TAR Suggestion Box

[Kromm]

I think our TAR should take a page out of the latest TAR Australia playbook.  What they've done there is have a Australia vs. New Zealand season, with an equal number of teams from each country, and I think that could be emulated with a US vs. Canada project.

 

It's cool, because while the basic rules of the race don't change, they can add in "country challenges" for various perks or punishments. 

 

What stuff would you like to see on TAR? (or definitely NOT see)

[Haleth]

Before the Brains, Brawn, Beauty thing I'd always thought it would be fun to have teams of people in the same or similar professions; military, first responders, teachers, medical professionals for example.  (But no aspiring actors, models, or bartenders.)  The BBB gimmick did a broad interpretation of that.

Edited August 19, 2014 by Haleth

[Sharpie66]

I really liked it when TAR:Canada started off their first season by having the racers drive elsewhere in the starting city to complete a task before they even got to the airport.

[SnideAsides]

TAR Australia vs. New Zealand was a total failure, so... not going to happen. Which is a shame, because I could totally get behind an all-star season that's half US teams (without the "only from the last returnee season onwards" rule, if for no other reason than I'm still pissed about Ken & Gerard losing their spot to Kevin & Drew) and half all-stars from the non-US seasons. Literally the best of both worlds: existing fanbases to build on AND new people to advertise.

 

There's one really simple change they could make to improve the show for free though: Start telling us how far it is between destinations again. The semiotics fan in me doesn't think it's that much of a coincidence that we got a run of bad seasons - 13, 14 (which, honestly, popular but kind of racist?), 15, and 16 - right around the time they stopped doing it and changed the graphics so the entire world could fit in the credits logo. I mean, it was literally the reality show version of the Beatles saying they were Bigger Than Jesus. Bringing that little bit back, at the cost of... what, six seconds of Phil voiceover per episode... would help make the show feel more epic again and help explain why Detours are sometimes so lopsided. Imagine the fun that could have been had at teams' expense in TAR21's Russian library book/synchronised swimming Detour, for example, if they'd told us the library was a short walk across Red Square away while the pool was ten kilometres away on Moscow's congested roads.

[NutMeg]

Seeing how the Canadian version has plenty of fans, I'll bring up the Asian version, which for once I've enjoyed more that the US version. Sure it had its flaws, but the cast was more diverse, the challenges more, well, challenging, and I was never mad with the winners! It's now been on the shelve for a while because the host is hosting the China version, but TBH when it was on I liked it way better that the US version, which I found rather lackluster in comparison. Obviously, I'm still here, but the editing/new features seem to copy Survivor more and more, and I liked TAR better when it was its own show. YMMVv, etc.   

[Lantern7]

Here's this week's description:

 

The race continues in London where teams try to win an Express Pass, but some pairs chances are capsized while boating in a punt in Oxford, England.

 

It looks like the Express Pass is here to stay, though I'm hoping they don't include a bonus for another team. What I'd like to see: Phil offer a winning team the Pass or a sponsor prize. And maybe sweeten the pot by making it, say, an all-inclusive package. Or $10,000 after taxes per person.

 

I'd also like to see the Fast Forward offered on every leg, though I can see why that wouldn't be feasible this days. I feel it offered a strategic element to the game.

[SnideAsides]

Actually, I think the way they handled the Express Pass this time could work for the Fast Forward. Just switch the cryptic clue and regular clue, so the one that takes a little bit of time to work out goes to the Fast Forward and the simple one goes to the next destination on the regular route. As long as the clues aren't too easy (or require a bit of a Detour from the main course), that would work really well as a way to bring back the Fast Forward.

[NutMeg]

Or $10,000 after taxes per person.

 

Just a pet peeve of mine, but isn't CBS cheap for not having taken inflation into account for all these years? There was a website mentioned to on TWOP that I didn't save, but really with all the money they're making (show still being around is proof enough), why has the ultimate reward stayed the same for so long? Round number is all fine and dandy, but more dollars would be even better, no?.  

[Bouquet]

How about a race where a team is only eliminated if there are more than three teams left and they check-in to a pitstop later than (say) 12 hours after the race leader? Teams remaining at the start of the final (double?) leg would be equalized, but perhaps handicapped based on their finishing order (like how finals playoffs are done in sports).

 

Pros:

• Fairer on teams: A better chance of not being eliminated by one mistake, and consistent good work can build a lead or claw back a deficit.
• A longer time for viewers to get to know teams and follow their favourites.
• A chance of an exciting large scramble for the finish line.

 

Cons:

• Check-in/Phil logistics are more tricky. May be OK if the elim max lag is no more than 12 hours.
• Task prep and operation is more tricky, with an unknown number of teams needing to be accomodated over a possibly extended time period.
• Elimination drama is not as episodic.

Edited December 19, 2014 by Bouquet

[Jac]

TAR Australia vs. New Zealand was a total failure, so... not going to happen. Which is a shame, because I could totally get behind an all-star season that's half US teams (without the "only from the last returnee season onwards" rule, if for no other reason than I'm still pissed about Ken & Gerard losing their spot to Kevin & Drew) and half all-stars from the non-US seasons. Literally the best of both worlds: existing fanbases to build on AND new people to advertise.

 

I think the major reason TAR Aus v NZ failed was not because of a fundamental problem with the idea but the way it was implemented in an Aus v NZ context. The biggest problem was that Australia and NZ are too similar to create any real tension based on cultural difference. A US v Canada version could work though because there are subtle but fundamental cultural differences that could really play into the way the race is played and create genuine tension.

[shok]

 

A US v Canada version could work though because there are subtle but fundamental cultural differences that could really play into the way the race is played and create genuine tension.

 

That definitely would be interesting. I'd love to see Natalie and Meaghan from last season's TARCanada on to see if they would dominate like they did on their own race. I think racing against the U.S. would get their competitive juices pumping like it does in hockey. ;)

[lianau]

I have a few issues with the double u-turn (which is better than the single u-turn , but still...) . I think it would be better if teams didn't  know at the beginning of a leg that a u-turn is coming up . Less chances for u-turn politics a la  season 21 or tried this season . I also think TPTB should not follow this pattern:  roadblock , detour , u-turn , it only means that there is no chance for recovery for the u-turned team(s). Start with a detour  and have the roadblock afterwards or have the pit stop be further away with a self driving challenge to get there 

[Quilt Fairy]

I've been thinking about how the Express Pass and now the Save end up going to strong teams that really don't need them. I  think it would be interesting if every team got an Express Pass right out of the gate, one get out jail free card to use when they wished. That would bring in some of the strategy that used to be involved with the Fast Forwards back in the olden days.

[Lingo]

I also think TPTB should not follow this pattern:  roadblock , detour , u-turn , it only means that there is no chance for recovery for the u-turned team(s). Start with a detour  and have the roadblock afterwards or have the pit stop be further away with a self driving challenge to get there 

 

I largely agree with this.  At least with the second U-turn this season, they did have that "find the correct Sea-Lion" task which took up a lot of time and was largely random.  I think that was included to give a U-turned team a chance to catch up with the rest of the pack.

 

I've been thinking about how the Express Pass and now the Save end up going to strong teams that really don't need them. I  think it would be interesting if every team got an Express Pass right out of the gate, one get out jail free card to use when they wished. That would bring in some of the strategy that used to be involved with the Fast Forwards back in the olden days.

 

I really like this idea.  However, a big part of the drama of the Race is seeing a team struggle with a hard task (especially if they choose the wrong person to do a roadblock).  Also, what if several teams still have their Express Pass on the last leg they can play it? It could drain a lot of the drama out of the episode.  Maybe they should have a rule that only one team is allowed to skip any particular task.

[Camera One]

Maybe they could introduce a Switch-Partner pass instead of an Express Pass, as in the two partners could trade off, if they realize that the task is more suited to the other person.

Edited December 21, 2014 by Camera One

[SnideAsides]

No more theme seasons. Ever. Family Edition didn't work. All-Stars 1 didn't work. Unfinished Business didn't work. All-Stars 2 didn't work. And now next season? Who the fuck watched the two All-Stars seasons and thought "These are good, but you know what they need? More teams like Eric and Danielle and Mark and Mallory!"

[Quilt Fairy]

Instead of an All-Stars season, I'd like to see what I call a 'Second Chance' season. It would have only teams that were eliminated early in their season. What can I say? I'm a sucker for an underdog.

[Camera One]

Instead of an All-Stars season, I'd like to see what I call a 'Second Chance' season. It would have only teams that were eliminated early in their season. What can I say? I'm a sucker for an underdog.

 

They can't help it though.  They will call the season that, and then we will see the Cowboys and the Globetrotters, and now, with our luck, probably the Wrestlers.

[backformore]

I would love a rule that the racers are not allowed to use or even touch a computer, smartphone, tablet, etc. They can ask locals for help, and the locals can look things up for them, but they cannot use any of these devices themselves.

One team in a cab using, I assume, the driver's phone to give the driver directions, bugged me. I liked it better when they had to rely on luck that they find a driver who knew the location.

[Lantern7]

I'm okay with theme seasons . . . or at least bringing back teams. The "dating couples" theme sounds like a disaster, but I'm hoping it'll work out because the show deserves to still be on the air.

 

Out of curiosity, what TAR25 teams would you want to bring back? In order of preference:

 

The Field: Defined as "eliminated teams one through six." I mean, do we need to see Michael & Scott again, even if the one guy's injury might have held them back? Also, there would be fans of the show that would have killed to have done the ox task . . . or at least mock-lamented having a "broken" ox.

 

Adam & Bethany: Who knows what could have happened if they swapped Roadblocks in the final leg? They're low on the list because they're way too mellow, at least in contrast to the intensity of the other teams.

 

Amy & Maya:  I know, only one pair of champions have ever had to prove themselves on an "all star" season. I figure if the Beekmans don't come back, these two should. Also, how much better could they be if Amy isn't hurt? And Phil might employ a "NO TOUCHING!!!!" rule strictly for Maya.

 

Brooke & Robbie: If you tilt your head, they got hosed. It's a matter of opinion . . . but you figure if they get back together, it would beat Brooke stalking Phil with a steel chair. Besides, it would be like having an evil version of John Vito & Jill. It might be intriguing.

 

Misti & Jim: They're here for overachieving . . . though I'd hate to be nervous about Jim blowing a gasket this time around. For pity's sake, man! Blink!!!

 

Kym & Alli: They should get an automatic invite back. If they decline to go for the Fast Forward, they might have eliminated the Scientists. Also, they like having fun in their downtime. If they don't snap at each other, they're fun to watch.

[Camera One]

How about a season themed "Meltdown From The Past"?  From this season, they could invite that Mother/Daughter team back.  (Just kidding, by the way).

Edited December 27, 2014 by Camera One

[curbcrusher]

Sleepless nights, and what do you get. A post to the suggestion box. I had three:

 

1) Take the map of the US and cut off all states that touch the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. TAR, these are the states you can start and end the race in for the next 25 seasons. If LA or NY never are shown again, its too soon.

 

2) Hows this for a theme - Fan designed legs. During each race run a contest for designing a leg to be used in the following season. Winner gets to greet at the mat with Phil. Gives the show an additional promotion opportunities during each season and rewards the fans.

 

3) Introduce the Lanterne Rouge elimination. Phil seems to like bike racing, Lanterne Rouge is the name used for the slowest rider in the Tour De France. At the end of each leg, the cumulative race time is calculated and the teams are aware of their overall standing, the last team is the Lanterne Rouge. At some leg, preferable one where there is a bunch and they all finish close so that all can be on are near the mat, the Lanterne Rouge elimination takes place. "Lucky team, you were the second to arrive, but lets be honest your racing is atrocious and others have been carrying you all along. You took the 4 hour penalty in the first leg and are a total of 7 hours behind the next closest team. That has come back to bite you here in leg 7.  You are eliminated."   I like this because it introduces a bit of a stage race strategy into the show. A team has to care about where they place from the start until the Lanterne Rouge elimination takes place.

[TheRabbi]

I love the idea of the "Lanterne Rouge" elimination.  As mentioned, it would make teams never have to let up for a second, even if they know they're ahead, as you never know when your cumulative time would come back to bite you.  I think they would need to enforce it from whenever the real meat of the leg begins, whether it be when the team's flight lands, when the HoO equalizes the start of the leg, etc., as it would be unfair for the first few teams if they had time tacked on simply because they had to wait for the equalizing flight/HoO when the last few teams could start a leg and hop on a quick flight with all the other teams (and we know production is getting more and more geared towards getting everyone always on the same flight).

 

I'd be a much tougher sell on the idea of 7 teams running a full race.  I think you still need the suspense of someone [maybe] getting eliminated every week and trying not be last.  Would there be a speed bump every week?  We know they're all getting on the same flight to the final city anyway, so what would really be the incentive to play well early?  And I think it would lose "appointment viewing" status if viewers knew that no one is getting eliminated so they can just watch the finale to see who wins instead of watching every week to see who goes home.

 

As for this season's potential returnees, I'd love to see Amy and Maya back, but if we're sticking with a no-winners rule, there's still plenty of other options.

 

Kym and Alli should be absolute shoe-ins.  It's not often the show gets a really strong, competent, entertaining all-female team.  This is obviously highly debatable, but IMO, before these two was probably the s21 Twinnies, and before that you'd have to go back to Jen and Kisha, or maybe all the way back to Dustin and Kandice (I didn't find Nat and Kat to be that memorable).

 

The couples that came in 2nd, 3rd, and 4th could all have cases to be brought back, but personally I'd like to see them back in exactly that order.  Misti and Jim would be first up, as they were very strong, fierce competitors which casting likes.  Adam and Bethany were a hit, though their most direct comparaison may be Kris and Jon, who were not invited back, as a couple who was always so lovey-dovey that they  never created the drama that the show desires.  And I'd personally never like to see the wrestlers back, but we know casting likes the more colorful and artificial types sometimes, so they're certainly candidates.

 

As much as I wouldn't mind seeing some early boots come back who were clearly big fans of the show, like Lisa/Michelle, Dennis/Isabelle, and Shelley/Nici, I don't see it happening.  S/N would be the best chance, as their meltdown in Denmark was pretty epic.

[SnideAsides]

Except the problem with the Lanterne Rouge idea is the team with the slowest overall time is already in last place, since Pit Stops are always the same length for every team.

[backformore]

I'd like fewer teams, and having no elimination the first leg.   Id rather get to know the teams a little bit more before eliminations.  

I'd also like if they had to stick to wearing a "team color".  I know they do this, but it's not consistent, and I end up getting the individuals confused with each other the first few legs.  

[Jersey Guy 87]

Except the problem with the Lanterne Rouge idea is the team with the slowest overall time is already in last place, since Pit Stops are always the same length for every team.

Exactly.  There's a staggered start to each leg of the race, representing the relative positions of the teams.  Whoever is last on a given leg has the slowest cumulative time.

 

The other problem with this idea is forced bunching because of HOO and flight/travel schedules.  Team A starts the leg at 8 AM and goes to the airport where the next flight is at 4 PM.  Team B starts the leg at noon and gets on the same flight.  When they land at their destination Team A has "spent" four hours more racing than Team B even if those entire 4 hours were spent waiting in the airport for a flight.  If everyone started the next leg at the same time this might make sense, but they don't.

[Netfoot]

Waiting for transportation is inevitable, and a reflection of real life. 

 

In earlier seasons, there was far more airport drama as teams searched for better flights, sometimes successfully and sometimes with disastrous results.  Fans complained about excessive airport drama and now we have far less of it, but this means far more spoonfed flights.  But if you spoonfeed the flights, you prevent front-runners from catching an earlier flight, so essentially you are encouraging transportation bunching.  Also, if you know that spoonfeeding is an acceptable norm, this could make it practical for race-setters to route the race to places where spoonfeeding is unavoidable.

 

On top of all that, add the convenience (to production) of not worrying about teams accidentally heading off to New Zealand when they are supposed to be going to Christ Church in Barbados. 

 

I think spoonfeeding is frequently unavoidable, and frequently desirable, at least from production's point of view.  Also, if you put the teams in an airport with ten different options for reaching their destination, they are well enough versed in TAR lore that for the most part they will all end up on the best flight anyhow.

 

So, I think travel bunching is unavoidable -- as is HOO bunching -- and there really isn't any way to compensate for it.  But since it is a natural part of travel I accept that leading teams will face a loss of their lead as a result and don't consider it "unfair".  Life is not fair.

[Camera One]

So, I think travel bunching is unavoidable -- as is HOO bunching -- and there really isn't any way to compensate for it.  But since it is a natural part of travel I accept that leading teams will face a loss of their lead as a result and don't consider it "unfair".  Life is not fair.

 

Hopefully, their advantage is in getting more rest, having some time to plan ahead (eg. looking at maps beforehand, getting to know their surroundings, etc.), and generally having a longer lower-stress breather.

[Maverick]

 Unless there's something I'm missing, just coming in last doesn't mean you're last on a cumulative basis.  If at the end of the 5th leg Team A is cumulatively 4 hours ahead of Team B, Team B arrives second to last and Team A arrives 2 hours later, then Team B is still eliminated because they didn't make up their cumulative deficit between the next team up.  

 

 As for travel time and HoO, I assume this type of scoring would count the time from Pit Stop Departure to Pit Stop Arrival. 

[auntlada]

Unless there's something I'm missing, just coming in last doesn't mean you're last on a cumulative basis.  If at the end of the 5th leg Team A is cumulatively 4 hours ahead of Team B, Team B arrives second to last and Team A arrives 2 hours later, then Team B is still eliminated because they didn't make up their cumulative deficit between the next team up.  

 

 As for travel time and HoO, I assume this type of scoring would count the time from Pit Stop Departure to Pit Stop Arrival.

But in that case, the first teams would probably have slower times from pit start to pit stop because of the times they have to wait for flights or things to open. They might be racing for 4-5 hours or more in any given leg than the last team to leave.

Regardless of the mechanics, though, I don't think I would like the Lanterne Rouge method of elimination. Except for the save -- which should be eliminated itself -- I like the eliminations the way they are. I originally liked the plan not to give the not-eliminated teams money on their next leg, so that those who had not wasted money came out OK, but it didn't seem to work very well. (I did not like the mugging. I just wanted teams to budget carefully.)

[hincandenza]

I actually adore the "Lanterne Rouge" method, although I didn't know until today it had a name.  I've long wished for a TAR where the eliminated team is both surprising and unsurprising: surprising in that it's not necessarily the last team to reach the Pit Stop in any given leg, but unsurprising in that it would mean a season of TAR that kept us apprised of the combined times so we were aware of who is closest to the chopping block, and the tension as we see teams' total times jockey back and forth for position.

 

Ah, but that would be dramatic irony: we the audience would know, but the teams would not, so they'd have every incentive to race hard, every moment of every leg, because yeah you might be ahead of Team X right now, but if you were 17 minutes behind Team X collectively over the previous legs, you might actually be behind overall and up for elimination!  Ergo: RAAAAAACE!!!! 

 

We could even get more Philimination Tension, since each episode one or more teams may be told "You are the 4th team (of 6) to arrive.... but this is an elimination leg, and you are currently the last team in terms of total overall time (cue onscreen graphic showing them say 17 minutes behind team #5)."  Their clock stops since they've reached the Pit Stop, but they don't know if they're even still in the race, and will linger at the Pit Stop biting their nails as the editors cut back and forth between the two teams still running so we don't quite know if that last place team will in fact still be in it.  Maybe we don't even tell them how far back or what place, just like with penalties when some amount of time that the racers can't see has elapsed Phil simply turns and says "Okay, you are now officially team #4!".

 

 

Forced Bunching in a Cumulative Time Race:

The biggest issue with loose form of leg construction and elimination is the need for forced bunching, which does serve a vital purpose both dramatic and editorial.  There was that early season when Myrna & Charla got amazing plane + HOO luck, such that they were the only team that would be able to reach the challenge that day... so the show I believe intervened by having the boat captain claim incoming storms would keep him moored up (cut to mostly sunny, cloudless sky) lest one team become a full calendar day ahead of the rest and effectively uncatchable for the remainder of the race.  But in a Lanterne Rouge type race, you could still have longer pit stops or plane bunchings to avoid those scenarios in the more difficult country-to-country trips where there's basically one good flight a day in or out, and a 10 minute difference in travel time suddenly becomes a 12 hour difference on the leg.  Those bunching operations don't become a sort of "necessary tax on success" pushing good teams back into the pack.  Rather, the better teams retain their cumulative lead even with a bunching operation, and are the ones that consistently drive/navigate faster, finish challenges quicker, and get less panicked/off course, time and again.  So that plane bunch no longer matters when necessary for race/organizational reasons: the lead time is still N minutes ahead of other teams, and they only lose that when those other teams begin consistently outperforming them in the ensuing legs to erase that accrued lead. 

 

It should stand to reason that such a race design wouldn't use gimmicks like FF, Express Pass, Save, or U-Turns both because they are impractical and also because I am a race purist that thinks other teams shouldn't be able to directly affect your race time. :)  I also think it wouldn't be as complex as it may sound: all you care about, the ONLY number you care about, is the "Cumulative time", easily displayed as a ticking clock chyron next to teams names, possibly with a second "This Leg" clock, and omitted in those times when the Amazing Editors wish to preserve dramatic tension.

 

 

Complex Legs:

Plus, TAR would be free to do harder, even puzzle-based, challenges and multi-day or multi-city legs (edited down to a single televised hour of course) with more impunity.  For an example leg, we have a plane bunch that heads to a new city landing mid-to-late morning, and then presents each team with a simplistic, even puzzle-like map of the current city with say five landmarks they should seek out.  They are free to visit these landmarks in any order they choose, using any mode of transportation they want/can afford, but at each they'll be looking for a cluebox that gives them a little history of the place they're in as well as a clue hinting them to the location of the trinket in a nearby location such as a famous shop or business, or statue, or whatever.  They find each trinket, which has a single letter underneath it, and once they've found 5 trinkets they rearrange those letters in some obvious way to spell a code word which along with the trinkets gains them access to the first Roadblock challenge of the leg, specifically unlimited by HOO, and after successful completion of that task their clock stops and their day ends, having incremented the time from the plane touching down through the moment they finished the Roadblock- we'll call that "Time-A".  Teams could spend a highly variable number of hours getting their trinkets and solving their puzzle, such that they never cross paths at the Roadblock challenge and literally have no idea what place they're in after day 1.

 

The team is given a voucher off-camera to go find a place to sleep if they choose (perhaps even offer a cash award if they decline and choose to rough it, spendable as desired on future legs), then are required to start day 2 at say no earlier than 7:00am the next morning- so a bunch, but one where the teams that finished faster get more rest and a shorter "Time-A".  At this time they'll be handed their next clue detailing one of two Detour challenge locations on basically opposite sides of the city, or possibly in a nearby city/area reachable by a multitude of travel options, each with their pros and cons.  Since the time bunch occurs, the teams will see each other again during the race, but unless they told the truth the night before no one knows who is where.  Once they've found and completed their Detour challenge, they navigate to another location containing a Memory Challenge of their current city (covering the history and trivia they'd have learned at various landmarks and challenges they visited) which when completed earns them their clue to the Pit Stop.  Questions that they get wrong repeatedly can be Passed... for a time penalty, of course.  From wake up time to Pit Stop time on day 2 is "Time-B", thus adding "Time-A" + "Time-B" is the total leg completion time.  When added to their running total, it's the slowest cumulative team that gets eliminated at the Pit Stop.

 

Easy way to get lots of cool city footage, avoids penalizing successful teams with necessary show-driven bunching points, makes for a city challenge that will naturally create more spacing and variability, and the team's tasks become balanced between navigation, riding public/private transportation, self-driving, memory, and prioritization of tasks, detour choices, or participants.

 

 

So yeah, in my usual verbose way, I'm a big fan of this "Lanterne Rouge" model for TAR. :)

[Netfoot]

Sorry, but I obviously don't quite understand this Lantern Rouge business.

 

Providing everybody gets a pitstop of equal duration -- 12 hours or any other length -- it should not be possible to get a higher cumulative time without a corresponding placement in the current leg.  Every elimination in the history of TAR has been a Lantern Rouge elimination, whether it's been called that or not.  Bilal & Sa'eed and now Brooke and Robbie, seeing as they didn't get eliminated at a pitstop, may be exceptions, but I don't actually think they are and it's too late for me to think hard enough so as to be sure.

 

Example:  If at the end of the 5th leg, Team A is cumulatively 3 hours behind TeamB, then TeamA will also be checking in at the leg#5 pitstop 3 hours behind TeamB.  If then, TeamA completes leg#6 in 12 hours and TeamB takes 16 hours, then TeamB will now be cumulatively one hour behind and will also arrive at leg#6 pitstop one hour behind.

 

Cumulative separation and end-of-leg separation must always be identical.  The only way it could be otherwise is if pitstops were not of equal length.  (Say the teams all began each leg together, so the last (but one) team to arrive would get a shorter pitstop so as to restart the next leg at the same time as the first team to arrive.)  Equal-length pitstops have been a given for 25 seasons, and despite the recent tendency to make changes, I think it would be very unwise to change that.  Especially if the sole purpose of that change were to introduce some new, sharp-stick-in-the-eye type of elimination, just for the draaaaama!

 

Edited to say that other than unequal-length pitstops, another way would be not to time from pitstop to pitstop.

Edited January 3, 2015 by Netfoot

[hincandenza]

Sorry, but I obviously don't quite understand this Lantern Rouge business.

 

Providing everybody gets a pitstop of equal duration -- 12 hours or any other length -- it should not be possible to get a higher cumulative time without a corresponding placement in the current leg.  Every elimination in the history of TAR has been a Lantern Rouge elimination, whether it's been called that or not.  Bilal & Sa'eed and now Brooke and Robbie, seeing as they didn't get eliminated at a pitstop, may be exceptions, but I don't actually think they are and it's too late for me to think hard enough so as to be sure.

 

Example:  If at the end of the 5th leg, Team A is cumulatively 3 hours behind TeamB, then TeamA will also be checking in at the leg#5 pitstop 3 hours behind TeamB.  If then, TeamA completes leg#6 in 12 hours and TeamB takes 16 hours, then TeamB will now be cumulatively one hour behind and will also arrive at leg#6 pitstop one hour behind.

 

Cumulative separation and end-of-leg separation must always be identical.  The only way it could be otherwise is if pitstops were not of equal length.  (Say the teams all began each leg together, so the last (but one) team to arrive would get a shorter pitstop so as to restart the next leg at the same time as the first team to arrive.)  Equal-length pitstops have been a given for 25 seasons, and despite the recent tendency to make changes, I think it would be very unwise to change that.  Especially if the sole purpose of that change were to introduce some new, sharp-stick-in-the-eye type of elimination, just for the draaaaama!

 

Edited to say that other than unequal-length pitstops, another way would be not to time from pitstop to pitstop.

 

What you say (highlighted by the bold portions) is true only if there is a) never a NEL, and b) there are never any artificial bunch points due to flights, hours of operation, or producer request capable of erasing an existing lead entirely.  That's the key point: on the race currently, while when I show up at the Pit Stop 30 minutes ahead of you I get to leave 30 minutes later after the equal pit stop time, if we then go to a place that tells us the exact same bunched flight we're to go to next... my lead is gone, like it never happened.  In my comment above, I went on to add that the idea of legs spanning 2+ days in a city is more palatable with cumulative time, because now the mid-leg HOO that first night doesn't negate the whole first half of the leg.

 

To me the absolute purest form of TAR would be all the teams taking off at the starting line, zero bunches or groupings, and every now and then the last team to hit a Pit Stop/12 hour mandatory wait would find Phil there to give them the bad news.  Truly an "Around the World in 80 Days" type of race... and near impossible to manage, because the growing distance between teams would make for logistical nightmares in terms of having teams on separate continents checking in at the same time, not to mention the lack of drama no matter how you edited the individual episodes if one team is literally a day behind.  Cumulative time fixes that, allowing success and standing to be as close to the Ideal Race as possible while still keeping teams in the same place for filming purposes.

 

Under Cumulative Time, once you start on leg 1 your overall clock is running and it is very much possible to check in after another team on a given leg and yet still be ahead of them because of cumulative time.  In the hypothetical I gave earlier, the producers used flight and HOO bunching to ensure the teams would be around each other and in the same city at the same time... yet still allowed for the teams to be widely separated by time for elimination purposes.  Better still, the teams wouldn't actually know for sure how close or far they were, so they'd never slack or let up or engage in any alliance trickery; you never know if two minutes to take a pee break is what got you eliminated from TAR.

 

For example, let's say I'm on team X, and we're an incredibly good team- freakishly, historically good, in fact we've won the first 5 legs on TAR in our season so far, by no less than an hour a leg minimum.  Here we are on leg 6, and we're once again killing it on navigation and direction following, we're killing it on every single challenge, just continuing our run of awesomeness.  In fact, we've practically lapped the field even on this leg... and then BAM, our taxi gets a flat while out in the middle of nowhere.  We have no choice, so we wait 40 minutes for a spare/tow but then find out the guy brought the wrong tire size or forgot a tool, so we have to wait 20 more minutes for a new cab to show up, and all because of a single flat tire way outside of our control, we end up checking in last at the Pit Stop.

 

In this scenario today, we'd be last, and if this is an elimination leg, going 5 for 5 on the first five legs means nothing.  Using cumulative time however, our collective excellence keeps us in the running over one bad day.  Since we paced the field by at least one hour per leg, then in addition to any leg rewards we get the real reward: unless we checked in 5+ hours later than the last team on this leg, we're cumulatively WAY ahead of at least one team.  No saves, no U-Turns, no lucky NEL or bunches, and no heartbreaking eliminations of great teams... just pure skill.  If your race time is ever the worst cumulatively when you reach a Pit Stop, then you are truly the weakest team so far, by any objective measure...

 

... which I'd argue is exactly how it should be.  A team could theoretically finish 1st every single leg, and yet still not make the finale if they get a single bad taxi driver at the one wrong time.  Boom, weeks of literal perfection, gone.  Someone earlier explained how there can be at least two meanings to "fair": one meaning is "consistently and evenly applied", such as fair laws, or fair rules that apply to all teams equally, which is the case on TAR today.  There is another meaning which implies "inherently just" in a greater social sense, such as we might discuss tax laws, or alimony/child support laws, or mandatory minimum sentencing, etc- all things which presume a greater moral purpose.  In this case, the moral purpose is to establish a truly fair and meaningful race that remains filmable and entertainingly dramatic to watch.  Cumulative Time- or the Lanterne Rouge- would allow this almost perfectly while adding interesting personal drama among contestants who have less certainty about their position at any given time in the Race.

[Netfoot]

What you say (highlighted by the bold portions) is true only if there is a) never a NEL, and b) there are never any artificial bunch points due to flights, hours of operation, or producer request capable of erasing an existing lead entirely..

 

Sorry, but none of that makes any difference at all.  So long as the time is counted from pitstart to pitstop, and the duration of the pitstop is equal for all, then at any pitstop, any team's cumulative lead will exactly equal their lead for the current leg.  Even if Phil awards a penalty of X minutes before they can check in, that penalty will add equally to the cumulative time and also to the check-in time for the current leg.

 

Let us look at TeamX, who is freakishly good, and has won each of the first five legs by an hour.  They are so freakishly consistent that they took exactly 10 hours per leg for each of the first five legs, for a total of 50 hours. On each leg, they arrived one hour ahead of TeamZ.  TeamX and TeamZ left the start at the same time, but TeamX arrived at the first pitstop after only 10 hours, whereas TeamZ arrived after 11 hours.  TeamX leg-lead is one hour, and their cumulative lead is one hour.

 

After a 12-hour pitstop, TeamX starts leg#2 at hour 22, runs for 10 hours and arrives at the second pitstop at hour 32.  TeamZ restarts at hour 23, arrives at the pitstop one hour behind TeamX at hour 33, having completed leg#2 in 33-23=10 hours.  TeamX now has a cumulative time of 20 hours, and a cumulative lead of one hour, as well as a leg-lead of one hour.

 

After another 12 hour pitstop, TeamX starts leg#3 at hour 44, runs a 10-hour leg and finishes at hour 54.  TeamZ starts leg#3 at hour 45, arrives an hour after TeamX at hour 55, having raced for 55-45=10 hours.  TeamX has a cumulative time is 10+10+10=30 hours, while TeamZ now has a cumulative time of 11+10+10=31 hours.  TeamX's leg-lead of one hour, exactly equals their cumulative lead of one hour.

 

Leg#4, TeamX starts at hour 56, races for 10 hours and wins by an hour for the fourth time in a row, checking in at 66 for 10+10+10+10=40 hours.  TeamZ starts at hour 57, finishes an hour behind TeamX at hour 67, racing for 10 hours, cumulative time 11+10+10+10=41 hours.  TeamX's leg-lead is one hour, cumulative lead is one hour.

 

In leg#5, TeamX depart at hour 78 but get screwed by a bad taxi and arrive two hours later than expected, thus ending up one hour behind at the mat.  Their cumulative time is 10+10+10+10+12 = 52, and they finish at hour 90.  TeamZ starts at hour 79, finishes an hour before TeamX at hour 89 completing the leg in 10 hours for a cumulative time of 11+10+10+10+10=51.  TeamX is now one hour behind in the leg, and also one hour behind cumulatively.  Lantern Rouge rules make absolutely no difference. 

 

Note that it doesn't matter one little bit that leg#2 was a NEL, or that at the start of leg#3 there was an airport bunch that put TeamX and TeamY on the same plane.

Edited January 3, 2015 by Netfoot

[auntlada]

I think we've entered math kudzu land, which is a good enough reason for me not to do a lanterne rouge. I think it would be way too confusing for viewers. If it's that complicated to explain here, it's too complicated to explain in a one-hour show.

[hincandenza]

It's really not remotely hard you guys, you just keep track of total time in the race and show it on screen.  A team's individual clock starts when they rip open their first clue on that leg, and stops when they check in at a pit stop- but also pauses as well as during any production forced bunches (I think this is what Netfoot keeps missing?).

 

Ah well, no biggie... it's just a fun speculative thread. :)

[Camera One]

It's really not remotely hard you guys, you just keep track of total time in the race and show it on screen.

 

This method would definitely be more fair, but I don't think it would work too well as a television show.  Showing times onscreen would limit their abilities to edit creatively to make it seem like everyone is close.  In addition, it would reduce the suspense, especially if one team is hours ahead of others.  Part of the excitement when teams are side by side on a task is whoever can finish first will be closer to the finish line for that leg.  But if we can see that one team setting up the tent or whatever is hours ahead due to their pre-flight bunching lead, that will reduce the excitement a bit.

Edited January 4, 2015 by Camera One

[Netfoot]

...but also pauses as well as during any production forced bunches (I think this is what Netfoot keeps missing?).

 

The reason I keep missing it, is because it doesn't happen.

 

I've repeatedly qualified my comments with the proviso that the race is timed from pitstart to pitstop, and the pitstop duration is the same for all.  There has never been any suggestion that somehow the timing get "adjusted" (read: cheating) during the course of the leg, and even if you were to introduce such a thing, how would you justify an "adjustment" that affected the cumulative time but not the leg time?  Or vice versa?  If an adjustment is required -- presumably to fulfill somebody's sense of fair play -- that adjustment would have to be applied to both let-time and cumulative time.

 

In actual fact, there have been times when adjustments have been made, while a team camera gets repaired, for example.  These adjustments have affected check-in times which automatically adjusted cumulative times by the exact same times.  When this has happened in the past, editing has always glossed over the event since it doesn't make good television.

 

No, there's no way you're going to get someone last to the pitstop and yet mysteriously ahead cumulatively.  Not unless you start messing with the race clock, or varying pitstop duration.

 

A change which I do think could be made and perhaps should be made is with the awarding of leg prizes.  The prize is awarded to the first-placed team.  However, the first-placed team in any leg is not necessarily the team that raced best on that leg.  For example,  a team that starts in position #1 and ends in position #1 may have completed the leg more slowly than a team that starts last, and catches up to position #2.  It might be a more fairly awarded prize if it's given to the team that finishes the leg in the least amount of time, rather than simply coming first.  It might lead to the unusual circumstance wherein the last team to arrive is eliminated... but takes the leg-prize as a consolation.  It might also lead to early teams hanging around biting their nails to see if their time is beaten by a later team.  But editors have always been reluctant to show the viewers how close or far apart the teams finish, so this may be at odds with editing goals.

[Fukui San]

On a different tack, here are changes I believe I suggested on TWOP. 

 

Instead of the Fast Forward, we have the Side Trip.  These are optional tasks that you can do if you feel if you're safe, and if you complete it, you receive an in game advantage. So any in game advantage that they might have, such as the Express Pass or the ability to U-Turn or whatever (please do not have the Save any longer), must be earned by completing a Side Trip. Other interesting advantages might be extra money, navigation help, or information. Teams will still have to do all of the other tasks, so it's an option only for the brave frontrunners. Not every leg has to have a side trip, but there will be one for every extra element you want to have in the race. For example, on leg 3 you might have a Side Trip to earn a team a U-Turn, and on leg 5 you have the U-Turn. Some Side Trips might have more than one advantage available.

 

Coming in first in the leg might still result in prizes, but no more getting a huge advantage for simply coming in first in any particular leg. Now it's a strategic decision.

[bafleyanne]

A team's individual clock starts when they rip open their first clue on that leg, and stops when they check in at a pit stop- but also pauses as well as during any production forced bunches (I think this is what Netfoot keeps missing?).

Right. Like.....let's say hypothetical team A finishes a leg in 10 hours and checks into the pit stop at 4 pm, so they get to leave at 4 am. Team B arrives at the pit stop at 6 pm and departs at 6 am. The beginning if the next leg has an HOO bunch such that neither team can start the first task until 8 am. Team A, who started the leg with a lead of 2 hours on Team B, now has no lead under our current system because no team can start the leg until 8 am. A cumulative timed race would allow teams to retain "credit," if you will, for good performance on a previous leg even in the face of bunching.

[hincandenza]

Exactly.  Thank you for restating it so succinctly.  The purest form of worldwide race would be a single clue at the starting line, then Phil shows up about 18-20 days later to see which team pulls in to the final Pit Stop first after all those cities, challenges, and flights. Basically impossible to film, edit, or organize, probably boring to watch if the time gaps get huge. 

 

The time "credit" of the Lanterne Rouge style lets you basically accrue larger and larger leads if you're consistently better than another team, while still retaining the functional structure of the current race design.

[SnideAsides]

Oh, I get it now. The Latin American regional version has something kind of like that, where you sign in when you arrive at an airport and get let out with the same time differences once your spoonfed flight arrives. It is a disaster.

[Bella]

Oh, I get it now. The Latin American regional version has something kind of like that, where you sign in when you arrive at an airport and get let out with the same time differences once your spoonfed flight arrives. It is a disaster.

 

Is it an entertaining disaster, or is it painful to watch?

[Netfoot]

Exactly.  Thank you for restating it so succinctly.

 

Nope.  Won't work.  Because if my cumulative clock gets stopped for two hours because of an HOO, why wouldn't my leg clock get stopped for the exact same reason?  If the HOO is "unfair", and a time adjustment needs to be made, then the adjustment must be made on both clocks, since it can't be unfair from a cumulative standpoint, yet be fair from a leg-time standpoint.

 

And why would you want to do that anyhow?  Life is "unfair".  You go to the store but you get a flat tire and you arrive too late to secure the bargain, even though you leave home first.  TAR just accepts that in microcosm.  If you must compensate everyone for everything, just do away with the cumulative timing.  (Which is what we have now.)  Simply restart all teams 12 hours after the last remaining team checks in, so each leg starts with all teams racing away from the pitstart together.  That way bunching wouldn't be "unfair" because everybody would be bunched even, but since they all started even anyway...

 

To tell the truth, these changes sound tediously boring, and the only reason I can see for introducing them is so we can get to enjoy the dubious pleasure of the kick-in-the-nuts elimination, where Phil says "You were not the last team to arrive, but please spread your legs wide, because I'm about to administer a Lanterne Rouge elimination!"

 

Another way to improve the fairness of the race would be standardized taxis.  Since the performance of some taxis in the past have had adverse effects on team placement, the race designers measure in advance, the time taken to make the journey from point A to point B.  When a team enters a taxi, their race clock is stopped.  When they arrive at destination, their clock gets advanced by the standard time, no matter how fast or slow the taxi ride actually was!  Then the clock gets restarted.  The beauty of this is that it also eliminates unfairness caused by flat tires, fuel stops, and the like!   To make this even more effective, we stop the clock when the team starts looking for a taxi, rather than when they actually find one.  This eliminates the unfairness that arises out of some teams finding a taxi right away, and other teams taking hours to find one.  In this way we eliminate unfairness caused by some teams being better racers than others. 

[TheRabbi]

If that's the case, they might as well scrap the international format and just do a bunch of challenges on a soundstage in Los Angeles and the quickest to complete is the winner.  The travel is what makes the show, with all the taxi luck, language barriers, getting lost, etc.  There'd be no sense of urgency in the teams running to hunt down taxis, or stress and killer fatigue hitting when a taxi gets lost, since they'd know that they're not actually losing time.  I don't like this idea.  

[Netfoot]

I don't like this idea.  

 

Neither do I.  I was shooting for irony.

 

The idea that some arbitrary judge gets to decide how much of your race experience is legitimate and how much is unfair and needs to be discounted, leaves a bad taste in my mouth.  Because once you start adjusting the race clock for one reason or another, there is no end to it.

 

Just think how we could have adjusted the WaveRider FF by stopping the clock for the Cyclists because they unfairly can't surf as well as Adam and Bethany.  And for someone who has an unfair advantage, like say a language skill, or prior familiarity with some city, it won't be long before we begin to add penalty minutes to their clock so as to make it more fair for the other teams. 

 

It's a horrible idea!

[SnideAsides]

Is it an entertaining disaster, or is it painful to watch?

Beyond painful to watch.

[Lantern7]

So . . . what teams would you like to see back? Also: are there enough memorable teams to make up an "all-winners" season? I'd suggest "all stars"/"Unfinished Business" candidates, but the last few seasons heading into the superior TAR25 are a bit of a blur.

 

How about "Champs vs. Chumps"*? Six winning teams and those that came close (e.g., the Afghanimals) and six that got wiped out early in the game. Could be interesting, right?

 

* That was the best theme title I could come up with.

[Camera One]

That would be great, but I've lost all expectations for seasons with returning teams after they called back the producers' own favorites for the third time.  At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if we got Luke and Margie again.  

 

I would like to see a true Unfinished Business.  Teams that were eliminated by a needle-in-a-haystack, or under unusual circumstances despite performing relatively well on the race.  I'm actually not too interested in teams which have already made the top 4, since they had plenty of exposure and screentime in their respective seasons already. 

[kingshearte]

I think something similar may have been mentioned, but I think it'd be kind of fun to see a season made up entirely of teams that were eliminated in the first leg or two, before we got any chance to get to know them. This might not exactly bring back the highest calibre of racers, but plenty of teams have been eliminated early (especially in that first leg) due to bad luck rather due to their own suckitude.

 

I just know that there have been a few teams that I was pretty sure I was going to like before they got eliminated, and a few that I ended up really liking, despite having no recollection of at all for the first several legs. There could be plenty of teams we'd all like to get to know better; we just didn't see enough of them the first time to know that we would.