Talk:The Amazing Race 9

Television: The Amazing Race / Reality Mid‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Amazing Race task force.
	This article is supported by the Reality television task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Archive 1 (2005.2.25 to 2006.4.10)

12 Legs?

The table of finishes lists 12 legs. How do we know this race is 12 legs? I don't remember a source for that. Is that what we just start all of the race tables at and add and subtract as needed?TeckWiz 14:05, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, since the past two "normal" TAR seasons have had 12 legs because of the removal of a non-elimination point (thus creating a superleg), setting the table at 12 legs probably is the simplest decision. It can always be changed later. -- SonicAD (talk) 15:23, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This was a long time ago but ever since season 18 occurred it's turned out that most of these legs listed as double-length or super legs are really 2 legs separated by a virtual Pit stop. Only on seasons 6, 8 (end) and 10 has there been true double-length legsAceee1 (talk) 05:43, 19 July 2019 (UTC).[reply]

Tasks

No plans to include a list as which team picked which Detour or which racer performed a Roadblock in each leg? --Destron Commander 03:44, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We have which racer performed how many but not which ones. We could only do that if someone remembers which team did what Detour and which person did what Roadblock from every leg of the race. If not, we'll wait to the Amazing Race 10.TeckWiz 13:28, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the amount of info presented right now is about right for a TV series article on Wikipedia. I would wait until WP:TV's guidelines are finalized to see how such detail should be managed. --Madchester 15:20, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What would be good is a very small table that had that info. I know Zron, a recaper on TARflies does that. They're pretty small tables, and a good size for the page. And if they look to big when you first find them look carefully because some info we don't even need. Like the Roadblock table says record for amount of Roadblocks done by each member. We don't need that because we have it in the leaderboard. The only question is...can you make small tables like that on Wikipedia?TeckWiz 11:26, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about a Detour table like this. It's very small. ~~The only problem is I don't know how to make the lines continue even when there is nothing in the box. (Since Ray and Yolanda only tried one detour the other box is the blank space)~~


Team	Motor Head	Rotor Head
Fran & Barry	*	x
Ray & Yolanda	x

An "x" is the task the team completed it
An asterisk means the team switched to the other task

Also, here is a Roadblock table


Team	Person Taking Challenge
Fran & Barry	Barry
Ray & Yolanda	Yolanda

If people agree with me we can put tables like this on the page. Anyone have suggestions or comments?TeckWiz 00:35, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree that these charts should go on the page. I am willing to look back at the old episodes on tape and provide the information, however, I would need someone else to put it into chart form, as I dont really understand wikipedia charts. -Reuvenk_[T][C] 20:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, I advise waiting until WP:TV's guidelines have been finalized. The working guidelines suggest brief plot outlines; additional tables would be too much, considering that there is already a leaderboard in place. --Madchester 20:55, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cities Count

Aleenf says the city count has been fixed to 24. I think it's only 22, going by the Wikipedia page. So either ~~Aleenf~~ UWAFanatic05 made a mistake, or the page is wrong. Here are the cities I counted:

Denver, Sao Paulo, Brotas, Moscow, Stuttgart, Bad Tolz, Geiselgasteig , Munich, Palermo, Castellammare del Golfo, Segesta, Catania, Siracusa, Rome, Athens, Corinth, Nemea, Rio, Muscat, Sur, Al Hawiyah, Nizwa

What am I missing. And if I'm not, once I'm told that I'll fix the page.TeckWiz 11:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for TeckWiz, I haven't done the cities count. So, you may be found the wrong person. Cities count is alwalys done by the other person. Thank you. Aleenf1 06:05, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Teckwiz I apologize for the incorrect number of cities. I was including Morrison, the suburb of Denver and also Frankfurt in Germany. Please revert the count to back the way you had it if these should not be counted. Also, I counted Perth and Fremantle as the only two cities visited in Leg 8, so that would make it 24 if you do not count Morrison and Frankfurt. Again, I apologize for this problem. UWAFanatic05 02:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Google Video

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that it's fairly reasonable to include a link to Google Video's section for The Amazing Race 9, as that's where CBS makes episodes available for rental. It seems to me that since that's a place where one can get the episodes on the internet, legally, it would be an appropriate site to link to. I was being bold and added it, but it got reverted fairly quickly, so I'd like to get some opinions before adding it back in case I've aimed off target here. -- SonicAD (talk) 06:16, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For song or album articles, there are no links to iTunes or Amazon.com to purchase the aforementioned music. Likewise, Wikipedia:External Links suggests that users should not link to external sites that are selling a good or service. --Madchester 06:24, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, didn't see that. Sorry, then, thought it might have been a good idea. Thanks for the correction. -- SonicAD (talk) 06:26, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but Google video is the only place to legally buy an episode, so it is pertinent. Just my $0.02. -Reuvenk_[T][C] 20:37, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are no links to the Season 1 or 7 boxed DVD sets on their respective Wikipedia articles. Likewise, there are no such links to DVD sets on other television or film articles, since they're in violation of WP:NOT. Wikipedia isn't supposed to be providing adspace for products or services. --Madchester 20:48, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to pick up an old conversation, but does google video still have Amazing Race episodes for download. I Checked just now and couldn't find anything. If they are indeed gone, why? -Reuvenk_[T][C] 15:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't check Google video but if they don't anymore here is a possible explanation:

About a month ago CBS started CBS On Demand. It offers CBS shows for dowload on your computer for about $0.99. It started with only Survivor: Panama, and has not changed since. However, probably at the start of The Amazing Race 10, they will start putting the Amazing Race episodes on CBS OnDemand. If CBS could make money off their own site and not have to pay a commission fee to Google, they will make more money. So, in probably planning to put it on CBS On Demand, they took it off google video.TeckWiz 20:08, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia

"This shows Joseph taking affirmative action..."

No it doesn't. It shows that Joseph was aware of what Eric and Jeremy did and it shows that Joseph understands that it may benefit his team. It does not show in any way that Joseph participated in the cancellation, discussed the cancellation with Eric and Jeremy beforehand, or in any other way participated in the cancellation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.24.48.1 (talk • contribs)

Special Prize

For the second time in Race history, a Travelocity trip has been awarded thanks to a "gnome". It's also the second time this season a prize has been awarded to any team and not just the first place (although the first time it happened to be the first place team. When the first two teams check in Phil said they would be in the final 3, meaning it was an elimination, which made me think what would happen if the last place team won the prize. What if Monica and Joseph had the golden gome? What would have happened?TeckWiz 01:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't the first time they awarded prizes via gnome result in the prize being awarded to the eliminated team? When the teams searched the island for gnomes with secret symbols on the bottom? Otto4711 04:09, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wrong. Ron and Kelly won the gnome prize in season 7. They were in last place but it was a non-elimination leg. Otto4711 04:20, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is That Needed???

I saw one non-wikipedians put The Da Vinci Code requests in this article, is that needed??? Aleenf1 10:13, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was spam from a Da Vinci Code enthusiast. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Da Vinci Code WebQuests to particpate in its AfD. --Madchester 18:59, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Elimination notes

Any thoughts on whether we should have elimination notes like the Survivor pages? --HansTAR 00:09, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article quality?

In the Post race trivia section, one piece of trivia states: "Eric/Jeremy and BJ/Tyler have continued to socialize since the end of the Race. (Warning: NSFW [Not Safe For Work] Link) [Empahsis added]." Should that really be in the article? Maybe, make a footnote with the link, and in the footnote, put the NSFW warning. Just my $.02. -Reuvenk_[T][C] 04:06, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This has to bo some sort of record

In TAR 9, only four teams ever arrived first at a pit stop (The final three all did, and Fran and Barry). Has that ever happened before in the race? I'm not adding it to the article because I cant verify it, but I think its a first. -Reuvenk_[T][C] 04:13, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not a first. In Season 5, Alison and Donny won the first leg, and every other leg was won by one of the final 3. 128.230.13.64 23:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In retrospect

Looking back at Talk:The_Amazing_Race_9/Archive_1#Straw_poll_on_removal_of_country_flags, it's a good thing that the flags were not removed from Wikipedia articles, given the final Roadblock. Fortunately we have editors here who aren't so narrow-minded. Congrats to everyone who contributed to the article for this season. --Madchester 06:13, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can I add this to the trivia section?

Can I add this fact to the trivia section. It might be important to anime fans:

On Leg 11 Detour, one of the addresses BJ & Tyler visited was the offices of Gonzo Animation, with its logo prominently shown when the team received their clue.

-上村七美 | talk 12:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Final Roadblock Count

Did Yolanda complete her 6th RB (the flag challenge) or did their team just skip that and went straight to the finish mat? --Madchester 16:12, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yolanda mentioned to someone at TARCon (or SOMEWHERE, it eludes me right now), that they pulled a Weaver when they arrived at the last task and went ahead and skipped the Roadblock. --HansTAR 03:58, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At TARCon, BJ & Tyler said they were mistakenly told they had completed the roadblock when in fact they had not. Someone caught the mistake and sent them back before they reached the finish line. TWOP posters have speculated that they mixed up the flags for Ireland and Italy. Feels like it should be mentioned but I'm not sure how to incorporate it. 68.227.185.167 20:09, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Route Map

Has anyone noticed that the route map hasn't been updated to include Thailand, Japan or Alaska? Is it simply because no one has gotten around to it yet?

T-TOW! -Alex 18:21, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gothic Lolita in Detour??

The Detour was Maiden or Messenger. In Maiden, teams had to transport a young Japanese woman in a traditional Japanese palanquin for 1/3 mile to a tea ceremony pavilion.

I've visted a few cosplay discussion sites, and they are complaining about the 20 second exposure of Gothic Lolita on the show. I'm assuming that this is what their talking about. Does anyone have screenshots to prove this??--293.xx.xxx.xx 01:47, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eric and Jeremy's maiden was a Gothic Lolita and Ray & Yolanda's was ko-gal (I think). I don't have a screenshot, but I have seen the show and I did see what they are talking about. - 上村七美 | talk 01:56, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicting Prize Details

A trivia item says that E&J were unuable to attend the Da Vinci Code premiere in Cannes, but the Prizes section indicates they were going to attend the premiere in Hollywood. Which is correct?

The film "premiered" in Cannes instead. There was no Hollywood premiere, since screenings for the film were rather limited so that it's plot wouldn't be leaked. --Madchester 22:00, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Accuracy Regarding the Current Route Map

The Map we currently have has an error regarding the location of Thailand and Bangkok,See and . mouselmm 23:29, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The map is supposed to show countries visited, not the specific cities. If this wasn't your answer, then what's wrong with it?TeckWiz 23:57, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The map highlighted the southern part of Thailand with Burma Included. Thailand should not touch the Bengal Sea mouselmm 00:03, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed it and reuploaded it. Tell me what you think. -- SmthManly / ^ManlyTalk / ^{ManlyContribs} 00:05, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your effort SmthManly, however, the error still exists (I am picky on these things)

Thailand has a tiny strip of land to the south connecting with Malaysia, to the west it borders with Myanmar/Burma and does not border with neither Bangladesh or India. Referring to the map we have now, the strip to the south that's highlighted belongs to Thailand, no doubt, but the northern territory highlighted borders with India and seems to me it was suppose to be Myanmar/Burma. That's what I was talking about.

I apologize for my poor grammar in advance mouselmm 00:23, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I fixed that according to the map you provided. I had to close my browser to see the changes, I think the browser caches all images, try closing your browser (every window) and reopening it and see if it looks good, I did it exactly like the map of Thailand you provided. -- SmthManly / ^ManlyTalk / ^{ManlyContribs} 00:26, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Everything looked fine after I re-opened my browser, thanks a lot for your help SmthManly ^_^ mouselmm 00:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No Problem! HIPPIES RULE!! -- SmthManly / ^ManlyTalk / ^{ManlyContribs} 00:32, 22 May 2006 (UTC) P.S. Sorry, Big TAR fane here.[reply]

TTOW

Does anyone have a definitive meaning for "TTOW" that BJ&Tyler shouted thoughout the race? I've heard anything from "circle of the universe" to "Good Times" as pronounced in Mandrin.Mutton 21:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TTOW means "That's the only way"TeckWiz 22:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source for that? Mutton 23:09, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I googled it and got a few pages with that. And if you want to check, get a myspace and ask Tyler or B.J. (even though they might not answer since they're probably getting tons of fan mail.TeckWiz 23:12, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Much obliged. Mutton 23:44, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome!TeckWiz 23:55, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[1]

Q. What does TTOW-- the catchphrase you spoke often -- mean?

Tyler: It's like the Chinese word for good time. It's our power call.

BJ: It's a word we like to say because we both have shirts that say TTOW that we bought when we were in China. It was the first time we traveled through a country together in 2002.

--Maxamegalon2000 20:25, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tyler has officially answered this as of June 14 2006 on his Myspace blog:

the meaning of TTOW

Some say TTOW is what the Mung people in the villages of northern Vietnam sing to their newborns as they sleep. Others say it is a Szechwan spice used on wedding desserts in eastern Mongolia.

But for BJ and me TTOW was the word printed on shirts we bought in mainland China in 2002. It was just four letters at the time, but since then it has evolved into our power call. We yell TTOW during extreme moments, like jumping of bridges in Greece, skydiving over northern Australia, or running across finish lines in Denver Colorado.

KsprayDad 07:06, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Straw polls on removal the teams a.k.a

This discussion is archived. Please do not edit the text in this box.

This is a straw poll to gauge opinion on whether the teams a.k.a should be removed from The Amazing Race seasonal articles. This is because we are known more about the team member name rather than his a.k.a.

Please sign your name using four tildes (~~~~) either Support or Oppose, additonal comments are appreciated. ~~Voting will last until 31 May 2006.~~ The results of the discussion was a tie with 2 support votes and 2 oppose votes.

Support (remove a.k.a)

Support, I never found this relevant after the race has ended. I no longer call Rob and Amber "Romber" and can't even rememember most of the others, but I do remember all the teams by their names, mostly because it was repeated so much on the show. Also, aren't all these nicknames thought up by fans, and thus likely to not be uniform from fan base to fan base, making them unofficial and unverifiable? A good example here would be "The Pinks"... this is the first time I have ever heard this nickname, as far as nicknames go I've always heard the Double Ds, a pun on their names and, well, other noticeable features about them. -- SmthManly / ^ManlyTalk / ^{ManlyContribs} 07:08, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support, The team nicknames are not relevant to be included in the seasonal articles, unless teams' nicknames were "offical" enough that they appeared on the Captions on the show itself (ex. Team Guido/Gutsy Grannies). They belong in the trivia sections. mouselmm 02:35, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose (keep a.k.a)

Oppose, but only for names that teams were popularly known by in the race. Which is pretty much everyone listed with a nickname except Fran and Barry. -- SonicAD (talk) 05:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose All teams nicknames have been used a lot during the race. Almost everytime a team is speaking to another team or talking about another team they use the other team's nicknames. The only nickname that has never been used is FrankenBarry, which I just took out.TeckWiz 11:08, 24 May 2006 (UTC)\[reply]

Comments

Both. I'd like to see the most notable names kept, but instead of a.k.a., I'd rather see ("Nickname"). Examples:

BJ & Tyler ("The Hippies")
Joseph & Monica ("MoJo")

— Ian Manka Talk to me! 19:39, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this seems better than aka. Keep the nickname but remove the "aka" phrase --Astrokey44 20:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care which format is used but 2 things need to be clear. First, we need to use a consistent naming scheme Second, there should be no fan-cruft nicknames; i.e., ones assigned by fans on messageboards or forums. Only include the names actually used by the teams during the Race and should be restricted to sources like the weekly program, the official website, insider clips and team interviews with the press. --Madchester 00:56, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I 101% agree with MadchesterTeckWiz 00:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed with Madchester and IanManka. --HansTAR 16:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Filming dates inconsistent

The opening paragraph says "Filming ran from November 7, 2005 to December 3, 2005." but the infobox says "Filming dates 2005-11-07 – 2005-11-28". Which is correct? -- Barrylb 03:07, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The return of Frankenberry

A particular editor continues to put Frankenberry in as a nickname though it has been removed 2 or 3 times. I have rewatched the episodes and do not here this nickname. From Google searching it seems to be a fan nickname and not one from the show...can we please have a definative on this? Can we please leave it out until someone can quote the episode/timestamp of when it is used? KsprayDad 06:55, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Frosties

John and Scott did use this term to describe Lisa and Joni in the show (on the airport shuttle bus). Between that and [2], I think it makes sense to keep the nickname in. If anyone can find a link that specifically mentions that J+S did mention it on the bus, that would be preferred, but even without that I don't see any reason to remove the information. If you disagree, let's talk. JYolkowski // talk 21:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John and Scott were only there for one leg, meaning it was only used once or twice. The nickname should be in the table if it was used by multiple teams and for more than a leg or two (the sisters themselves were only in it for two.) TeckWiz is 12 yrs old^TalkContribs_{# of Edits} 22:17, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone else have an opinion either way? If someone else agrees with TeckWiz I don't mind removing it, but it can be kind of hard to reach consensus between only two editors (-: JYolkowski // talk

Sicily

I'm just wondering why Sicily has its own flag. Isn't it just a state/province/whatever of Italy?174.1.48.24 (talk) 22:42, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1st ever race using start line as finish line

Should i use this?: This was the first ever season in TAR to reuse the starting line as the finish line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Singaporeandy (talk • contribs) 13:08, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sicily

I am reopening the debate here, I believe using Sicily is wrong. The reason being Sicily is a province/state/territory of the country and not independent at all. Even the show says [3] Palermo, Italy on the island of Sicily. Intoronto1125 TalkContributions 21:59, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but no matter how much we argue, Ryulong is not going to let us change them.Shadow2 (talk) 22:27, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Legs?

There is a new situation that Phil described Saint Basil's Cathedral in Moscow was actually the third Pit Stop? Therefore, Legs 3 and 4 are forming Superleg? Just as similar to TAR8 talk page I wrote, Phil had same description in the Pit Stop segment. ApprenticeFan ^work 08:52, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just because there's a Pit Stop (IE, the Mat), does not mean it's the end of the leg. As Phil repeatedly states, "The leg is not over". 174.1.50.249 (talk) 09:06, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:The Amazing Race 1 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 01:43, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Amazing Race 9. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for www.cbs.com/primetime/amazing_race9/shows/ep04/race/story/?id=7

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:19, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on The Amazing Race 9. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:23, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Amazing Race 9. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121205025656/http://www.fsc.com.au/home/ to http://www.fsc.com.au/home/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:18, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Double-Length legs (by any other name) - 1 or 2 legs?

Before an editing spar happens, I would like for this issue to be cleared up first. Double-length legs is a game feature in TAR where teams proceed to the mat, thinking that they would check in (get a prize if first, possibly be eliminated if last). But instead, they are all handed a clue to either:

continue the leg (essentially the host would just be a Clue box), or
start the next leg

We can't really rely on in-show script because they contradict themselves, e.g. "This leg is not over" versus the host saying that the race is a particular number of legs. Saying that the host just said this thing to avoid confusing teams on whether or not they are starting another leg, can easily be applied to the other possible confusion of counting how many legs there are. It also means that they didn't think of the sentence "The next leg of the Race starts right now" until years later.

Now, starting Season 18, this is no longer a problem. The Race has been 'standardized' to 12 legs each season, with some legs having zero-hour pit stops or No-break legs. So the issue comes from Seasons 6, 7, 8, 9, and 14, as well as concurrent seasons of other TAR versions prior to Season 18.

What we could look at is the structure of the seasons themselves. Season 5 had 13 legs. Then in Season 6, they were supposed to have 13 legs as well, but then Hungary's 'no begging allowed' policy came to light. Therefore a 'double-length leg' was created. From the name itself, it means "a leg that is twice as long as a normal leg" - this would lean towards being just 1 leg. But it does beg the question of "Where did the term 'double-length leg' come from?". Because I don't know.

One work-around this is to define a Pit Stop from this era to be "where a team could possibly be eliminated or given a non-elimination penalty". This means those in the double-length legs were fake Pit Stops, only dressed as Pit Stops to fake out teams and viewers. If we view this "fake Pit stops" as leg endpoints, then three (the one in Season 6, last leg of Season 8, and the one in Season 10) would not split into two legs. These three had no pit stop mat in the middle of the double-length leg. For consistency, I'd say that they should all be double-length, but counted-as-one legs.

Thoughts? Albertdaniel222 (talk) 08:05, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also: I don't think even the show doesn't really know what a leg is. In Season 25, they made a note of the fact that Leg 7 of that season was the 300th leg of the entire series. Though that number is a bit ... off. If all double-length legs are considered as 1 leg, then Season 25 Leg 7 would be the 297th. If they are all considered as two legs, then it's the 304th. But if only the ones with pit stop mats are considered separate legs, then it's the 301st leg. Albertdaniel222 (talk) 14:25, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The three instances without a Pitstop mat on seasons 6, 8 (2nd) and 10 are each one [double-sized] leg, while the rest are two legs with a fake/virtual Pit-stop in the middle. They were 1 leg late on season 25.68.196.23.37 (talk) 05:18, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think they should be considered two legs due to the length although the argument from the previous guy's post has it's point since there is no specified dividing point. I like them being counted as 2 for simplicity and historical reasons ex. Leg 8 in season 6 is non-elimination (like in Seasons 1-5) if they are counted as two where as with the double leg being one it's labeled as Leg 7 making "Leg 8" elimination despite being the 9th equivalent leg. In season 7 equivalent Leg 8 ends with a virtual Pit-stop which means that Season 8 (Family Edition) has the 1st true equivalent Leg 8 elimination.

That said one thing I noticed at the starting line each season is Phil would say 13 legs on season 1-5 (and I think 11 based on Rob's overconfidence after leg 3 before his and Amber's infamous fall on leg 4), 11 legs on seasons 12&13 and 12 legs on seasons 15+ but on seasons 6-10&14 he said "the race is divided into" EITHER "many legs" OR "a number of legs" so either he didn't understand which they are or he said that for legal purposes to avoid any suing the show from a team that thought the race should have been a leg longer or shorter.

Maybe the previous anonymous user is correct and 2nd halves of those 3 non-mat divided double-legs as well as any legs later on seasons 6&10 (season 8 ended with it's non-mat divided double-leg so no other legs are effected there) should be specified as leg X equivalent for historical and length purposes but just the numbers would just count those doubles as 1 since there is no official middle marker just clues or a sign in on AOL (in the case on season 6) Aceee1 (talk) 23:12, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well we have three options: (1) all as two legs, (2) those with pit stop mats as two legs & others as one, and (3) all as one leg. For Option 1, the problem comes with the three instances with no pit stop mats - 6, 8(2nd), 10 - because they had no overt point of Leg A becoming Leg B (especially in season 6). For Option 2, the problem is it's dividing these few, very similar instances into two smaller groups. I think it's more helpful for the reader to know that back in this era, a "double-length leg" existed and it differs from the "zero-hour pit stop" that we have today. Sidenote: if I remember correctly, production really stuck to 12-hour intervals between legs. Nowadays, the rest-time really varies to fit into the production's tight filming schedule. I think it leaves Option 3 as the best one. Plus the inconsistencies & vagueness in Phil's script could be for (1) surprising the teams and the audience with twists, and (2) so that the teams and audience can better understand what is happening at the moment and not necessarily stating the absolute truth. For example, you kinda just have to pick between "This leg of the Race is not over" versus "11 surfboards for the prior 11 legs of the Race" in season 14. Honestly if we could just get one of the producers to say in an interview how they counted that 300th leg thing, this discussion would all be over. Albertdaniel222 (talk) 17:34, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The 300th leg thing is wrong no matter which combo it is; if it's your combo it would be S25 leg 10, if all virtual pit stop and double-length legs divided into 2 would be S25 leg 3, all virtual pit stop legs count as 2 but double-length legs with no mat count as 1 S25 leg 6 and if all virtual pit stops were the middle of 1 leg (including S18+) along with double-length legs as 1 the 300th leg would be S27 leg 4 (which would combine legs 4 & 5 into one)

Seasons 7-9&14 will be soon updated to reflect the old double-length leg reference with the final leg of season 8 counting as 1 double-length leg (seasons 6&10 left alone) and those with pit stop mats announced as originally called 1 leg but now are split into 2.

The reverse argument would be that every virtual Pit stop should be the middle of 1 leg however Phil says 12 legs on every season starting with 15 including those with a virtual pit stop or two which means he would be lying on the leg numbers on most of seasons 18+. It seems too strange how some false pit stop mats can be the middle of one leg while others divide two.... then we have TAR Latin America which I haven't watched due to the language barrier however they have the same "1 leg virtual pit stop scenario" which mimics two legs during the final 3 of seasons 1-5 while season 6 has a regular non-elimination leg with no penalty. In some of those "double-legs" the 1st place team is awarded a prize, is a team really rewarded for being in the lead MIDWAY through a leg? I have to think if they said "the leg isn't over" it is the same mistake script to eliminate the no penalty question (while dropping the matter in season 6) while they really began a new leg. Then again things really get complicated beginning with season 3 where they have virtual pit stops outside of the final 3 that are marked as dividing two legs while still having a single final 3 leg listed as double-length despite another virtual pit stop. Another twist is how the virtual pit stops on Latin America outside the final 3 are not treated independent for last team procedures as some of them are actual elimination points and those that aren't penalize the last team with a speed bump.Aceee1 (talk) 07:38, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated seasons 7,8,9 & 14 as well as Asia 1&2 to show how legs with virtual or false Pit stops used to be considered 1 leg but are now 2 separate legs. I will make the same update to Latin America 1-5 since they also have virtual pit stop mats.Aceee1 (talk) 00:30, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Latin America 1-5 are now updated and like the other seasons above reference that they used to be called double-length legs while the only 3 that still exist are on season 6, 8 (final leg) and 10.

BTW If the 300th leg episode had been 1 episode earlier it would be pretty simple.Aceee1 (talk) 05:49, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, So you've already changed all of those pages WITHOUT even reaching a consensus on the issue. You still didn't say a good reason to change it in the first place. Having them different tell us that those seasons are from a different era. A change in the leg system came much later on (season 18 & onward). It doesn't mean we erase what happened in the past just to fit it into the present. Albertdaniel222 (talk) 01:32, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I just asking if whether if the updates by Aceee1 (talk should be accepted; you said that there the consensus is not reached, and the terminology is not offical yet. I'm just curious, should we reconsider Aceee1's edits and until further notice, temporarily remove his edits; I do not find the text constructive (because of the italics and some other add-ons).(203.78.15.150 (talk) 08:31, 29 July 2019 (UTC))[reply]