The Price Is Right question

[XkaVader1]

Is the game "Pay The Rent" impossible? No one has ever won the $100,000 prize and I don't see it happening at all. I really do think it's impossible. Anyone agree?

[TheKid965]

It may well be considered "impossible," but it can be done. In fact, there's already been one player (out of the twenty-one who've attempted it so far, including yesterday) who actually did have the proper arrangement of GPs and thus would have won the $100K, but he bailed out at the $10K level. (For the record, it happened in November of 2010, during the Veterans' Day Spectacular that year.)

In order to win this game, a contestant needs both knowledge of GP prices, the ability to work against standard Pricing Game logic (i.e., the fact that even though the most expensive item must go in the safe, the least expensive one belongs anywhere but the mailbox!), and the nerves of steel to not take the bailout money when things are looking close.

Of course, we are talking about a Pricing Game that's being played for a six-figure cash payout... it should be harder to win than your average game. I don't have a problem with that. Where I complain is when we get setups like this last one, where even a certified genius probably wouldn't even have stood a chance of getting the right combination. (Note that, if you ignore prices and just play it like a blind lottery, the odds of getting the $100,000 combination are 719-1 against. That doesn't actually sound that bad when you consider the odds of all five Plinko chips going into the $10K slot are 59,048-1 against -- and that's for half as much as Pay the Rent offers! Oh, and for the record, it's the same 1:720 chance of getting a mere $500 in bonus money on Hole in One, and nobody complains about that being "impossible" [1]... so, yeah.)

Bottom line, I wouldn't say Pay the Rent is "impossible" to win... just "rather unlikely" to be won. Which is probably as it should be, all things considered.

[1] Of course, the pricing element of Hole in One is considerably more intuitive than Pay the Rent: Just arrange the GPs in order from low to high, no additional math required. That could account for it.

[tattooed]

tl;dr: I agree with The Kid.

[TheKid965]

▲ Heh. That actually means a lot to me, thanks. 8^)

[CarShark]

I'm dangerously close to believing that not only will this game not be won, but that it was created with the express purpose of not being won. Between the unintuitive pricing scheme, the horribly unforgiving ranges and the continued selection of less-than-bright contestants, I don't foresee a winner any time soon.

[CardSharks8689]

If someone does win $100,000 on Pay The Rent, it would not only be miraculous, but also it would probably be a one-time event.

Contestants are going to bail out more than anyone going all the way and winning the full $100,000. After all, it is easier to claim $10,000 on Pay The Rent than it is to win $10,000 on Grand Game.

[XkaVader1]

Not to mention. If someone actually does end up winning the $100,000 top prize, you better believe that the producers of TPiR will cry foul. They'll want to find out how that person won it all.

[TheKid965]

Not to mention. If someone actually does end up winning the $100,000 top prize, you better believe that the producers of TPiR will cry foul. They'll want to find out how that person won it all.

I disagree. A win in this game will be exceptionally rare, no question about it... but it is a winnable game, at least in theory. This isn't a "perfect Showcase bid" situation at all.