What if nobody bids on a sabotage? - Cutthroat Kitchen (2013) Discussion

[–] drunkbear 8 years ago

Interesting question. I wonder if the show has some rule/mechanic to deal with that? Maybe Alton would assign it randomly?

- HOW kin I be so brainless, when I is so smart?

reply

[–] thomas998 8 years ago

Let's be honest on any given show you know that their will be at least one chef that knows they aren't as good as some of the others... So it will always be in the best interest of the weakest one to try and sabotage the strongest... and all it takes is just one bid.

What I never understand is why they are all so poor at the actual bidding.... They either jump up astronomically high from the previous bid which likely wastes money, or they have seen bids going up by 1000 a pop and they decide to give a bid only 100 more.

reply

[–] askoz 8 years ago

Let's be honest on any given show you know that their will be at least one chef that knows they aren't as good as some of the others... So it will always be in the best interest of the weakest one to try and sabotage the strongest... and all it takes is just one bid.

You're probably right about that.

What I never understand is why they are all so poor at the actual bidding.... They either jump up astronomically high from the previous bid which likely wastes money, or they have seen bids going up by 1000 a pop and they decide to give a bid only 100 more.

That's mostly editing. They don't show every single bid because that would be excruciatingly boring to watch.

reply

[–] FlushingCaps 8 years ago

But with $25,000 to work with, why would you not bid $500 on any of these sabotages? I haven't seen one yet that wouldn't be worth that much money.

I would suppose that if the chefs all decided to not bid on any sabotages--to save their money, presumably--that the taping would be stopped, the four chefs would be excused and they would begin taping that episode all over with four new chefs who actually wanted to play the game.

Why don't we just shoot 'em down and be through with it?

reply

[–] cliff-hartle 8 years ago

Yes this is a TV show. If they don't play along they yell "CUT" and have a little talk with the chefs.

reply

[–] elwyn5150 8 years ago

I doubt they would just start a new episode with new chefs.

I have been to the taping of a live show once as an audience member. (It was Beauty and the Geek.) They take hours just to get one ten minute contest.

During that time, the staff have to get paid etc. I don't think they would just scrap all that footage and restart.

reply

[–] FlushingCaps 7 years ago

I fully understand your point about the costs of re-filming, but without anyone bidding on the sabotages, they don't have a show. If there were no bidding on Alton's first sabotage, despite his pleadings...there is not going to be a usable show filmed. So it would be cheaper to bring in people who want to play the game than to go through the whole procedure with non-contesting contestants.

Why don't we just shoot 'em down and be through with it?

reply

[–] DCompton86 8 years ago

I would say it's in their contracts with the show not to declare a mutiny. If they did, the taping would be stopped and all contestants would probably be having a long talk with the producers (and lawyers likely). If they still refused, they would be sent home and four new people would be brought in. There's probably at least one or two back-ups called in in case a contestant for some reason could not compete. So they likely would call in people who have applied for the show that live near the taping as to not get too far off schedule.

"It's better to be hated for who you are than be loved for who you aren't."

reply

[–] elwyn5150 8 years ago

If nobody bid, it would just be like a normal contest - it would still be watchable.

There is another possibility that noone has mentioned: if some of the contestants have exhausted all their funds and those who still had money were eliminated. This is unlikely though.

reply

[–] poordogabone-1 8 years ago

That would be like entering a running race and deciding to walk. If you sign up for CTK, you should be ready to play the game. If only one chef decides to hold on to his or her money, that's one thing, but there is no way production is going to allow the whole crew to refrain from bidding.

I'd like to be a pessimist, but this is a luxury I cannot afford.—Joseph of Cordoba

reply

[–] askoz 8 years ago

That's a bad analogy. To walk in a running race is the same as losing on purpose.

Those who won't bid in CTK do it because they feel they can handle the sabotage and save the money for worse ones that may come later. And also (of course) to walk home with more money. It's a calculated risk that is part of the game. It's not like they don't want to win.

But at 500 bucks the advantage of any sabotage will always outweigh the cost, so it would be stupid to not give at least that much if no one else is bidding.

So I would say: if that happens, then it's the show's fault for not coming up with a good enough sabotage.

reply

[–] sandifay62 7 years ago

This show is about sabotages. So while some may try to save all their money, others sign on to have the fun of sabotaging. Because whether you buy a sabotage or not, you're going to have to partake in them eventually because the other are playing against you. They aren't on the same page.

Most people that tried to e cheap ended up regretting it and getting sent home.

reply

[–] poordogabone-1 7 years ago

Read my post again. I said it would be okay if one chef decided to hang onto his or her money, but there would be no show if all four decided to do so.

I'd like to be a pessimist, but this is a luxury I cannot afford.—Joseph of Cordoba

reply