Supermarket Sweep - General Discussion

[springbarb]

I've bought Hormel chili (it's good in a Mexican dip) and guessed "stag" but have never heard of Stagg chili.

I was also glad the gym owner bros and woman who came in workout clothes didn't win.

[Maverick]

That fitness woman was so full of herself. Obnoxious too. 

[Kromm]

On 12/7/2020 at 2:50 PM, readster said:

Something I have noticed is that Leslie tells them about the bonuses constantly. People just seem to zoom by them.

The P. A. is turned off when she's shouting to people to get the inflatables. You can tell, because it no longer echoes. It's commentary just for the home viewers at that point. 

[Yeah No]

On 12/7/2020 at 8:50 PM, Maverick said:

I've never heard of Stagg chili either.  We have Hormel Chili marketed as Hormel not Stagg. This must be another regional thing like the Wise chips. I knew the answer to the clue was stag but would have no clue where to look. 

I've heard of it from advertisements, but it's not that familiar to me here in CT and I've never had it, nor did I get the clue.  I know I've probably seen it in Walmart and Target but maybe only a few times a year if that.  Right now both stores are out of stock on it online.  I just read that Stagg chili is a regional brand from the West Coast but it has been getting a broader distribution in recent years.  This is one of my pet peeves with this show - they should do their homework and not expect people to know products that they might not be familiar with depending on where they live.  

4 hours ago, Kromm said:

The P. A. is turned off when she's shouting to people to get the inflatables. You can tell, because it no longer echoes. It's commentary just for the home viewers at that point. 

Yeah, that's not completely obvious because it took me a while to figure out that they can't hear her, and I usually pick up on those things pretty quickly.  Another thing I find a little annoying.

[Swenson]

On 12/7/2020 at 1:17 PM, saber5055 said:

*Raises hand.* Me. Never heard of it. And, in response, why would ANYONE buy CANNED chili? Just ... yuck. Brown some ground beef, throw in some tomatoes and beans (if you want beans), add some spices and you've got a big pot of delicious chili, enough for four people, and at less cost than a can of that chili I've never heard of.

Sounds good.....cook some up and send it over.  Cuz I ain't gonna do it.  You say it's cheaper?  You have to buy the meat, buy the tomatoes, buy the spice you need, buy the beans if you need them...when all is said and done....canned chili is cheaper.....and easier.

Edited December 9, 2020 by Swenson

[Swenson]

I live in the west....I didn't know Stagg wasn't available anywhere else.....the show is in L.A......the contestants likely are too.... so they should know.

We have Hormel chili in our supermarkets too.

[Yeah No]

9 hours ago, Swenson said:

Sounds good.....cook some up and send it over.  Cuz I ain't gonna do it.  You say it's cheaper?  You have to buy the meat, buy the tomatoes, buy the spice you need, buy the beans if you need them...when all is said and done....canned chili is cheaper.....and easier.

Perhaps, but it's not better.  The quality of the meat in those canned chilis is not that great, or plentiful.

I have all the ingredients to make chili in my house right now. Home cooks that keep a stocked pantry don't have to go out and buy all those ingredients just to make chili, they already have them.  And it is cheaper when you price everything out by the amounts you use versus the amount you get versus the quality of the ingredients.  When I make a pot of chili I get days worth of portions for only a few dollars for the whole pot.  I'm sure it costs less per 15 ounce portion than the almost $2.00 a 15 oz. can of Stagg costs at Walmart.

Edited December 10, 2020 by Yeah No

[Swenson]

9 hours ago, Yeah No said:

Perhaps, but it's not better.  The quality of the meat in those canned chilis is not that great, or plentiful.

I have all the ingredients to make chili in my house right now. Home cooks that keep a stocked pantry don't have to go out and buy all those ingredients just to make chili, they already have them.  And it is cheaper when you price everything out by the amounts you use versus the amount you get versus the quality of the ingredients.  When I make a pot of chili I get days worth of portions for only a few dollars for the whole pot.  I'm sure it costs less per 15 ounce portion than the almost $2.00 a 15 oz. can of Stagg costs at Walmart.

I guess that would depend on how many people you feed in your household.....I'm just a single and have no need to make up a big pot of homemade chili.....I certainly know how though.  There is some canned chili ...like Nally's....where I would rather eat Alpo.   Stagg is good.

[Yeah No]

1 hour ago, Swenson said:

I guess that would depend on how many people you feed in your household.....I'm just a single and have no need to make up a big pot of homemade chili.....I certainly know how though.  There is some canned chili ...like Nally's....where I would rather eat Alpo.   Stagg is good.

I live in a 2 person household - Chili takes so little time to make and keeps nicely in smaller portions in the freezer.  A couple of cans of beans, a pound of chopped beef, two 15 oz. cans of diced fire roasted tomatoes with green chiles (or without), an extra small can or two of green chiles if desired, two tablespoons of Worcestershire sauce (or one of soy sauce), some chili powder, cumin powder, a few cloves of chopped garlic (or garlic paste or even powdered garlic), a chopped onion (or onion powder), some hot sauce or chipotle powder to your taste, taco sauce to taste (or an 8 oz. can of tomato sauce), and a cup or two of water or beef broth (or even one cube of beef bullion dissolved in one cup of water, which is what I did).  It's not like these ingredients are hard to find or are not commonly used in other dishes.  They wouldn't go to waste unused if you eat other food that uses them or make this dish often.  The initial investment of spices sounds like a lot but if you make it often gets less and less expensive per batch, plus a lot of people already have soy sauce and hot sauce in their house.  I would say this recipe makes about 6 healthy sized portions.  And if you buy the house brand at Walmart it's definitely cheaper per portion than buying canned chili at almost $2.00 a can.  Great Value canned beans are only just over 50 cents a can.  Their beef broth is also 50 cents a can.  It's even cheaper if you use cubed bullion.  Their diced tomatoes aren't even 50 cents a can.  And they have several ground beef options that are pretty inexpensive too.

It's based on this recipe from Rachael Ray.  It sounds less exciting than some recipes but I liked it better than a lot of them that have more expensive ingredients.

[Kromm]

12 hours ago, Swenson said:

Perhaps, but it's not better.  The quality of the meat in those canned chilis is not that great, or plentiful.

I seem to recall thinking that Trader Joe's chili in a can was at least tolerable (not fantastic, but at least edible), but traditionally it is indeed total crap. 

[geauxaway]

On 12/9/2020 at 10:58 PM, Yeah No said:

Perhaps, but it's not better.  The quality of the meat in those canned chilis is not that great, or plentiful.

I have all the ingredients to make chili in my house right now. Home cooks that keep a stocked pantry don't have to go out and buy all those ingredients just to make chili, they already have them.  And it is cheaper when you price everything out by the amounts you use versus the amount you get versus the quality of the ingredients.  When I make a pot of chili I get days worth of portions for only a few dollars for the whole pot.  I'm sure it costs less per 15 ounce portion than the almost $2.00 a 15 oz. can of Stagg costs at Walmart.

It’s the same as people who buy Manwich 🤮. Like seriously, ground beef, ketchup and mustard, some garlic, onions, season to taste  and voila!   Just the thought of canned chili makes me gag.

[readster]

Tonight's episodes, showed how you DON'T do Supermarket Sweep. I mean, what was the first group doing? I mean they barely grabbed anything and tossed the bonus to the side. Huh? That last game were some hard clues, I mean I completely forgot about Aqua Net, but yep, my friend's older siblings used it a lot in the 80s.

[Irlandesa]

I kind of wonder if the first Supermarket Sweep was the first one filmed.  Those clues were very hard (not rhyming) and Leslie was wearing a skirt.  In most of the episodes, she's wearing more casual clothing. 

[Auntiebc]

Why do so many people waiste time just running around without outting anything in their carts. So much time is waisted just looking around. Makes no sense. Leslie Jones ruins this show.

[readster]

8 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

I kind of wonder if the first Supermarket Sweep was the first one filmed.  Those clues were very hard (not rhyming) and Leslie was wearing a skirt.  In most of the episodes, she's wearing more casual clothing. 

Very true, and Leslie even said the episodes were not shown in order, however... since the teams had to "find their names" and not have some air head trying to get them coffee or something. Seems more like a later episode, plus notice the flower shop took like almost no time to get the bouquet. 

[Enigma X]

I am noticing that if a teams wins in one episode that one loses in the other.

[saber5055]

16 hours ago, readster said:

That last game were some hard clues, I mean I completely forgot about Aqua Net, but yep, my friend's older siblings used it a lot in the 80s

I got a laugh out of Aqua Net and got that easily since we used it on show dogs. Everyone had a can of it in their grooming box. Other than that, the clues were kinda tough. I missed the first half hour and only kinda sorta watched the second episode. Still, I noticed everyone pushing the inflatable banana out of the way last night, like last week when two players kept bending over it to get something off the shelves, and then left it on the floor.

[readster]

22 minutes ago, saber5055 said:

I got a laugh out of Aqua Net and got that easily since we used it on show dogs. Everyone had a can of it in their grooming box. Other than that, the clues were kinda tough. I missed the first half hour and only kinda sorta watched the second episode. Still, I noticed everyone pushing the inflatable banana out of the way last night, like last week when two players kept bending over it to get something off the shelves, and then left it on the floor.

I know it's like: "Oh, bonus bad, get out of our way!" I want to yell at them to just get the damn thing and move on.

[Racj82]

10 hours ago, readster said:

I know it's like: "Oh, bonus bad, get out of our way!" I want to yell at them to just get the damn thing and move on.

Leslie does too. Sadly they can't hear her.

[readster]

7 hours ago, Racj82 said:

Leslie does too. Sadly they can't hear her.

Since the show has it's season finale in January and looks like it will get another season. I hope people who eventually go on here get the point of picking up the DAMN bonuses. 

[springbarb]

I couldn't believe that guy only got, what, $750 before bonuses? I loved the music as he wandered around, but HOLY CROW. Yeah, he wouldn't have won back in the 90s.

[readster]

1 hour ago, springbarb said:

I couldn't believe that guy only got, what, $750 before bonuses? I loved the music as he wandered around, but HOLY CROW. Yeah, he wouldn't have won back in the 90s.

He was like not even trying to shop. He was: "oh, let's get the special bonuses." When Leslie told him after it was over: "What were you doing? The worst you could have done is just swing stuff in your cart and go." He is probably one of those people who just gets what's on a grocery list and then check outs and goes home.

[853fisher]

I'm late to the party.  I'm a bit too young to remember the 90s run as it happened, and until fairly recently it wasn't being rerun anywhere I watched, so I have no strong connection to this format.  But recently I've been watching all the primetime games to have something on during chores etc, and because I'd like to see more of them in general so I'm happy to add my +1 to the ratings.  I went through all eight episodes so far over the past week or two.

The long and short is that I like it!  The style is extremely frenetic and just about up to the line of too much for me but, seeing Leslie here and there has earned her a lot of goodwill in my eyes, so she rarely crosses it.  I agree with those who say that they would like more in the way of "Tina has picked up a maximum three Thermoses worth $150" but some of her one-liners are genuinely hilarious.  I watch with captions on because of my hearing and occasionally she just gets rendered "[yelling indistinctly]," which is fair enough.  I think I enjoy the puzzles more than the sweep.

I wonder what, if any, opportunity players have to review the store layout before what we see?  If none, I might be tempted to ignore the mini-sweep and run through as many of the aisles as possible to get my bearings while the others are looking for the item.  That is "only" worth 10 seconds and, what, $250?  Maybe I could learn enough to be worth that and more.

Stagg is one of the few brands I think I've never heard of.  Claussen pickles was another.  I did know Wise but think of them as regional.  I read all the comments about chili with interest.  I often don't enjoy chunky textures so the prevailing style of chili is not for me, but I like smooth stuff like Skyline and a small chain of restaurants around DC where I was raised.  In college I found Skyline in the freezer aisle and could not have been more pleased.  For a long time I've thought about picking up the mixes the restaurant chain sells and making my own.  I think you've all inspired me now, more than any inflatable could!

Edited December 20, 2020 by 853fisher
"but"

[Kromm]

I've been watching episodes of the 2019 UK version of Supermarket Sweep online and the differences and commonalities between the Leslie Jones version are fascinating. You can clearly see what was directly carried over and what wasn't.  Little things like sassing the security guard and being flirtatious with the cashiers... a direct carry over. The way the bonuses are constructed?  Almost precisely the same.  There are far more rounds though, far more mini-games, and so the rewards for getting each question right are lower to allow that. There's only 1 trio of contestants for the same length episode as the US version. There's also a LOT more banter.   

We're of course not allowed to point directly to stuff like this but I'm sure searching "Supermarket Sweep UK 2019" or something similar to that in the appropriate places will find it. 

[Taeolas]

As was pointed out earlier in the thread, CTV Life channel in Canada has aired the UK Supermarket Sweep. 

One big difference that surprised me, was how much North American Branding I depend on. I had no clue for a lot of the answers because the Brands and even the terms are completely different from North American styles. 

I think COVID restrictions killed a lot of the minigame styles; no point in having Cashier actors on set with COVID limits, but then you don't get a number of the cashier-related games. Hopefully that's something that a new season can do if COVID lightens up (so maybe Season 3 at this point). 

 

I'm not sure if I like having 2 games in an hour vs 1 game and more rounds; both have pros and cons. I do think I like the US style 3-4-5 tier final sweep better. I think I'd prefer seeing a second sweep midway through like the UK style has. The running around the market is a big thing for the show and having a second sprint searching for the 5 marked items would be a nice addition. (It would probably lead to the game going 1 group for 1 hour if that was done) 

The review of the rules for the final sweep is nice the first time. By the 9th time, I was FFing through it. This would be a perfect skit to film and have on the website so people are aware of it if they are curious, but not something to fill up air time with every episode. 

[Kromm]

52 minutes ago, Taeolas said:

One big difference that surprised me, was how much North American Branding I depend on. I had no clue for a lot of the answers because the Brands and even the terms are completely different from North American styles. 

It could be different in older UK versions, but the 2019 version (with Rylan Clark) seems to avoid brand names at all costs (other than TESCO, who sponsors the whole thing). It's more about TYPES of items, not brands.  An answer might be "Pickles", but never a brand of pickles, for example. That does make the questions somewhat easier, admittedly. 

I know this aired on ITV, not BBC, but there still might have been rules they had to follow about product placement. Even the TESCO mentions are only in bumper ads outside the episode proper. 

Edited December 21, 2020 by Kromm

[springbarb]

On 12/20/2020 at 5:06 PM, 853fisher said:

I wonder what, if any, opportunity players have to review the store layout before what we see?  If none, I might be tempted to ignore the mini-sweep and run through as many of the aisles as possible to get my bearings while the others are looking for the item.  That is "only" worth 10 seconds and, what, $250?  Maybe I could learn enough to be worth that and more.

I think in the 90s version, teams had something like 10 or 15 minutes to go through the store before filming started to see the layout and figure out what the big ticket items were. Leslie's list that she gives them probably isn't worth going for unless you're going through those sections anyway.

[Yeah No]

Is it only me?  It's beginning to annoy me that it's so easy to go all the way up to a $50,000 win only to lose it all in the blink of an eye on one last question.  I really feel for those people in that situation.  I wish the show would let them keep whatever they won and not make them risk losing it if they chose to try to win more.  Or at least give them another chance to keep it, perhaps by answering one final question.  I'm sure aficionados of the original version(s) are probably attached to the rules because of their history with them, but I am new to this show and have no such attachment.  

[Irlandesa]

Just now, Yeah No said:

Is it only me?  It's beginning to annoy me that it's so easy to go all the way up to a $50,000 win only to lose it all in the blink of an eye on one last question. 

It's frustrating and sad but those are common game show rules.  Gamble to earn more or be happy with less. 

I was shocked the two women kept pushing it.  They were lucky to get to 50K considering they had no time left after the first round.  I don't think I would gamble for the final clue unless I had around 40 seconds.

[Yeah No]

1 minute ago, Irlandesa said:

It's frustrating and sad but those are common game show rules.  Gamble to earn more or be happy with less. 

Common, perhaps, but I don't remember shows where it felt quite this disappointing to me, and there were some that let them keep what they won but just gave them a chance at a big jackpot at the end without risking it all.  Perhaps it's because of how much work and risk they've already put into it that it feels like such a big letdown if they lose it all at the very end.  If they won more during the sweep it wouldn't feel so bad.  Going home with $4,000 or less spit between two people seems like too little for all they've done to earn it.  I guess if you like that kind of thing it won't be that annoying but I admit my views on this have probably changed recently in no small part due to the pandemic and knowing how many people out there right now could really use the money.

[qtpye]

18 hours ago, Yeah No said:

Common, perhaps, but I don't remember shows where it felt quite this disappointing to me, and there were some that let them keep what they won but just gave them a chance at a big jackpot at the end without risking it all.  Perhaps it's because of how much work and risk they've already put into it that it feels like such a big letdown if they lose it all at the very end.  If they won more during the sweep it wouldn't feel so bad.  Going home with $4,000 or less spit between two people seems like too little for all they've done to earn it.  I guess if you like that kind of thing it won't be that annoying but I admit my views on this have probably changed recently in no small part due to the pandemic and knowing how many people out there right now could really use the money.

I thought the Japanese sweet was almost impossible and I am someone who loves Japanese food.

Edited December 25, 2020 by qtpye

[Kromm]

Re: losing everything. 

It's often the default. One example: on "The Wall" they can lose everything (and it can be far more money than this). On another show from both sides of the Atlantic, "The Chase", you could lose all of a fortune. There's many other examples, those two come to mind mostly because I've seen them recently. 

Or if not everything, like "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire" ... you can lose a ton of the money, but not all, depending on what stage you passed.

On older game shows I know losers got parting consolation prizes given by the sponsors. Sometimes it got talked about on air, sometimes not. That might still exist, and this would be the type of show to do it. 

[qtpye]

10 minutes ago, Kromm said:

Re: losing everything. 

It's often the default. One example: on "The Wall" they can lose everything (and it can be far more money than this). On another show from both sides of the Atlantic, "The Chase", you could lose all of a fortune. There's many other examples, those two come to mind mostly because I've seen them recently. 

Or if not everything, like "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire" ... you can lose a ton of the money, but not all, depending on what stage you passed.

On older game shows I know losers got parting consolation prizes given by the sponsors. Sometimes it got talked about on air, sometimes not. That might still exist, and this would be the type of show to do it. 

I think the difference is that the original Supermarket Sweep was just a fun dorky game. The stakes were never life changing amounts. Heck, the biggest prize was only 5K (not even all that much for the 90's).

A sweep amount over $1,000 was considered good money (that could be because of rising grocery prices).

I just felt so bad for those two women...they seemed to be in shock.

[Maverick]

 I can't feel bad for them.  They were given the rules and had a free choice.   They barely made it through the first round (and even then I think if you photo finished it I'm not sure they technically made it).   They should have stopped then.  If 50k or even 25 was a life changing amount they shouldn't have risked it. 

[qtpye]

32 minutes ago, Maverick said:

 I can't feel bad for them.  They were given the rules and had a free choice.   They barely made it through the first round (and even then I think if you photo finished it I'm not sure they technically made it).   They should have stopped then.  If 50k or even 25 was a life changing amount they shouldn't have risked it. 

I agree they knew the rules but such is the way of game shows. They played a strong game (before the final sweep) but left with nothing but what they made in the big sweep. It was a bummer but that was the risk they chose to take.

Edited December 25, 2020 by qtpye

[readster]

2 hours ago, Maverick said:

 I can't feel bad for them.  They were given the rules and had a free choice.   They barely made it through the first round (and even then I think if you photo finished it I'm not sure they technically made it).   They should have stopped then.  If 50k or even 25 was a life changing amount they shouldn't have risked it. 

I agree, after that photo finish, I would have called it quits. The second show, I felt bad for them, they had no idea the final clue and sadly just didn't know where things were. 

[Maverick]

Wrong topic

Edited December 30, 2020 by Maverick

[saber5055]

Players have a choice if they want to keep the $50,000 or gamble to TRY to win $100,000. To gamble on $100,000 is just that, a gamble. Some win, some lose it all. Just like the slots player who puts all his/her winnings back into the slot machine to TRY to win more. It's a choice. Some people are greedy. Some aren't. I have no problem with people losing it all. They do get to keep the money from the inflated prices of the things they put in their shopping carts so they don't go home with zero. Just a couple thou and a deflated ego.

If I had few seconds left and $50,000, I'd color myself lucky and go home.

[853fisher]

Interesting discussion about the stakes and reactions to a big win or loss.  I tend to come down on the "they knew they were taking a gamble, so fair enough" side, but it sure can be disappointing when I liked the team!  I suppose that kind of response, or the thrill on the other side of the coin when they succeed, is what the producers want.  If this were still a daytime game, the stakes could be lower the way we're used to, but ever since "Millionaire" around 20 years ago, the norm has been heightened.  Fortunately I do feel Leslie keeps things pretty light overall.

Although they did well in the game, I wasn't terrifically impressed with the team on the last game who revealed that they had flown in from Tennessee.  I don't believe there has been any time since March that it has been appropriate or wise to cross the country for leisure purposes, and had understood that as a rule these shows were only bringing in contestants who were at least close enough to arrive by private auto.  I accept that reasonable minds may differ about this, but I would prefer not to be reminded of these debates while I'm trying to enjoy a silly game show.  I would have edited that out if I were the producers.

[saber5055]

I missed the point in the topic of $50,000 winners losing everything if they go for the $100,000 and fail. If they are guaranteed to keep whatever amount they've won, of course they all will go for the $100,000 since they will not lose the $50,000 and could have $100,000. There's no fun in that, the enjoyment is watching teams tank. Or, if you like the team, watching them leave with $100,000. I like the all-or-nothing approach.

[Yeah No]

5 hours ago, saber5055 said:

I missed the point in the topic of $50,000 winners losing everything if they go for the $100,000 and fail. If they are guaranteed to keep whatever amount they've won, of course they all will go for the $100,000 since they will not lose the $50,000 and could have $100,000. There's no fun in that, the enjoyment is watching teams tank. Or, if you like the team, watching them leave with $100,000. I like the all-or-nothing approach.

I personally don't enjoy watching anyone "tank".  I realize that's the trend these days since we have entire shows devoted to laughing at other people's misery (such as on TBS) but that's not me.  YMMV.

[Taeolas]

I don't really mind the Lose it All Gambling aspect for going after the higher amounts; there should definitely be some risk for doing that. "The Wall" is a hell of a lot worse for risking it all and/or ultimately not getting what you thought you won. 

That said, I wouldn't mind making the risks more tiered. Something like:

* Get to the Final Sweep, you are guaranteed to win what you swept in the main game. 

* Get the first 3 clues, you win 25k if you walk right away. If you chose to go for the 50k, you'll have a 5k or 10k guarantee still in play (plus what you won earlier)

* Get the 50k clue, you have a 20k guarantee if you go for the 100k, or you can take the 50k right then and there. 

[saber5055]

12 hours ago, Yeah No said:

I realize that's the trend these days since we have entire shows devoted to laughing at other people's misery (such as on TBS) but that's not me.  YMMV.

I don't think shows are devoted to laughing at people's misery, but I can't stop anyone from doing that. I don't laugh when people try for the $100,000 and lose it all. I DO get irritated when the $100,000 clue is for a product I've never heard of, as proven by earlier posts in this thread. That the obscure clue makes it impossible for the team to get it, THAT'S what makes me cranky, not that the team didn't know it or didn't win the money.

If I win $20 at a slot, I leave. My friend puts it all back in for the "fun" of trying to win, and she leaves with nothing. It's up to the contestants to decide to leave or not. It's great if they come out with the most money possible, but if they lose, that was their decision. Only they know how much they need the money ... or don't need the money.

I don't watch shows that make fun of contestants. I don't even know what those shows are.

Edited January 8, 2021 by saber5055

[Yeah No]

7 hours ago, Taeolas said:

I don't really mind the Lose it All Gambling aspect for going after the higher amounts; there should definitely be some risk for doing that. "The Wall" is a hell of a lot worse for risking it all and/or ultimately not getting what you thought you won. 

That said, I wouldn't mind making the risks more tiered. Something like:

* Get to the Final Sweep, you are guaranteed to win what you swept in the main game. 

* Get the first 3 clues, you win 25k if you walk right away. If you chose to go for the 50k, you'll have a 5k or 10k guarantee still in play (plus what you won earlier)

* Get the 50k clue, you have a 20k guarantee if you go for the 100k, or you can take the 50k right then and there. 

I like your ideas!  At least keep a partial prize if you make it to the final round, and not just what you won in the first round.

[853fisher]

Not much buzz around the show this season, it seems.

I haven’t minded the switch away from “all or nothing” in the bonus round, but as one might have predicted, some of the riddles seem tougher to me.

Most everything else seems the same. The only thing I really dislike is the game where you’re asked to guess the combined price of two items. The trouble is that they give no info about quantity or size. It’s just “peanut butter and marshmallows” or “soup and detergent” and it drives me up the wall!

[Yeah No]

4 minutes ago, 853fisher said:

Not much buzz around the show this season, it seems.

I haven’t minded the switch away from “all or nothing” in the bonus round, but as one might have predicted, some of the riddles seem tougher to me.

Most everything else seems the same. The only thing I really dislike is the game where you’re asked to guess the combined price of two items. The trouble is that they give no info about quantity or size. It’s just “peanut butter and marshmallows” or “soup and detergent” and it drives me up the wall!

That plus with the way grocery prices are going up these days it's hard to keep up!

Despite that I would have won every round of this game.  Don't know why but I'm the idiot savant of grocery prices going way back to my childhood watching "The Price is Right".

I also seem to be unusually skilled at guessing the words without the vowels on those receipts.  Unless the people playing the game are unusually dumb, LOL.

[hiisa]

Did anyone see the most recent episode? Karange did such a terrible job! I was shocked they made it to the sweep at all the way the shopper wandered the aisles but Im not shocked at how TERRIBLE they did in the sweep. Ive never seen anyone do so poorly in the sweep. 

[Taeolas]

Yeah, they had a full minute advantage on the sweep and still only eeked out the win, and then wiffed on the bonus sweep at the end. 

Granted I couldn't remember the answer to the first clue ("Chinette") but I knew it had to be paper plates. I just didn't really know where to find it. But with 90 seconds I probably could have narrowed it down enough (Somewhere near the paper products normally would be my first guess; and these seemed to be with the paper towel)

 

On a different note, is anyone else REALLY tired with how Leslie treats the "staff" in the supermarket? All that shouting and screaming would brand her as a Sucky Manager in most places, and would probably be classified as harassment in a non-scripted environment.  I know it's part of her comedy character; but it is really turning me off the show. 

[Maverick]

 No, not the only one.  I tuned into the first episode of the season hoping they tweaked some things from season one.  But if anything they doubled down on them.   More shouting, more "look at me!" contestants and triple the doofus employees.   Not it's not just insecurity guard Neal, but there's the drippy coffee lady and the mam's boy checker.  I know Leslie's schtick is being LOUD and it's ok in small doses but she does it for the whole show.  And I really hate the way she says "doilers".  It stopped being about half way through the second episode of season one.   I gave it another try this week because nothing else was on and still annoying.  In the final sweep with Team How the Fuck Did You Get on the Show Much Less End Up In the Final Sweep, Leslie was actually much more subdued.  If she's act more like that 90% with her trademark personality the rest of the time she'd actually make a really good game show host.   

[qtpye]

Yes, instead of the insultingly stupid employees, they should double down on the narration of how much things cost during the big sweep. Anyone remember Gold Wrapped Hams?

Like, I had no idea those Yeti coolers were $300.