Friend of the Bar Lewis Murphy of Fifty 50 Show fame (latest episode out yesterday, well worth a listen i.e. I’m on it etc.) went and saw the first episode of The Common Denominator being filmed. And here’s what he had to say – it’s a great write-up, I’ve emboldened the main points:
The Common Denominator has been compared obviously to Only Connect in its primary question-setting device. I think this is a little bit of an unfair comparison. Do we compare any show with normal questions to Mastermind every time? Of course not. So I’m going to cast all Only Connect similarity aside when writing this review.
Although yes, seeing connections between things is rather Only Connect-ish isn’t it?
Anyway, onto the game itself. Three contestants line up alongside our genial host Phil Spencer (more on him later). They will be eliminated one by one until we get to the grand prize final round. Not surprisingly, it will be one elimination per round, with nothing going to those who lose. There’s not much of an introduction for the contestants before the game begins, each gets a standard “I’m Tom, from Southampton, and I’m an IT consultant” at the top of the show, and will be talked to later (all details there made up).
Round 1 is a simple word connection round. Two words will appear on the board, and the player has 10 seconds to blather as much as they can until they stumble upon the common denominator. I mean, the player has 10 seconds to correctly identify the common denominator between the two. An example from the recording (because even though this will be shown on TV, I’m ok giving out a few sample questions) was Duke and Chain, the common denominator being Daisy; Daisy Duke from the Dukes of Hazzard, and a daisy chain. A lot of the questions involve pop culture, wordplay of this sort, or both as we see here.
Each player gets 4 of these questions to answer all by themselves. The two players with the highest totals go through to round 2. If there’s a 2-way tie for the lower score, or a 3-way tie overall, tiebreaker questions are played on the buzzer. Answer correctly, you’re through, answer incorrectly, you’re out. When a player leaves the show, there is a very cheesy sendoff of the sort “I’m afraid the common denominator between Goodbye and Farewell is you” – the phrase “the common denominator” really gets used a lot, and NEVER the word “connection”.
Round 2 is picture clues. There are 4 questions in total, which are played alternately between the two players. BUT! If the player answering the question cannot get it in their 10 seconds, play immediately passes to their opponent for 10 seconds, who can then blather their way to winning the point instead. More wordplay is possible here, an example question given to the audience before recording was a picture of a baby and a wolf, where the common denominator was cry; babies cry, and cry wolf is a phrase in somewhat common use. After the 4 questions (or possibly after 3 if one player gains enough advantage) the lower scorer is knocked out. I imagine a similar tiebreak situation can happen, but it didn’t in this recording.
Interestingly, the ad break is exactly half way through the show, by which I mean it comes 2 questions in to round 2. Not entirely sure if breaking up a round like this is a good move, but for now it seems to be what they’ve gone for.
Round 3 is the jackpot round, which has nothing to do with interesting crossword things as discussed previously. Instead it’s something of a lightning round. There are 6 questions waiting to be revealed on the big screen, worth progressively more money: £100, £250, £500, £1,000, £2,500, and a jackpot £10,000. The player has 45 seconds to answer as many as they can, and the questions are in a mixed picture/word form: one question was a picture of a pot of honey, and the word Frankenstein. After they answer a question, the clock is paused before they decide whether to go on to the next one, because if the time runs out while you’re attempting to answer a question, you lose your money.
There is one lifeline though, the player can pass a question if they are having trouble. However, this only brings up a new question of the same difficulty, as they have locked themselves in to playing for that amount, so the pass isn’t a free ticket to keep going then just pass at 1 second to go. And that’s about it, the player goes home with the money they won (or not), and the show ends, applause over credits.
Phil Spencer does a competent job as host. He’s obviously worked with the public before on his many property shows, so he knows how to talk to contestants. He is given some VERY cheesy dialogue, being the aforementioned leaving bits and the intro to round 2 where he asks the players what they would be a conne- uh, common denominator between. It’s a roundabout way to ask about their interests, and it’s clear that these are written beforehand Blind Date style. There’s nothing particularly bad to say about Phil, just nothing outstandingly good either.
The set feels like I’ve seen it before somewhere, but I can’t think where. Lots of red and purple translucent circles line the walls, with a wide screen at the opposite end of the set to the contestants where questions appear. Questions appear in the form of red capsules, with a word or picture on either side of a central wavy line, sliding apart in the middle to reveal the common denominator. They’re decent enough graphics, taking up the lower third of the screen at home when the big screen isn’t being shown. The capsules turn mini for the final round, with the money amounts on them when the questions aren’t.
Warmup was provided by the ever-entertaining Mark Olver, of Deal Or No Deal. He carried us through, I think, as the recording went on a bit. It was the first live run through of a game complete with cameras and audience and all, so it’s understandable that it would take longer than a regular recording. That said, it was definitely a record for the series proper, will go out on TV, and was played for real actual money. No solid details were given of when this would be on, just afternoons some time next year.
And that’s about it. I do think this does enough to differentiate itself from OC (though the insistence of terminology to do so was quite obvious) and could be quite entertaining. The jackpot won’t be won every time, but there’s always a chance of winning decent cash if the player’s smart about it. By the way, I had a quick chat with Mark after the show, podcast fans. Just saying!
Thanks Lewis! Shame they got rid of the crossword final, I thought it was quite clever. Anyway, I’m hoping to go down myself for a viewing in a few week’s time, tickets are still available from SRO Audiences.
Couple of things I realised I forgot:
– the jackpot round amounts don’t accumulate, they’re what you will leave with, e.g. if you answer 4 questions, you get £1,000, not £1,850.
– This was recorded in studio 3, one without any installed seating. There’s a couple of rows of chairs at the front which were taken up by media students today, and the rest a way back, directly behind the cameras etc. which made the whole thing rather hard to see from the right hand half of the seating, so they brought a monitor round for us to watch on. Inconvenient.
Quite similar to Pointless?
Isn’t that where DBTI was filmed?
I think it was, yes.
I’m going on Sunday (wow, I’d forgotten that until now!), and I suspect it’ll be decent fun.
I’d be astonished if this doesn’t plug straight in to replace 1001 Things as the DoND lead-in. The new endgame having a risk-reward element seems to be a hint of this, as the common denominator of this and DoND is risk-reward 😉
5pm is what had been suggested to me by someone I basically trust. If that is the case, Race the Clock is probably going in that 3:30pm slot.
This is conjecture and not legally binding, it could all change by January.
It sounds really slow – would I be correct in saying that? It could be fun though, I guess, and it would fill the 1001 Things niche quite well (i.e. what I have on when I’m doing work and need some noise but don’t have the mental energy for something more challenging).
Also, it’ll drive me nuts if I don’t get this – the connection, sorry, Common Denominator between honey and Frankenstein is monster, right?
Yes, well done, you win something like £500 (not really).
Having seen the Israeli ‘taster tape’, I rather liked the question style and thought it was different enough from other things to be a worthwhile addition.
However, these ‘basic race’-type round structures we’re seeing of late strike me as terribly dull. I’d have preferred a more interactive round 1 where players can have a decent amount of time to think of the C.D. but if another player gets it first they can buzz in to start a 5-second countdown (a bit like the Chase) after which the buzzee gets the chance to steal.
You’ll note that OC only has 6 questions per round in R1/R2 but it feels like there’s a bit more gameplay than that in practice because of the passing over. Imagine what it would have been like if it was just 3 straight questions to each side.
Overall, there doesn’t seem to be enough questions or game time to sustain the running time. OC has a rate of 1 question per minute, but 2/3rds of that is game time and only 1/3 is chat and mechanics. Here, it seems to be 10 seconds in every minute, if that, is actual question time.
That’s quite a novel and fun idea, but in a show that’s about stumbling upon the correct answer rather than immediately coming up with the definitive one, would it work?
Well, you could put people in isolation booths to solve that problem so that we hear the contestant in play but the other contestants have to work it out on their own in silence.
I think I preferred Round 2 of the Israeli original where that they had a freeform 2-3 minutes to get through as many as they can, with a bit of host prompting.
Also, how would you punish errant players in this context? If effectively players are curbing the clock you’ve got to stop them buzzing in with no real answer.
Schlag-like, you’d donate one point to the person whose question it was originally. Or even 2 points to the original questionee and 1 point to the 3rd player who’s been denied the chance to buzz in.
While the OC comparison is the obvious from the premise, the actual questions based on this example look like they’re more in the Fort Boyard Codeword playbook.
…Babies Cry, mind, looks a bit forced.
I think that’s fair enough really, it’s not about creating phrases.
Sorry if I made it seem more like it was all making phrases. While a lot of them are phrases, not all of them are by any means. Let’s see if you can find the common denominator between David Jason and Shaun of the Dead, for example.
(I should stop telling you all the questions)
Frost? Toughie.
Correct! I agree that one was a bit of a toughie.
I think I got it right on the cusp of the 10 seconds mark, easier going through Shaun of the Dead than it was going through the career of David Jason. Fun question, though.
It’s Robot Wars version 2.0..
http://insidetv.ew.com/2012/11/20/robot-combat-league/
This is going to be amazing or rubbish with not much middle ground I reckon.
Pingback: Fifty 50 Episode 10 | Fifty 50
OK, I went and saw this this afternoon, not much to add to Lewis’ experiences (although they have dropped the contestant sign offs, and the interviews are conducted straight rather than “I’m the common denominator between X and Y”, both are wise choices I think). I’ll print up here what I wrote on Twitter earlier though, for reference:
* I give it six weeks before @tomscott comes up with The Gammon Denominator.
* If you could turn the lights down so they aren’t shining directly into the eyes of the audience at the back that’d be nice. The Common Interrogator, more like.
* Phil Spencer. By all accounts a really nice guy, as a gameshow host feels more like an enthusiastic substitute teacher than proper host. I think his natural delivery counts against him in this instance, difficult to build up tension. Also he doesn’t seem very confident in getting score situations across to the viewers. It was nice when he sat in the audience though.
* They didn’t really try and make the difficulties of the opening round balanced have they?
* The graphics are *quite* nice. The round two clock is quite clever. This being said, I do have The Tampon Denominator ready for a headline for reasons that may become apparent.
* That’s it. I like the central conceit (very playalongable), no-o-o-o-t quite sure the show does it justice. We’ll see.