Show Discussion: Tipping Point

By | July 2, 2012

Weekdaily, 5pm, ITV1
20 episodes

Ben Shephard hosts a gameshow based around those coin pushers you see in arcades. Contestants use “skill and strategy” in order to earn the right to play the machine which could pay out as much as £10,000 if they’re very lucky. It’s lucky there’s £10,000 in it, because the machine itself looks a bit bland from the previews. Still though.

102 thoughts on “Show Discussion: Tipping Point

  1. Greg

    The show is just as boring as the machine. Based on what I have seen so far whoever commissioned this needs the sack. Although ill watch the rest in the hope something interesting happens.

    Reply
    1. Jean

      Haha you still wanted to watch the rest lol so proves you are interested in Tipping Point

      Reply
  2. Lewis

    As I said on Twitter, the Italians would do this right. We certainly didn’t.

    Reply
    1. CeleTheRef

      If it ever comes to Italy, I can picture Enrico Papi on it, possibly with a musical round, a word game somewhere and a few chicks as assistants

      however I’ve got word that a return of The Price Is Right is being considered.

      Reply
  3. John R

    At the moment this show is so slow it makes ‘For The Rest Of Your Life’ look faster than Usain Bolt.

    Activate The Kube!

    Reply
  4. Andy "Kesh" Sullivan

    I must say, I’m finding it hard to get enthused about this game too. Whoever had the notion to base a game show on an old arcade machine needs to collect their P45 and quick! When playing these machines normally, you wouldn’t just do one at a time like they’re doing here. They should at least give them the option to play multiple counters on multiple drop zones (maybe a maximum of 2) to potentially win more counters.

    Reply
    1. Andy "Kesh" Sullivan

      Right then, after watching the episode through to its conclusion, the final thoughts in my household are that it’s watchable and that there’s worse that have been on TV than this. My mum would watch this again only because there’s nothing else she would want to watch at this time of the day (she doesn’t like Pointless and has got bored of DOND).

      I thought Kelley was rather silly to keep dropping counters down the first drop zone in the final round, as it seemed she wasn’t going to give up on going for the gold counter. What I would have done was to try dropping some down the third drop zone to try and dislodge some of the counters hanging off the edge and try to get as much out of the machine as I could, since I’d practically know that I couldn’t make the gold counter drop.

      Reply
  5. Tom H

    It’s simple. You’d only be interested in the outcome of the machine if you were playing yourself. As a passive viewer, it’s totally irrelevant.

    Reply
  6. JC

    Round 1 was ok, but round 2 is simply too slow (ironically so, for a quick-fire round). I didn’t find the machine exciting enough to hold my interest for minutes at a time. Not sure if I will make it through to the end of the programme, to be honest!

    Reply
  7. Brig Bother Post author

    From what people were saying on Twitter I was expecting this to be the worst thing ever ever ever, in truth I don’t think it’s *quite* that bad, although I found myself getting more impatient with it as the show progressed, but then I think that’s because the first two rounds had the most going on.

    OK, if you missed it, the set-up – there’s a big coin pusher machine filled with counters. The back board is split into four “zones”, and by answer questions correctly contestants can press a button to drop another counter into a zone where it will bounce around Plinko style for a bit then fall onto the coin shelf which goes back and forth slowly. If this pushes other counters into the “win zone” then you score £50 for each one.

    ROUND ONE:
    – Each of the four players gets three counters. Questions are asked on the buzzer. Get a question right and you can choose to either play one of your counters or force someone else to play one of theirs (if it doesn’t look like paying out).
    – If you buzz in and get it wrong then one of your counters is put into the “penalty pot”. At the end of the round, one sudden death question decides who gets to play the penalty counters.
    – The person with the lowest score is eliminated. No word as to whether they keep the money earned or not, such skirting round the issue tends to mean “no, but we’ll try and hide that.” Edit: Apparently it was announced at the top of the show they leave with nothing.

    ROUND TWO
    – The person with the highest score gets to determine the order of play. Each person gets thirty seconds of rapid fire questions earning one counter for each right answer. At the end of the time they then get to drop the counters. Lowest total score is eliminated.

    ROUND THREE
    – Six questions are asked alternately of the two remaining contestants. They can opt to answer themselves or pass to their opponent. A correct answer earns the right to play a counter, a wrong answer gives the counter to the opponent. Lowest score after six questions is out.

    FINAL
    – The winning contestant puts the JACKPOT COUNTER!!! into play, it’s slightly larger and more golden than the other ones, and has a star on it. They do this by picking a zone and letting it fall as normal.
    – If the contestant can get it out again, they’ll earn £10,000. Any other counters that fall are worth the standard £50.
    – There are six categories of questions. For each one the contestant can take a 1, 2 or 3 difficulty counter question depending on how confident they are. If they get it right, they can drop that many counters into the machine. If they are wrong they earn zero.
    – If the contestant has not removed the JACKPOT COUNTER by the end of the last question, they have the option of taking their current winnings home with them or trading them in for three more counters, but then it is all or nothing.
    – That’s it.

    The first half an hour I didn’t mind too much – the mood between the contestants is rather bright and breezy, everyone seems to be having a fun time, the game is slow (well the machine is slow) but I thought the ideas were basically light and diverting enough to be fun.

    Certainly the whole set up wasn’t as dark and moody as I anticipated it to be. I still wouldn’t take a second look at it in an arcade mind you. I think it needs to play up its own ridiculousness a bit more

    Shephard offering a commentary on a coin-shoving game is at first hilarious and then by halfway through you wish it was someone else who’d do it with their tongue more obviously firmly in their cheek. Bradley Walsh would be believable here, everyone says what a nice guy Shephard is to work with which is lovely but as a prospect he remains quite difficult to get excited over as a viewer.

    By round three with half the contestants gone the show loses quite a lot of vibrancy. Also by this point there are far fewer chips (I know they’re “counters” but I keep wanting to write chips) in the machine so it feels more difficult to catch-up. Potentially one person could get six chips, and that would be nice, but the previous round there were 15-18 going into the machine and most of them have already come back out again.

    By the time you get to the final it’s just the host and the contestant feeding chips in whilst you want to imagine David Mitchell going “ooh, and that’s a bad miss” in the background.

    Trading your cash for extra chips is almost, ALMOST a great idea – after all a coin-pusher is all about reinvesting your winnings isn’t it? But I think in not offering it on a (say) 1 chip = £500 basis you’ve missed a MASSIVE thematic trick.

    I didn’t hate it as much as I was expecting but at the end of the day a show shouldn’t really get more dull as it progresses. You get a decent amount of questions, but you are going to have to wait ages between them. You wish they could have done something a bit more interesting with some of the counters and with the theme. It’s also a shame players have to drop the chips in by hitting their buzzer when it might feel a bit more skilful and therefore less pointless if they could physically drop it in themselves. As it is, the timing to make sure it lands basically flat is not difficult.

    Reply
    1. Lewis

      “There are six categories of questions. For each one the contestant can take a 1, 2 or 3 difficulty counter question depending on how confident they are. If they get it right, they can drop that many counters into the machine. If they are wrong they earn zero.”

      Funny, that’s two shows today I’ve watched, that started broadcasting today, where there’s 1/2/3 point difficulty questions to choose from. The one from 1987 was better, 4 rounds in 30 minutes.

      Reply
  8. Mart with a Y not a I

    So, Tipping Point then.
    First Graphics – Sky Sports Rugby Union coverage wants it’s on-screen captions back.

    Second – Music – It’s just like Goldenballs never left us. I am right that the ‘bin the ball’ sting from the aforementioned is being used somewhere in the screechy mix of this programme?

    Third – Set. Any reason that they are all 6 foot off the floor?
    Oh and another ‘red lighting for wrong, green lighting for correct’ by design claims another victim. And as for the actual coin dozer ‘prop’ itself. Yeah, and…?

    Four – Format. I admit I only came to the rather quiet and slow party 20 mins in, but I couldn’t follow the logic of what each coin that fell into the collector was actually worth – it seemed to change for each contestant each time. Not therefore the easiest mechanic to pick up.

    The end game is a passable mix of quizzical, semi-randomness and mild tactics – but it’s nothing special, plus shelling out £100 per coin to drop into the collector before the £10 grand gold coin does, is just meany tight-pockets.

    Five – Host. It’s Ben Shepard doing a nice little summer job before he is forced to spend Sunday mornings next to Chris Kamara on Goals On Sunday for another 40 odd weeks. Probably his best gameshow hosting job since..err The Krypton Factor.

    All in all – it’s no The Chase (which in terms of gameplay is played at hypersonic speed compared to this) and that may be it’s problem in trying to catch the causal viewer.

    5/10.

    Reply
  9. Mart with a Y not a I

    And it’s £50 per coin not £100 as I stated above.

    Thoughts about what to have for tea when Ben was giving out the final round rules but have clouded my concentration levels…

    Reply
  10. Dan Peake

    I thought, as a game, it was sound. The presentation was a bit darker than I would have liked – I mean that literally. Lets have a nice bright set as befits a coin pushing machine, not the dark and quite claustrophic set that was given to it.

    However, it was just so slow. Other than speeding up the machine, I’m not sure how they can really address this, but it got on my nerves very quickly.

    In my opinion it’s by no means terrible (I’m looking at you Heads or Tails). But it doesn’t quite do anything for me.

    Reply
    1. Gizensha

      (Haven’t seen it yet)

      …They went for ‘dark and claustrophobic’ with the set?

      Surely ‘An oversized arcade’ would have been more suitable given the gimmick? Which, yes, dark, but dark and attract screen for centipede going on in the background in a mock-up booth is far more interesting and fun than dark and claustrophobic. (Though then they’d probably have had to justify why eliminated contestants couldn’t try to use their chips to win a consolation prize of an giant stuffed animal in an oversized crane game)

      Reply
  11. Greg

    I can think of loads of game/quiz shows i would rather have seen. Can’t help but think they missed a trick not doing Blockbusters seeing the great job Challenge did.

    Reply
  12. David

    It wasn’t horrible…but there are a few things that don’t seem right..

    -The set just doesn’t fit. Something like this should be bright and colorful like an arcade…and not having an audience is a big miss.

    -The first two rounds are fine- the last two don’t work well.

    -I’d have the 3rd round be played to a time limit instead of a certain number of questions; maybe after a signal have one final question where whoever gets it gets a drop from all four zones at the same time as a catchup possibility.

    -In the endgame, I’d have the jackpot disc zone selected randomly. In the other three zones I’d drop red disks worth £250. Use the round 2 rules and give the player 45 seconds to answer as many questions as possible, and if they don’t drop the jackpot disc, offer them one chance to buy discs at £1000 per, but if they risk it all, they get an extra disk for the fraction of 1000 they had (so with 2400, they can buy 1 disc and keep 1400, buy 2 discs and keep 400, or risk at all and get 3 disks).

    I give it a C+…This show would have been perfect for the US in the 70’s…Hey, they had a gameshow based on this, so why not?

    http://youtu.be/rU7n6Ncojx8

    Reply
  13. Paul B

    Well it managed 2.2m (15%) yesterday, and grew its audience steadily over the hour (1.8/2.1/2.4/2.7).

    (Including HD but not +1)

    That’s only 0.2m down on The Chase in the same slot last week, (and Wimbledon coverage was averaging about 3.5m over the 5pm hour yesterday, as opposed to about 1.9m last week). Of course that means Tipping Point’s share is lower (15% compared to 20%), but we all know that’s not important right Brig?

    I think all involved will be happy with that, anyway. See how it holds up.

    Personally I think some of your are being quite generous to it. The format is basically:

    – Answer a question.
    – If correct make a largely arbitrary decision, then wait an interminable amount of time to discover how much money this correct answer is worth.
    – Repeat until end of round.
    – Person with least money is eliminated.
    – Repeat until end of show.

    The only remotely interesting decisions a contestant makes in an entire show are the “Easy, medium or hard?” decisions in the endgame, which are hardly *that* interesting *and*(as observed above) are hardly a new invention.

    Lazy. Slow. Very, very, very, very, very, very dull.

    Reply
  14. Brig Bother Post author

    but we all know that’s not important right Brig?

    Absolutely.

    I really wanted to hate it, but I found it initially more compelling than anticipated. I also think they picked quite good contestants who were loud, but not so irritating it was like The Fuse.

    Reply
  15. Gizensha

    Just seen the first episode.

    So, lets see, that was… What… £2250 in, £2700 out (rounds 1-3)? (I mean, yeah, real world she wouldn’t have paid £50 to shove a £10k coin in but real world the £10k coin would have been placed in there by the people running the machine at the start) – A £450 loss for the arcade, then in the amount of time it takes four people to pop 45 coins into it.

    Conclusion based on 1 episode: The arcade would get rid of the machine asap. I might keep watching just to keep track of the profitability of the machine.

    The game is… Meh outside of doing so, though in an inoffensive ‘watch while eating’ sort of way but certainly nothing even close to a much watch. Probably a 4/10 from me, but a 4/10 that feels like it’s wasting a lot of potential.

    Set – …Good god it’s like the cliche pink and blue of the early 90s slamming into the cliche dark forboding of the late 90s/early 00s.
    Ben Shephard – His usual almost invisible self. Doesn’t add anything to proceedings, doesn’t take anything away.
    Contestant casting – Decent. Good interaction between contestants, fairly fun. Highlights my thought earlier that the set should have been made out more like an oversized arcade than we got.
    Question difficulty – Would prefer harder, especially to make use of the Penalty Pot more, but about standard for teatime fare.

    The arcade machine concept would give a very firm rollover concept to the show if it were allowed to do so, which I don’t think it will be. No opportunity to reinvest winnings except an all or nothing gamble is a huge waste. Actually, I think the biggest problem with the show is that it’s been done as a quiz show with a scoring gimmick, rather than being a show based off an oversized version of an arcade machine that the prop invites (Even if, as mentioned by others, not the best designed of that sort of machine… And as mentioned by me wow is this machine unprofitable.)

    Reply
    1. Gizensha

      Rounds 1-3 should read the entire game, forgot to update it to reflect I’d bunched the final into the round 1-3 stats.

      Reply
  16. Alex

    There’s a whole load of terminology I’m learning here for an arcade game I NEVER play.

    They should have totally make a show based on Bishi Bashi Special instead.

    Reply
  17. Dave M

    This show was kind of a disappointment for me, but not for the normal reason. Given the pitch, this had the potential to be one of the worst shows of all time. Instead, somebody had the gall to build probably the best game show possible around the albatross of a coin-pusher, and the show winds up as simply slow and mediocre instead of memorably awful.

    Reply
  18. Barney Sausage

    Tipping Point…ideal, as someone else said above, for eating your tea in front of. Ben Shephard…really nice bloke (I have met him through work, lovely guy and really, really nice with members of the public – plenty of time spent having photos and signing autographs, which doesn’t sound much but is a whole lot more generous than a host of folk I could mention, if you know what I mean) but I find it a bit bizarre to hear him commentating on the arbitrary dropping of coins into a machine…which, unless I am mistaken, appears to have small divisions between each “drop zone” which (I think) could lead coins – and the jackpot coin – to be knocked into a position where it’s impossible to move or retrieve it…is that a flaw?

    There’s been a couple of comments about “contestant casting”…and that’s a bit of a bug bear of mine! I know of more than a handful of people who have gone along to auditions – in some cases more than half a dozen, and in one case 14 times – who are articulate, intelligent and basically “good enough” in my book to put on TV. However, not one has made it through to a show…let me empty my head, and see what everyone thinks of this…it appears to me that, when choosing contestants for a game show, producers have a pre-set idea of the “type” of person they want for a show. They want good looking, Mr and Miss Smiley…irrespective of intelligence or ability, you need to look good in front of a camera, and to be able to talk through your thinking – externalising your thought processes, to fill up some time

    Mythical example (qf. Dale Winton on In It to Win It)
    Host – so, for a thousand pounds…what is the capital of France – Berlin…Paris…or a potato?

    Contestant – Hmmm…well, I’ve been to France…I don’t think it’s a potato….and Berlin…well…it doesn’t sound “French”…hmmm….I am leaning towards Paris…

    Host – You don’t think it’s a potato? Are you sure??

    Contestant – Well, I had a baked potato for lunch – and it didn’t appear to have the Eiffel Tower sticking out of it…and when I received my Doctorate in Geography, Paris was in France…so, I think…let me read the choices again…yes, I think I might go for Paris

    Host – Would you like me to take that as your answer??

    (The few viewers left – “for Christ’s sake, it’s bloody Paris…get on with it – you’re worse than Noel and his freaking boxes….)

    Contestant – Yes please…Paris

    Interminable bloody pause, supposedly to build up tension but really boring the trousers off the viewing millions…

    …and so on.

    This, I feel, effectively presents an obstacle for average Joe, who might not be cover girl / guy material but is interested enough to want to go on a show…if you don’t fit in to the producer’s ideal, you won’t make it through. Of course, this is nothing new – I recall various “gameshow regulars”…there was a vicar once (I want to say David Smith??) who went on loads of shows…also, the chap who won loads of games on 100%…

    …but it seems to be really prevalent today – particularly on C4, where you appear to have little chance of getting onto Million Pound Drop unless you are reasonably glam (notwithstanding the celeb versions – I don’t find Larry Lamb glam!!)…you seem, to me, to have to fit a certain profile before you get on. It appears to be more so with The Bank Job – you have to have a trendy haircut, be youngish and be reasonably thick to get on there!

    It may be me…but I watch some of the old gameshows on Challenge, and see more of a representation of “ordinary people” than we get today. Do we really need casting? Should everything have to have a heartfelt narrative,every contestant to be perfectly articulate and comfortable in front of a camera? And…what if a really talented, gorgeous, intelligent wheelchair user applies for the Million Pound Drop? Would they allow them on, and sort out an entry route – after all, the MPD studio surely counts as a workplace, and if my very basic understanding of the Disability Dicrimination Act is correct, it enshrines in law the duty of the “employer” to make reasonable adjustments to facilitate the workplace for disabled employees…

    Just a few thoughts…what do you think?

    Reply
    1. Andy "Kesh" Sullivan

      I will most definitely agree with you there. I think shows these days rely too much on having a set ‘personality’ that they want for contestants rather than just letting people of everyday walks of life have a go.

      As some may or may not know, I’ve been trying for a VERY long time to appear on a game show with little success. The first (and so far ONLY) show I ever did was Memory Bank on Channel 5 in August of 2004. With that show, it was basically ‘ring the number to express interest in being on, go through a short telephone audition by answering a few questions then they would give you a show date’. Since doing that show, I got the bug and applied for almost everything I could see, e.g. Millionaire, The Chase, The Cube, The Million Pound Drop, both series of The Bank Job, Breakaway, Challenge’s Blockbusters and many more. The only successes I’ve had so far was that I got an audition for The Chase last August and got shortlisted, didn’t manage to get on Series 5 BUT my application has been brought forward for Series 6 which will be filming shortly…that’s it.

      At least with The Chase, you get a wide variety of people: some young, some middle-aged, some older and the everyman has quite a good chance of getting on. With all the other shows I applied for (probably with the exception of Breakaway), they rely on having a deluge of people that wouldn’t look out of place on TOWIE (the only show I can think of where you could actually lose brain cells by watching it, truth be told. Never watched it, never will.) or possibly Big Brother. You know the type I mean, 20-something ditzy giggly girls with a weirdly-spelled name, quite good-looking but with the personality and intelligence of cardboard that can’t grasp even the BASICS of general knowledge, and the guys aren’t much cop either, all they have is a weird haircut and think they’re God’s gift to women.

      Why do game shows have to do this? Growing up in the 90’s, I used to watch every game show under the sun and they always seemed to have a wide variety of contestants and it was rare that you would see the same faces on game shows (although there are some that have been on the game show circuit for years and been on plenty of programmes, like there were a lot of shows on ‘the boxy website’ where an uploader’s mum named Pamella was on them). Nowadays, you tend to see the same faces on multiple shows, e.g. Morris who was on DOND and did a few other shows lie 101 WTLAGS, and Dean Chase who was the first person to play our version of The Cube and then ended up on an episode of The Chase a couple of months ago.

      I just wish more shows would relax their policies a bit and let some other people have a go for a change. I’m not just saying people like me who have been trying for ages, but like with MPD, they seem to have a strict policy where nobody over 30 can even get on unless they’re related to a younger player or they’re a celebrity. That’s another thing that’s getting my goat these days – celebrity-only game shows or those that seem to HAVE to have ‘celebrity specials’ now and again. I’m looking at you Family Fortunes, Mr and Mrs, Millionaire, MPD, The Chase, Pointless and The Bank Job. Now, I have NOTHING against the fact that they’re playing for charity, that’s not my issue. My issue is that there’s surely another way for them to raise some money to give to these charities than to encroach on game shows and stop people who have gone through the proper channels and applied, and are crossing their fingers hoping to have a shot at their favourite shows and not getting on because the production companies want to let some Z-listers who want to revive their careers on. I rest my case.

      Reply
    2. Gizensha

      Ben Shepherd is a consummate professional who, sadly, keeps getting cast on programs that need someone who can elevate the format rather than needing someone to let the format shine on its own merits.

      Generally I agree with you, though for this show specifically – You kind of need a certain type of contestant, willing to cheer on the other three while celebrating the failures to get a good to-and-fro between them. With just Ben Shepherd commentating on the chips dropping and without that sort of camaraderie between competitors, the first couple of rounds would be as dull as the finale.

      Reply
    1. Paul B

      The rating I gave on Monday excluded +1. The equivalent rating for TX2 was up, but only by 0.04m (2.24m vs. 2.20m).

      That all-important share figure(!) was up from 14.9% to 16.1%

      If a show as mediocre as this can do passably well purely by not offending anyone it’ll only encourage commissioners to be even more risk averse. Ah well.

      Reply
      1. Brig Bother Post author

        I think it will be interesting to see what happens when Wimbledon finishes and (presumably) Pointless comes back on (although presumably they’ll be repeats until after the Olympics?), especially as that isn’t quite the monster it was six months ago.

        Reply
        1. Weaver

          To confirm, Pointless is having repeats in the next two weeks (except Fri 20th, when it’s cancelled for women’s football). Penny to a pound it’s in repeats for the week after, and then doubtless off air for two more weeks. By which time Tipping Point will have been and gone.

          On the substantive question, I should probably watch an episode in order, from beginning to end, without flipping over to +1 or catchup.

          Reply
  19. Gizensha

    OK – Been thinking a little, off and on, still not seen the second episode, but…

    I think the biggest changes I’d make to it is removing the elimination aspect, the show doesn’t benefit from it, and change the end game as follows – A series of general knowledge questions, four if you want the jackpot to be the same amount, preferably five. Each correct answer gives a prize chip, same as the £10k chip is now. They get inserted as evenly as possible, with the contestant picking how inequalities are resolved (So, they have a choice in the matter provided, but they can’t The winner can then reinvest as much or as little of his or her current winnings as he or she likes (This… Really means the machine needs to be less generous otherwise it’s an easy decision of ‘all of it’), the first prize chip to come out of the machine is wroth £1k, the second £2k, and so on and so forth for a maximum prize of £15k if you use a five prize chip version or £10k if you go with four.

    Possibly even go as far as to make it a rollover thing, but in that case I think you’d need to make them a straight £1k per chip.

    Reply
  20. Lewis

    I decided to do a machine profitability breakdown, inspired by Gizensha. It seemed to me like more tokens were coming out for each that went in as the game went on, so I tracked it round by round… (note: “percentage” is the percent ratio of what came out to what went in, e.g. 2 in and 3 out would be 150%)

    Round 1
    Tokens in: 12
    Tokens out: 18
    Percentage: 150%

    Round 2
    Tokens in: 12
    Tokens out: 29
    Percentage: 241.67%

    Round 3
    Tokens in: 6
    Tokens out: 10
    Percentage: 166.67%

    Final
    Tokens in (minus jackpot token): 8
    Tokens out: 13
    Percentage: 162.5%

    Total
    Tokens in: 38
    Tokens out: 70
    Percentage: 184.21%

    A staggering loss for the house there! I do have to wonder where the extra 32 tokens came from though, the machine looked no less full at the end than it did in the beginning…

    ALSO! I noticed a hanging token clearly disappear in the edit in the final round, did anyone else?

    Reply
    1. Cockney_Celt

      I am on an episode of this shortly and the reason for the overhanging counter disappearing was it probably fell while Ben was asking a question-in other words it was too long after the last person’s go on the machine to give to them so the discs that fell while the machine was not ‘in-play’ would be declared null & void and obviously edited out.

      Reply
  21. Gizensha

    I counted the jackpot token, I think you missed two tokens in round 2 (I think the third team to play it got 4 rather than 2, the first two got five), not sure what’s caused my other extra three tokens, however.

    Reply
      1. Lewis

        It was for episode 3. I remember round 2 being 6, 3, 3 going into the machine, definitely.

        Reply
  22. Paul B

    Down to 1.73m (not including +1) yesterday. 12% share.

    Perhaps it suffered from being up against that Murray bloke at Wimbledon, or perhaps this is THE BEGINNING OF THE END.

    Reply
  23. Chris M. Dickson

    The “if you can’t say anything nice then don’t say anything at all” department speaks.

    Nice set, nice graphics, decent theme, not obviously offensive, some fun questions and it’s always pleasant to spend time in the company of a host who’s a nice guy. Three out of ten.

    Reply
  24. Mr.Magoo

    The only thing more boring than watching this gamehow is reading these comments about the rules! ZZZ

    I think it would have been better and more random if the coins had different vaules because then they would have been forced to go for the coins they needed to catch up by going down different slots rather then the same one everytime.

    Still i would be surprised if this gets a second series without a lot of improvements.

    Reply
    1. Brig Bother Post author

      If you don’t like reading comments about rules, you’re more than welcome to sod off!

      If people each owned a zone, what if you put a coin in someone else’s zone and any money that comes out is taken from their bank? Actually I don’t think that would work.

      Reply
      1. Mr.Magoo

        I just meant why not just watch it play out rather than reading the rules that is all.

        Reply
        1. Andy "Kesh" Sullivan

          It’s for the benefit of those who can’t or haven’t seen the show yet. We don’t just get British people visiting this site, y’know. It helps everyone to be on the same page so they know what we’re talking about.

          Reply
        2. Brig Bother Post author

          Because taking things apart and seeing how they tick is how we work.

          Don’t worry, I can do jokes as well!!!

          Reply
    1. Mr.Magoo

      Yeah but i still wasn’t that excited by the end… bring back the chase, ASAP!

      Reply
    2. David

      And it’s still cheap- it only ups the total to 10K and doesn’t add 10K to the previous total..

      Reply
      1. Trigger

        10k is a lot more than is usually won on shows at this time of the day – perfection/eggheads/breakaway/weakest link.

        I wouldn’t mind £10k right now!

        Reply
  25. Poochy.EXE

    I just had an idea for a way to fix this show:

    – First, make contestants earn their counters in a timed round of rapid-fire questions on the buzzer, a la $ale of the Century’s sprint rounds. Each correct answer earns a counter, each incorrect answer loses one.
    – Whoever earned the most counters has the option of playing or passing. If they pass, whoever has the next highest number of counters gets the option, and so on down the line. If everyone else passes, the player with the fewest counters is forced to play. Repeat until everyone has played.
    – Put 4 big buttons on each player’s podium, one for each drop zone. When they’re playing, allow them to hit the button at any time to drop a counter in that drop zone. Rapid-fire playing is allowed.
    – Replace the bonus round’s questions with another round of rapid-fire questions against the clock.
    – If the winner runs out of counters, they can continue dropping counters, but each additional counter deducts from their winnings (say, 100 quid each).

    Reply
  26. Trigger

    Viewing figures doing well – think this could be a grower

    Reply
    1. Zboy

      Interesting to see that the ratings have grown. Especially after the pounding the show got originally.

      Reply
      1. Brig Bother Post author

        I want a T-Shirt with “ooh, it looks like there’s been some lateral movement” on it.

        I still think the first half of the show is considerably better than the last half of the show, but a hit is a hit.

        Reply
        1. Paul B

          The ratings have held steady so far. Seem to have settled at 2.1m and around 16% It’s basically a dead heat with Pointless repeats at the moment. Pointless was up 100k yesterday, but Tipping Point up 100k or so both Monday and Tuesday.

          Reply
          1. Trigger

            Very good for a first run – I think it’ll come back again later this year

  27. Jackie

    Can anyone answer this question fo me? Those contestants who are eliminated do they get to keep the money they’ve won or is it only the final contestant who gets the chance? By the way I thoroughly enjoy the mix of chance and knowledge!

    Reply
  28. Caroline

    I don’t mind the program , it beats countdown hands down in my opinion (but not The Chase!) .
    I often wonder when watching tipping point if it is somehow fixed so that the contestant doesnt win the £10k as the counters often slide a certain way when it comes to the final part . .?

    Reply
  29. Caroline

    And I don’t think it’s fair that other contestants leave empty handed unless they win a prize . All that effort for nothing . Seems a little unfair ..

    Reply
  30. Steve

    hello is the jackpot coin which Ben Shepard holds in his hand the actual coin that goes in the machine or is the jackpot coin smaller

    Please settle this argument with my work colleague
    Regards steve

    Reply
  31. Martin Heley

    What has been the most counters dropped in a single visit of the game.

    Reply
      1. Tom F

        That’s the public service remit filled for another year Brig, good work.

        Reply
      2. Simon F

        Unless it’s the celebrity version, in which case losing players do take away their winnings.

        Reply
        1. Crimsonshade

          And they keep £1000 if they lose after taking the three-counter gamble…

          Mind you, THEY don’t get the money – as with any celebrity show offering cash prizes, it’s all for charity.

          Reply
          1. Nico W.

            Well in Germany we have had some shows in the past where the celebrities were able to keep the money all for themselves. Celebrity Big Brother offers 100000€ for them every year and there was a political debate show by Stefan Raab where the voted winner (if he got more than 50% of the votes) won 300000€ (normally 100000€ but a rolling jackpot ended in a maximum of 300000€) as well. It was won just once by a musician (Sido) who seems to have kept the money. In a special episode Peer Steinbrück (a left-wing politician) was voted the winner, but I think he donated his 300000€.

            Have there been any celebrity shows in the UK/US/anywhere else where they got to keep the winnings?

          2. Brig Bother Post author

            Celebrity Mole in the US did IIRC, but I don’t think it’s happened in the UK – discounting celebrity poker tournaments of old where the prize is in lieu of an appearance fee.

            Actually had no idea that Raab debate show thing had more than one episode.

          3. Alex

            I believe the celebrity version of The Mole US did because the whole iffy idea of the Mole effectively stealing money from people’s charities.

          4. Matt Clemson

            When Bez won Celebrity BB he definitely kept the money. I think that was the first series with a prize, too. It’s worth mentioning that the charity benefit for those early series came from the revenue from the phone votes, though, and that remained intact independently of the prize money.

          5. Brig Bother Post author

            I don’t remember that at all but it does check out! Surely the only Celeb BB series with prizemoney, except for the one Chantelle won as a fake celeb.

          6. David B

            “All for charity” is misleading. I’m fairly sure the celebs get an appearance fee as well as charity money.

          7. Crimsonshade

            I apologise for using a poor choice of wording in my earlier comment – however, I am very pleased to see the kind of discussion it generated 🙂

  32. Denise Rybak

    What’s the point of the head to head round then when one contestant has a huge lead that positively cannot be caught by the other? What a farce!!!!

    Reply
    1. Alex

      Because nothing is impossible, especially since the double-counters became a thing.

      Reply
    2. Simon F

      The contestant in the lead still is entitled to the right to build up their prize money in case they don’t get the jackpot.

      Reply
  33. Austin Stratton

    They always push the button too late.. It infuriates me when they get to the final, and almost every other counter ‘rides’. They don’t learn by it, and it just seems obvious that if they pushed it when the rail was further out, on its way back in, the counter would be pulled flat almost always. Anyone else find this?

    Reply
  34. Trevor

    Is there a firm that could build me a tipping machine that would fit in a normal size large front room? I would not expect this to be a toy ? Thank

    Reply
    1. Thomas Sales

      If memory serves me correctly, when Hugh Rycroft, the devisor, came up with Tipping Point he did so after a trip to a seaside arcade. Have a look around your local arcade for manufacturers and ring around.

      Reply
  35. Cappo

    I just watch it to see how many of us humans are throwbacks from neanderthal times,, , watching them push the counter drop button at the wrong time, and then continuing to do so and wonder why it ends up riding on the back of another counter,,,, , COME ON HUMANS!!! It’s not friggin university challenge!! , if ya can pick ya nose without poking ya eye out, you should know when to press the button,, arghhh, so frustrating,,
    ( natural selection comes to mind)

    Reply
    1. Brig Bother Post author

      I don’t know, although I would say your viewpoint as a contestant is flatter than you might like.

      Reply
  36. Dave

    It’s amazing how few contestants haven’t worked out, if you put the counter in so it lands when the rack is still sliding outward, the counter gets dragged flat, and doesn’t bounce (ride) on top of another counter.

    Reply
  37. Des Elmes

    Austin, Cappo and Dave: counters *can* and *do* ride even when you release them at the supposed “right” time.

    Reply
  38. ollyo

    Can anyone please tell me how many discs are used at Beginning of Tipping Point

    Reply
    1. Des Elmes

      Do you mean how many are in the machine at the start of the game?

      Well over a hundred, anyway – including three doubles and three mysteries.

      Reply
  39. Nick

    Who takes the counters off once they’ve gone over on the tipping point

    Reply
  40. Gerry

    In the final round of the game show Tipping Point why do some contestants choose two counters instead of three? It seems futile as I dont believe a two counter question is easier than a three counter question, if the contestants are unsure of the category they are about to attempt to answer.

    Reply
    1. Andrew Sullivan

      I guess it’s a case of it’s better to go for 2 and get it right than to go for 3 and get it wrong. If I was on the show, I’d just do 3 counters for each question and take it from there by maybe working out the answers to the questions I wasn’t sure of by process of elimination.

      Reply
  41. John R

    “In the board game Snakes and Ladders players move backwards when they land on which limbless animal?”

    Reply
  42. Scousegirl

    Two excellent answers today:
    ‘They’re changing guards at Buckingham Palace’ is the first line of a poem by which author?
    Contestant: “Wordsworth”
    The same contestant thought Groucho Marx was one of the 3 Stooges.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *