i was watching that new show "beat the geeks" on the comedy channel and two people played for 25 min answering a bunch of questions. the score was 50 to 40 going into the third round. the point value in the last riund was 150 points!

someone could be kicking butt the entire show (say in this episode one person got every answer) it would have been 90 to 0. but if they get the last one wrong they lose!? doesnt seem like a good way to decide who played better.

why not just skip the first round (which are pretty much meaningless) and go to the last round?

I just skip the entire show

alot of shows do this...one person dominates for 25 minutes and with the last question they get it wrong and WHAMMO! they lose the enitre game.

it's to keep your attention... the game shows don't care about fairness... just viewership.

In addition, many of the shows drop a contestant, so the first round points are more of a qualifier.

das

ah-ha..i think see it now. so the last round is the "real" game and the first rounds are pretty much just to see who gets to play....hummm....

And actually, you've got the scoring wrong for that last round.

The last round is POTENTIALLY worth up to 150 points for you, if you get all the questions right.

Basically, say Player A has 20 points, and Player B has 85 points. Since Player A is behind, he goes first. He gets asked rapid-fire questions (up to 15). If he gets a question right he gets 10 points. If he gets one wrong, his turn is over.

So in our example, Player A has to get at least 7 questions to stay in the game. After Player A is done, Player B gets his chance to answer questions and score up to 150 points.

So see, it's not one big question worth an unfair 150 points.