The Chase (new ITV quiz show)

[Jojo Apollo]

Not as good as Divided IMO, but nice to see which quiz show expert they have each day as "The Chaser".

[Michael Wallace]

If anyone could offer a summary it'd be appreciated - the Internet doesn't seem to have quite caught up on this one...

[Ben Wilson]

If anyone could offer a summary it'd be appreciated - the Internet doesn't seem to have quite caught up on this one...

ITV watched an episode of Eggheads and thought 'ooh'.

[Phil Reynolds]

If anyone could offer a summary it'd be appreciated - the Internet doesn't seem to have quite caught up on this one...

Just watched this for the first time and found it enjoyable to watch and refreshingly ungimmicky.

In the first part of the show, a team of four take it in turns to amass a prize pot. Each player is given one minute to answer quickfire questions for which they gain £1,000 per correct answer; they then have to answer a series of multiple choice questions against "The Chaser" (an Egghead by any other name; today's was Shaun Wallace, who was a Mastermind winner a few years ago and IIRC was the losing finalist in Are You An Egghead?). Each multiple choice question they answer correctly moves them one step nearer home; the contestant has a head start on the Chaser, which they can opt to extend or narrow in exchange for a decrease or increase in their contribution to the prize pot. If the contestant makes it home, the money goes into the pot and they are in the final round; if the Chaser catches them they lose the money and drop out.

In the final section, the remaining contestants have two minutes to answer quickfire questions between them; each one they get right puts them one step ahead of the Chaser. The Chaser then has two minutes to catch them; if he answers wrongly, that question is passed to the team (who may confer) and, if they get it right, the Chaser moves back a step.

Today's show was pretty tense at the end; the team had amassed £36,000 between them and put 20 steps between themselves and Shaun, but he caught them up with 2 seconds to go and they went home with nothing.

[Michael Wallace]

Thanks Phil, that sounds like a pretty good summary. It also sounds like a pretty good show, but I guess I'd have to watch it to get a real feel for it.

Is it clear if the Chaser has an incentive (a la the Eggheads winning £1,000 if they win a show)?

[Clive Brooker]

The first episode was had a very similar final result. The chaser was different - another contender from "Are You an Egghead" who I've seen many times but whose name escapes me.

As far as I can tell the team of challengers doesn't have any prior connection, but I could be wrong. The curious thing I've found when watching is that I don't identify with the contestants at all and find myself rooting for the chaser, who seems to have a formidable task.

Perhaps they could combine this show with the final denouement from Divided.

[Phil Reynolds]

Is it clear if the Chaser has an incentive (a la the Eggheads winning £1,000 if they win a show)?

No, it's not made explicit, but I would guess a similar arrangement applies.

As far as I can tell the team of challengers doesn't have any prior connection, but I could be wrong.

No, I don't think they do either - otherwise those who are eliminated in the individual rounds could still end up with a share of the money, which (as Bradley Walsh made clear) they don't.

[Phil Reynolds]

The first episode was had a very similar final result. The chaser was different - another contender from "Are You an Egghead" who I've seen many times but whose name escapes me.

Apparently it was Mark Labbett.

[Michael Wallace]

Just watched a couple of episodes of these. I think it's possibly the best quiz show/gameshow I've seen in a while. It got through plenty of questions, and because every round had a time limit there wasn't any of the "well I don't think the sky is red because I went out yesterday and it wasn't, so I think I'm going to go for blue" dawdling that seems to be compulsory these days to drag out a show without having to get question setters to do more work. The two I saw seemed fairly well balanced as well.

Perhaps the strangest thing was the weird attitude the chaser had to have (I presume he was told to act like it), what with his calling people chicken and having to try and appear a bit mean without actually being rude. Very odd. Funny, but odd. (I certainly don't think it comes across as they think it should.)

I think it's a little odd that they don't make it explicit that if a player goes out in their first round then they can't win any money at the end - I only managed to infer this from one of the shows I saw. It's an interesting dynamic, but it makes the whole "I'll see what my team-mates think I should do" thing a bit pointless. It also gives the person going last rather a lot of power.

But yeah, pretty good. Not good enough to reboot into Windows for, but I'd probably make a point of taking a break from work to watch it if I had a TV licence.

[Phil Reynolds]

I think it's a little odd that they don't make it explicit that if a player goes out in their first round then they can't win any money at the end - I only managed to infer this from one of the shows I saw. It's an interesting dynamic, but it makes the whole "I'll see what my team-mates think I should do" thing a bit pointless.

Why do you say that? Yesterday's programme was the first one I've seen where all four team members went through to the final, and it was largely because they took the team decision that it's more important for everyone to stay in and increase the chances of taking something home at the end than to risk getting knocked out in the individual heats. Of course, a team with a particularly confident (and selfish) member or two might take the view that they can win the final chase on their own and that it's in their own interest to eliminate the weaker team members so that those remaining get a greater share of the money, but (as you say) this potential isn't made explicit and I don't think it plays a significant part in the game.

It also gives the person going last rather a lot of power.

How so?

[Michael Wallace]

I think it's a little odd that they don't make it explicit that if a player goes out in their first round then they can't win any money at the end - I only managed to infer this from one of the shows I saw. It's an interesting dynamic, but it makes the whole "I'll see what my team-mates think I should do" thing a bit pointless.

Why do you say that? Yesterday's programme was the first one I've seen where all four team members went through to the final, and it was largely because they took the team decision that it's more important for everyone to stay in and increase the chances of taking something home at the end than to risk getting knocked out in the individual heats.

When you're faced with the question of whether to stick, move one step nearer or one step further away, I don't see any particular reason to take your team into account. You're faced with these options, and you can guess at your probability of success, and you either know (if you go last) or can make estimates about your expected return from the outcomes. Because you can't win any money if you get knocked out, there's no scope for team-based strategy modification along the lines of (for example) "go for the big money, if you get knocked out we'll go for the middle ones to make sure it's still reasonable".

With regards to going going last (and this is what I meant regarding the last player having some power (although power probably isn't the word, really)), you have the highest information available of all the players - you know precisely what your final expected winnings are dependent on the options in front of you, whereas previous players have had to take the fact they don't know what you're going to do into account (and whilst you could say "oh the team could agree what strategy to choose throughout", once that decision is being made, there's no point in playing to the advantage of the team, only yourself).

[Phil Reynolds]

Hmm, I think I see what you're saying. It's certainly true that only the individual concerned can guess at the risk factors involved, since the team are strangers.

One thing I find interesting - I can't offhand think of another game show that's done this - is that the final quickfire round requires the contestants to buzz in even though they're not competing against one another, with no apparent timeout per question. This means that, if no one buzzes within a couple of seconds, someone has to take the responsibility to buzz and pass in order to move on, otherwise (presumably) the time would simply tick away. In Tuesday's show there was one guy in particular who kept buzzing in quite quickly and then passing - so quickly, in fact, that I felt he wasn't always giving his team mates (who might have actually known some of the answers) a fair opportunity to buzz first.

[Michael Wallace]

This means that, if no one buzzes within a couple of seconds, someone has to take the responsibility to buzz and pass in order to move on, otherwise (presumably) the time would simply tick away.

I noticed this as well - it's definitely a bit odd, although I'm not sure if it's just a badly designed aspect of the game (it's certainly a little awkward to watch).

[Jojo Apollo]

Was hoping they would have a different Chaser each day, seems they only have the two.

[Phil Reynolds]

(NB spoilers)
Nice to see Shaun wink at the team today when he knew he could no longer beat them.

[Derek Hazell]

I watched The Chase replacement, The Fuse yesterday. A very forgettable quiz show, with extremely easy questions I thought. Which is presumably why no one has bothered to start a thread on it on here . . .

[Phil Reynolds]

I watched The Chase replacement, The Fuse yesterday. A very forgettable quiz show, with extremely easy questions I thought.

You forgot to mention the extremely irritating contestants (at least on Monday's show, which I switched off half way through) who seemed to have been told to squeal and clap their hands every time Austin Healy addressed them.

[Michael Wallace]

You forgot to mention the extremely irritating contestants (at least on Monday's show, which I switched off half way through) who seemed to have been told to squeal and clap their hands every time Austin Healy addressed them.

Oh god this. Although it had the side-effect of highlighting the lack of studio audience - the sound of 6 people clapping in an otherwise empty studio is not a particularly encouraging one.

It's a shame, I thought the format could be quite good - at least they get through plenty of questions - but the production of it was severely lacking (although I appreciate that it's new). The presenter was pretty awkward (although nowhere near Kirsty Wark's antics in A Question of Genius), and whilst all the explosion-related terminology wasn't his fault, you wonder if he could have carried them off better. Indeed, I think something that typified it was when he had to say "are you ready to fight the fuse? let's light the fuse", which is a pretty terrible, but would have been so much better if he'd just put a bit of emphasis on 'light', rather than saying it as if it were a completely unrelated sentence.

There's something a little bit off in the second round too, with the 'best' two players from round one getting the (quite big, I'd've thought) advantage of choosing their opponents (and subjects). Whilst they rotate the contestants during the first 6 rounds so everyone gets a go in the prime position, it's not your fault if on your turn in that spot everyone else gets their questions right.

The final was a bit weird as well - why treble the prize money won so far instead of just reducing it? They spend the show mentioning that they can win up to whatever is treble the money at the end, so why not just treble it to begin with?

That said, "how much cash is in Sarah's box?" (and then several subsequent similar lines) was pretty funny, even if unintentional.

[Karen Pearson]

You forgot to mention the extremely irritating contestants (at least on Monday's show, which I switched off half way through) who seemed to have been told to squeal and clap their hands every time Austin Healy addressed them.

I went to an audition for this and didn't get shortlisted. There were 18 at my audition and I thought I was fairly obvious what type of person they wanted (and it was never going to be me - I just can't do all the squealing and fake excitement ( ))

There is an equally awful new BBC quiz called Panic Attack coming up soon. I was a reserve for it but never made it on - probably no bad thing as it's not a great quiz.