Thanks for Playing!

bird, new, square, twitter icon



Previous Columns
The Magnificent Marble Machine

Copyright Statement

No infringement of copyright is intended by these fan pages; production companies of shows this site covers retain all rights to the sounds, images, and information contained herein. No challenge to copyright is implied. 

Web design by Jason Elliott. Logo by Chico Alexander. 
Full Copyright Statement

Powered by 1&1 Internet

with Chris Wolvie
Weakest Argument for the ERA Ever
September 29
It's men vs. women in a "battle of the sexes"! Women or men: which is...

AIR DATES: July 18, 1977 to January 12, 1978
CREATOR: Goodson/Todman Productions
HOST: Bill Anderson & Saragh Purcell
WATCH IT AT: (Finale - Part 1)

ong before "Fandango" first appeared on The Nashville Network (before the WWE changed it to Spike) and just a year or two before "Real People" started a trend of similar "human interest" shows, the hosts of those two shows set out to settle an age-old question: which gender could outsmart (and outbluff) the other when it's six-on-six? Yeah, the "Battle of the Sexes" has been a thing even before Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs had their tennis spat. But that and the growing popularity of the "Equal Rights Amendment" in the 70s made it an even bigger to-do during that decade. Mark Goodson and Bill Todman jumped on the opportunity and created a show where it was only men versus only women. Looking back, I think that if this was the best TV could do to illustrate men vs. women then I certainly hope we've improved our stance over the last four decades. (And considering a woman is a Presidential nominee, I'd say we did.)

Two teams of six play. The returning champs start at the "question podium" with a contestant who is asked a question (either general knowledge or survey). The host (the one that's the same gender as the 
contestant) then hands them a card with the correct answer and a bluff answer. The contestant gives one of the answers. The other team then has to decide if the answer given is correct or incorrect. The other host goes down the line asking the team members to give their opinions. When two members agree, the correct answer is given. If the team members are wrong, they are eliminated from the round. If they are right, the one giving the answer is eliminated, along with another one chosen by the other team. Whoever was right would be asked the next question.

If a team is down to two and they disagree on whether the answer is right or wrong, the second member tries to convince the first one that they are right...but the first member would always have the last word.

The first team to eliminate all members of the other team won the round and $1000 to split and advanced to the bonus game. A team could stay until they lost twice.

The winning team now faced thirty audience members of the opposite gender 
in the same gameplay. One-by-one, the team members would be asked a question and then given a card with ONLY the right answer on it. The member could either give the right answer or come up with a bluff on their own. The audience members used paddle-like devices to vote whether they thought the contestant is right or wrong. After the correct answer is given, those who guessed incorrectly were eliminated and sat down.

The object was for the team to eliminate all thirty audience members. If they did that by the time every team member has been asked a question, the team would split $5000. However, if any audience member remained standing after all six team members were asked, those audience members would split $500.

It was obvious that this HAD to be hosted by two, one male and one female. I mean, it'd be a conflict of interest otherwise, right? 
And it's obvious this is where Sarah Purcell honed her skills that served her on "Real People" for five years. And Bill Anderson? Well, for a then-40-something country singer, he did the best he could. Certainly better than Jon "Bowser" Bowman did in the relative trainwreck that was "Match Game/Hollywood Squares Hour".

While the whole "explaining your answer" thing that started on "Card Sharks" wasn't all that great to me, I can understand it in this format. After all, you're not only trying to convince the host and the opponents that you're right but, more importantly, your teammates. You were giving your own opinion but you were letting your TEAM know the reasoning. After all, this WAS team vs. team, not just 1 man vs. 6 women/1 woman vs. 6 men.

The music was quite upbeat, as you'd half-expect music in a late-70s game show to be. It was quite disco-like, but I did like the male and female "doo-be-do-wop"ping during the introduction. Also, the men and women running onto the set like football teams at the start was a nice touch.

And, of course, bonus points for having the gall to include the word "SEX" in the very title. As a grade-schooler, I had no idea what the word meant. Thankfully, because of the show, I figured out it meant "gender" and not...well, the OTHER definition. I saved my mom some embarrassment (that is until, after watching "The Newlywed Game", I asked her what "making whoopie" meant).

I think
 it would've worked with less players. Maybe four or five apiece. And while it was fair to KO another member as well as the "answer giver", that seemed a bit UNfair to the one KOed. After all, that person had nothing to do with the giver being unable to get the other team to get it wrong; s/he was just a victim of circumstance.

I also would've gone with two-out-of-three rounds before going to the bonus round. Playing a bonus round and then seeing the team you just beat back at it again...I dunno, it just seems wrong. A foe vanquished should STAY least in the world of game shows. Lone exception would be "Bullseye" who would allow a challenger who didn't even get to answer a question to play again. But, if you lose a game show, you should just take your parting gifts and skeedaddle.

In the end, though, this show never really answered the question of who is the "better sex". All it showed was that a certain group of one gender could outwit a certain group of another gender...until a DIFFERENT group came along. For a show that seemed to be trying to prove a point, they didn't do it that well.

Funnily enough,
 I actually CAN see this working as a show on GSN. And these days, the questions CAN be a bit more racy. They may even want to go the route ot the "Battle of the Sexes" party game and ask men questions women would know and vice versa. Have it be new three-on-three teams like the first revival of "Chain Reaction" each show, have only ONE member KOed each question (and, if the "giver" outwits the other team, they get to choose which one fooled gets KOed), best two-of-three rounds and give the winning team two questions each to give to the audience in the bonus round. Until women are paid equally for the same job, the "battle of the sexes" will continue, PC or not. Why not capitalize on it?

One potato, two potato, three potato, Bill...

Chris Wolvie is of one sex...though he doubts he's better than EITHER of them. E-mail him at