Coincidence"?

PS: For those of you who think NBC would never do something like this, I'd like to remind you of a 1950's TV game show scandal...

NBC's "Twenty-One"

[edit on 20-2-2007 by mecheng]




posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 10:56 AM
link   
We have that show here in the UK, I don't know which version came first, but as for rigging, it is known in the UK that the broadcasts aof the shows are rigged, ie the first Jackpot winner broadcast was held back, but the show itself is not. I suppose it could be rigged but if it were disgruntled competitors who leave with 1p would soon blow the gaff wouldn't they?



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 11:03 AM
link   
I guess I'm thinking that, as far as rigging, that the producers could somehow, remotely change the monetary values inside the briefacases as they are being picked... during the show to end up with a particular outcome.

As for disgruntled contestants who end up losing... they would never know. They would think the $1 they ended up with was actually inside the briefcase they originally chose.



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 11:25 AM
link   
Yes, I suppose so. If you think about it one of the oldest tricks in the world is to put something into a matchbox and make it didsappear. Changing a number might work the same way. The first time a mistake was made though (the same value appearing in two different case for instance) would bring about another 21 style scandal.

Would excess be arrogant enough not to take 21 as a warning? Maybe they would.

The Movie Quiz Show about 21 and starring Ralph Fiennes is a good watch by the way.



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 10:48 PM
link   
Of you actually getting the million are pretty slim. When the banker offers you $170,000 bucks and you live in a shack you say deal. I got sick when that lady lost went from that to $3,000 from the banker. You just have to remember to not be so greedy. Greed kills, on game shows and at the casino.

[edit on 20-2-2007 by Royal76]



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 08:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Royal76
You just have to remember to not be so greedy.


I agree. But you have to wonder about this episode I was speaking about originally. The storyline was that the guy's parents came to the US with $750 in their pockets. Then the he somehow, miracuously, picked all the breifcases except $75, $750, and $750,000. The original briefcase he picked which contained the dollar amount he would have won if he would have continued, was $750!

I haven't calculated the odds, but to me it had to have been rigged to get results like that.



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 08:32 AM
link   
the simplest way to rig it would be to tell the player where the $1,000,000 is, and then let them pick it, and play it out
and
the producers want a big winner more than anything !!

that would raise ratings, and what they could charge for a commercial, and they make their money back in a week.
so
I'd have to say since no one in the US has won a million, that it is legit, because they have so much to lose if word gets out its rigged (jail time) and the predictible result of cheating (a million winner) hasn't happened yet

call me naive, but I think truth is stranger than fiction, and the drama is better if its legit.

[edit on 21-2-2007 by syrinx high priest]



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 03:50 AM
link   
I just found this in Anonymous Posts:-


Original Anonymous Post By: anon_100272
Hey there...I am a friend of Pyong's and was in the studio audience. I can promise you that is was definitely not rigged. There was alot that you did not see due to editing....for example Pyong was thinking about picking #10 the whole time($75) but Dennis (his supporter) had feeling that he shouldn't...but on the screen they show Pyong just picking numbers easily...and believe he took his time...

...during commercial breaks I was looking to see if there any switcheroos....I just can't see how they could do it in front of 200+ people who make up the studio audience.

Remember, you don't see about 60% of what is actually taped...if you saw it in its entirety...you would see how crazy and emotional it was for that $750 to be in the case.

It was crazy wild....a huge coicidence...maybe it was fate...but as someone who was at the taping...it was definitely not rigged...to think other wise would mean that my friend is a cheat...or in on it....and that is simply not the case.



posted on Mar, 18 2007 @ 09:41 PM
link   
I don't think you can prove it either way. Yes the only way for it to be proved is for them to make a mistake. Personally I think it's all about the odds. The nice thing about the show is that everyone is gonna take home something for playing the game. It might be alot of money or a liittle bit of money or just a good lesson learned in how not to be so geedy. I'm not a huge fan either, but like to watch it when I can.



posted on Mar, 18 2007 @ 10:07 PM
link   
I'm not sure about this particular one, but in general game shows take out insurance to pay large prizes. That would make it quite difficult for the games to be fixed since both the insurance companies and the government would be monitoring it.



posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 09:09 AM
link   
I personally don't think it is rigged, it involves strategy and luck.

You have 1 in (what is it 22 boxes? not sure.) 22 chance of getting 250,000, why need to rig it?

Who wants to be a millionaire isn't rigged, why rig this one???



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 02:59 AM
link   
we have this same show in australia. just so happened that a guy who was playing for charity won $200,000 - the ultimate amount down under.

i've heard about mechanical briefcases???
that would explain alot...



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 06:02 PM
link   
Right from the first time I watched the show I always considered ways one *could* rig the outcomes. I mean, come on, it IS possible and would not be that hard. A small team / skilled person could easily use a computer and then watch the show, manipulating the values of the case(s) in real time, adjust for the change and calculate odds for all the outcomes. And of course, they would pick they best outcome in their favor. THIS IS POSSIBLE. Just stating.

Now whether or not they do it, I would not know. However, I feel that human greed, running with ones emotions instead of thinking and not understanding the nature of odds leads to the demise of most contestants. I have noticed that the show definitely uses peoples (and the audiences) emotions in creating suspense. Emotion has a BIG influence on consumerism. It would seem very seedy to play on this AND remotely cheat the odds. But totally possible.

However, I feel that the greed of humans and understanding the odds is the underlying nature of this show and its success. (One has to assume that time was put into 'testing' the game before put into TV production and the statistics worked out).

I would love to see the data on payouts during the game, and profits from the advertising from commercials and during the show at times. I know who gets the best deal, do you? No deal.



posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 04:26 AM
link   
There is a rule you haven't mentioned that is closer to being 'rigged' though:

In one session, they will go through with 5 or 6 contestants and only pick one of them to go to air. The other 5 don't get anything.

You don't get paid unless your episode goes to air. I think thats fairly dodgy. You go through it all and win some huge amount and at the end the producer says 'no, not exciting enough' and you end up leaving with nothing.

I can remember when it first went public, there was huge outrage here in Aus. about it. A current affairs program, A Current Affair (A+ for originality there) did a big story on it and had all the contestants that won $200,000 but never got aired together and marched on the rival station's studio.



posted on Aug, 7 2008 @ 03:20 PM
link   
In the most important way, I belive the the show is rigged. Most of the people continue on, even when the odds are against them. You don't really see that in other shows, i.e, they'll usuallly stop when the risk of losing too much money is there. On Deal Or No Deal, almost all the contenstinats continue on and ususally end up losing large amounts of money. THe same mantra comes from the contestiants. "I came to win a million, so I'm going all the way."



posted on Aug, 8 2008 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by mecheng
 


After the 21 fiasco, no game shows are rigged. The producers could get jail time and the network could lose its broadcast license. There are only 26 cases, so the odds are actually very good on getting the million dollars. It was a coincidence for the 750 show.
TV game shows are edited to move along and for emotional content, but the game itself is not rigged.



posted on Aug, 8 2008 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by kidflash2008
 


Yeah, after the outrage of 21 things have tightened down drastically. I'm sure there still will be times people think they can manipulate things for ratings. The ratings are King and if it means the life or death of a show and many peoples jobs they always will get desperate and start thinking about cheating. Whether they don it or not is another issue!



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 10:34 PM
link   
you think games shows are not rigged, you got to be kidding. they reasonly caught the price is right for cheating on their game plinko. they said theres magnets to rig the out come,they forgot to reset the magnets each time she dropped her chip and she won 30,000 all together. the price is right refused to pay her saying that it was supposed to be reset. the contestant theatened to sue so trhey paid it was on the news. I think that it is rigged in some way



posted on Jan, 1 2009 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by MrMysticism
 


I think the show is rigged and they have a way of showing different money amounts inside those THICK suitcases. Think enough to hold cards with all the money amounts. I realize she show is edited but come on, so no one has opened the first case or found the Million in one of the first cases opened. And then all high amounts so it ends up being a bad deal.



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: mecheng

I recently saw that re-run and it reawoke my own doubts for years about how the amounts in the cases might be manipulated. I'm still watching re-runs trying to figure it out. My main question has been about the construction of the cases, how the amounts are entered and even whether there are multiple latches for opening the cases, with the "ladies" all in on the conspiracy so they can be clued to use one or the other latch to reveal the desired amount. I'm inclined toward fewer people in on any conspiracy, though. If the amounts are displayed electronically and the banker, with a computer of course, could switch the amounts as the game progressed, then that, in my mind, was a possibility. However, I've not been able to determine by looking during the show--and can find no information on how the cases are constructed--I'm left to wonder.




new topics




 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join