Share This Page

Freeport grad gets dirty filming episode of 'Wipeout'

| Monday, Sept. 16, 2013, 10:33 a.m.
Rudee Dilick, a South Buffalo native and Freeport Area graduate, works her way through the obstacle course for ABC’s “Wipe Out” show. The episode featuring Dilick will air Thursday night. While she is not guaranteed that her performance will air, she believes her segment will make the cut.

While watching an episode of ABC's “Wipeout,” South Buffalo native Rudee Dilick had a thought many people watching reality TV have.

“I though it'd be really cool to do,” said Dilick, a 2005 graduate of Freeport Area High School who now lives in Murrieta, Calif. “I was honestly just watching it with a couple of girls from down the street who I baby-sit.

“I decided to start looking around and found a way to apply.”

Dilick hopes to appear Thursday on the show's “Dirty Jobs” episode.

Dilick thought she was perfect for the spot given that she's a mortician by trade.

ABC's website described the episode this way: “Contestants who have made careers out of their own dirty jobs get messy on the course; obstacles include Pooper Scooper, Bustodian and Roach Poacher.”

“I applied the first time they called me, I called them back and I never heard back,” she said. “So I applied again and I kept calling them back until they called me. It just so happened they were doing a dirty jobs episode.

“I really played up the whole mortician angle.”

Dilick, who graduated from Georgetown University in 2009 and moved to California in 2011, can't say how she did on the show, which features contestants competing on extreme obstacle courses for $50,000.

The show isn't as glamorous as it seems, she said.

“There were 20 of us that went through the first round that day,” she said. “I was No. 7. I kept thinking, ‘This is going to be so fun.'

“People are coming back and they're covered in mud and foam. And I'm like, ‘How was it?' and they were like, ‘It sucks.'

“But I was just so hyped up I didn't believe them,” she said. “They were right: ‘Suck' doesn't even begin to describe how bad it was.”

Dilick said she wouldn't go through the competition again even if she was paid $50,000.

“The mud pits — they mix water with sand. When you get out, you just have sand in your eyes,” she said. “After I fell in, I really couldn't see anything.

“It wasn't fun.”

Still, Dilick called it a once-in-a-lifetime experience.

“It was cool to see how TV works and everything that goes into making a show,” she said. “The people I was on with were great.

“It was just a cool group of people who do a job that a lot of people don't want to do,” she said. “It was neat to see a lot of people who are excited to go to work every morning just like I am.”

Dilick's older sister, Ashley DiMond, said it came as no shock to her or the rest of the family when they found out she was on the show.

“She's the ambitious one in the family,” DiMond said. “When she graduated from Pittsburgh Institute of Mortuary Science, she said to our mom, ‘I'm moving to California.'

“So they piled into a car, and she moved to California to do her externship, and she got a job there.”

DiMond said “Wipeout” is something the family has always watched. “We used to watch it with my grandma when we were younger,” she said. “That was her show.”

Dilick said ABC stressed to contestants that not everyone would get to be on TV, but she said she thinks she has a good shot at being on Thursday's episode.

“I got hit in the head pretty good,” she said with a laugh. “So, I think there might be a few cuts where they'll actually show me.”

R.A. Monti is a freelance writer.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.