The Lemon Fool

In the quiz Pointless, the contestants (in pairs) see the question category then get to decide which of them goes first and which goes second.

I've never been able to work out if there's an optimal strategy for deciding on this.

MrFoolish wrote:In the quiz Pointless, the contestants (in pairs) see the question category then get to decide which of them goes first and which goes second.

I've never been able to work out if there's an optimal strategy for deciding on this.

Me neither. It seems, er, pointless to give them a choice.

Scott.

If one contestant thinks they know one or more (less obvious) answer, they should probably go second (assuming the other contestant only knows the obvious answers). But I don't think they can discuss the detail can they? Therefore hard for them to arrive at that conclusion.

chas49 wrote:If one contestant thinks they know one or more (less obvious) answer, they should probably go second (assuming the other contestant only knows the obvious answers). But I don't think they can discuss the detail can they? Therefore hard for them to arrive at that conclusion.

In most of the rounds, the second contestants get an entirely fresh set of question/answers, so someone with better knowledge gets no advantage.

EDIT: they can only confer when they see the subject/category, and must decide before the actual question is asked.

Scott.

The second set of questions in each round are more difficult than the first set, either by the sets themselves or, when there is only one long list that's played by both contestants in each pair, 'cos the easier ones tend to get used up first. So, in order to avoid bombing out (100), it makes sense to put the least knowledgeable on the subject of the pair on first.

mc2fool wrote:The second set of questions in each round are more difficult than the first set, either by the sets themselves

I can't say I've noticed that. Is that your impression, or is it defined in the format somewhere?

Scott.

swill453 wrote:

mc2fool wrote:The second set of questions in each round are more difficult than the first set, either by the sets themselves

I can't say I've noticed that. Is that your impression, or is it defined in the format somewhere?

Scott.

My impression, although I'm surprised you haven't noticed as it seems pretty obvious to me.

It's also obvious that in the cases where there is one long list of questions that all contestants have to choose from, the persons that go second will have less choice than those that go first.

mc2fool wrote:My impression, although I'm surprised you haven't noticed as it seems pretty obvious to me.

It's also obvious that in the cases where there is one long list of questions that all contestants have to choose from, the persons that go second will have less choice than those that go first.

I agree the second point is obvious. I'll watch more closely to see if I concur on the first.

Scott.

swill453 wrote:

chas49 wrote:If one contestant thinks they know one or more (less obvious) answer, they should probably go second (assuming the other contestant only knows the obvious answers). But I don't think they can discuss the detail can they? Therefore hard for them to arrive at that conclusion.

In most of the rounds, the second contestants get an entirely fresh set of question/answers, so someone with better knowledge gets no advantage.

EDIT: they can only confer when they see the subject/category, and must decide before the actual question is asked.

Scott.

Going second you know more about the state of the game, and the risks you do or don't need to run. The player with most subject knowledge is likely to have most answers, and most intelligent guesses at their disposal and can make a better informed decision about which to use. It's a highly situational advantage which increases the further down the line you are and the more open the field of possible responses.

I doubt in most cases it makes much difference, and its probably as much about player comfort, and filling 45 seconds of show time, but in theory it's akin to positional advantage in poker.

If you know very little about the subject, you presumably want to go early in the round, in order to get one of the more obvious available answers, and 60/70/80 points rather than 100. Someone with good subject knowledge can benefit from going later, as has been said, to know whether they can give a “safe” answer or have to take a risk on a very low scorer.

If it is a round with 2 separate groups of answers, then going early/late in your particular round (before or after the opponents) could give the same advantages.

Problem is, the contestants don’t usually know whether it is 2 separate groups of answers or an all-in round until after they’ve made the choice. So, as already said, probably more about filling the program time. Same with ordering the final round answers - who cares.

Gryff