Thursday, October 30, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

[Robert K S]

The No. 1 patent law blog has picked up on the wins by champ Ryan and also patent attorney Patnet Neeraj Joshi who apparently won Sports Jeopardy!

[mrparadise]

Robert Slaven has posted in the past that he didn't offer a tie in his fifth game because the add-$1 (or $100) strategy was just so ingrained that there was never any idea of doing anything else. As someone who has been in the studio to play, surely you could understand how, in the heat of the moment (excited to be in the lead to possibly win a fifth game), one might not think, "Hey, I won't have to play against this person again even if we tie!"

perhaps.
but mr. slaven's post (whenever it was) was long after the show aired, and even longer after it was taped, which gave him plenty of time to cook up an explanation. it is hard to believe that he didn't remember that the fifth game would be his *last* game.
i remember such things as facial expressions and physical demeanor; if i had heard that explanation at the time, i would not have bought it.
and i don't buy it now
reasonable people can disagree.

Anyone have the data (or a way to get it) on what percent of the time a four day champ, leading in his or her fifth game, would "do the right thing" and offer a tie to second place? It always seemed to me that when the four day champ didn't it was often because it just didn't occur to them, not because of churlishness. God knows a distressingly large number of contestants seem not to have a clue as to FJ! (and DD) wagering strategy so it would not be surprising if many are unaware of that option (although, granted, you would think four day champs would be much more likely to be aware, but still). Another aspect which I used to find interesting was to see if a first time contestant who was leading a four time winner in a fifth game would "do the right thing" and offer a tie to the champ so he or she could go to the TOC, no small thing. I remember some doing this but most of the time it didn't happen.

[Sherm]

Sometime people analyze too much. The goal is to win, so you bet a dollar more than the second place guy can cover. We've all grown up with "a tie is like kissing your sister". I don't think its about being nice or being mean, a tie just isn't called a win with the way most people think. It's just as simple as how much do I bet to win. When I played HS football back in the 80's, games could end in ties, they changed that about 20 years ago. Colleges did the same thing. It's just a mentally, and I'm sure my instinct if I were in the lead would be, multiply by 2 and add a buck, that gives you a win if you are right.

Vermonter has shown that there is acutally a benefit to offering the tie, and I have to say. If I were on the show, I would offer the tie, assuming I thought I was better than the second place person. If not, I wouldn't. The goal is still to win, and win again if possible.

Also, I think part of the feedback on this tie, is the way it happened. Second place holds back 200 and ends up with a tie. Didn't see that happening. This game was a tie, but it was also a fluke. First place didn't offer a tie with her bet, maybe she meant to, but she didn't

[MDaunt]

The goal is to maximize my earnings for the benefit of my family. If that requires me to offer a tie, I will. If it doesn't, I won't. For the record, I did not offer a tie in my fifth game (a lock game where I had the wrong answer in FJ).

[MinnesotaMyron]

I need to learn those damn kings.

Horrible Histories. That's how I learned them.

Here you go.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g71kWzJWuSs

I really regret that your Songs about Learning One Day didn't happen.

Cheers!

[Bamaman]

The goal is to maximize my earnings for the benefit of my family. If that requires me to offer a tie, I will. If it doesn't, I won't. For the record, I did not offer a tie in my fifth game (a lock game where I had the wrong answer in FJ).

You horrible man!!!

[MDaunt]

The goal is to maximize my earnings for the benefit of my family. If that requires me to offer a tie, I will. If it doesn't, I won't. For the record, I did not offer a tie in my fifth game (a lock game where I had the wrong answer in FJ).

You horrible man!!!

I can live with that.

[opusthepenguin]

The goal is to maximize my earnings for the benefit of my family. If that requires me to offer a tie, I will. If it doesn't, I won't. For the record, I did not offer a tie in my fifth game (a lock game where I had the wrong answer in FJ).

Did you end up winning by a dollar?

[StevenH]

The goal is to maximize my earnings for the benefit of my family. If that requires me to offer a tie, I will. If it doesn't, I won't. For the record, I did not offer a tie in my fifth game (a lock game where I had the wrong answer in FJ).

Did you hate the FJ category?

[lieph82]

An interesting scenario for me would be if I were leading $24,000 to $23,600 with 3rd place in the red pre-FJ. She would be tough competition again the next day, obviously, so I wouldn't want to offer a tie, but if I did offer a tie and she made the advised wager, I would win (tie) on a double stumper, which would be huge. I wonder if you can get an idea in the green room who's likely to be a good wagerer? If I didn't particularly like the FJ category and I thought there was a good chance she'd make the logical bet, I think I'd bet for the tie there.

The goal is to maximize my earnings for the benefit of my family. If that requires me to offer a tie, I will. If it doesn't, I won't. For the record, I did not offer a tie in my fifth game (a lock game where I had the wrong answer in FJ).

Did you end up winning by a dollar?

Yeah, if you were leading $20,000 to $4,000 and bet $11,999, I'd probably look at you a little funny, but hey, to each his own. But nobody could possibly criticize you for betting small and taking the guaranteed money.

[MDaunt]

The goal is to maximize my earnings for the benefit of my family. If that requires me to offer a tie, I will. If it doesn't, I won't. For the record, I did not offer a tie in my fifth game (a lock game where I had the wrong answer in FJ).

Did you end up winning by a dollar?

I don't remember exactly, but I don't think 2nd place went all in.

The goal is to maximize my earnings for the benefit of my family. If that requires me to offer a tie, I will. If it doesn't, I won't. For the record, I did not offer a tie in my fifth game (a lock game where I had the wrong answer in FJ).

Did you hate the FJ category?

Loved it. (I got it wrong because I responded How Green Is My Valley).

[seaborgium]

perhaps.
but mr. slaven's post (whenever it was) was long after the show aired, and even longer after it was taped, which gave him plenty of time to cook up an explanation. it is hard to believe that he didn't remember that the fifth game would be his *last* game.
i remember such things as facial expressions and physical demeanor; if i had heard that explanation at the time, i would not have bought it.
and i don't buy it now
reasonable people can disagree.

As Mark posted, Robert already had a lock; mea culpa for thinking his game fit your description. Do you have the same opinion of people who led, say, $11,000 to $5,000, and bet $999?

In my fifth game, even though the opponent who led me entering FJ had bet small on all three Daily Doubles, that detail never crossed my mind when I tried to anticipate what she'd wager in FJ. I'm sure I would have thought of it as a viewer, but it's easy to get focused one particular way when you're on stage, to the point where you miss details pointing a different way. (I was $1,600 behind her and had to bet $0 because third place had half my score, but I worried she might anticipate this and bet $1,599 or less. Eventually I comforted myself with the idea that I wouldn't dare to wager anything less than $14,801 from her position. She ended up splitting the difference and betting $7,000; I won when I was the only one with a correct response. But I wish I had thought of the DDs and found them a convincing argument for betting big.)

And I've met Robert, who is guileless.

[UiscePreston]

It's a Dutch name, and in Dutch the "P" and "B" sounds are almost interchangeable.

Here is a minimal pair in Dutch: pand "property" and band "orchestra" - two separate words with two separate pronunciations and two separate meanings - none of which are interchangeable to a Dutch speaker. There are hundreds of minimal pairs in Dutch where by exchanging one of these consonants for the other, you will change the pronunciation and meaning, ex. perk "bed"/berk "birch tree", pont "ferry"/bont "fur", et al. Thus /p/ and /b/ are separate meaningful sound units called phonemes. They are not interchangeable.

The Dutch language does have a couple of linguistic processes that might make someone think Dutch /p/ is /b/ or vice versa.

1) Nearly all dialects of Dutch (except for Groningen) do not aspirate their voiceless stops at all. This means if a vowel follows these types of stops, voicing starts immediately after the release of consonants like /p/, /t/, and /k/. In English, when these consonants are word-initial, they are aspirated. i.e. followed by a brief puff of air. You don't notice it because it holds no meaning. But it is there and it buffers that voicing of the vowel from the stops, making a /p/ less likely to be heard as its voiced counterpart, /b/ - which is a common mistake for English speakers when grasping foreign words and names. (It is also the reason that the most famous misheard lyric of all time is 'Scuse me while I kiss this guy. The /k/ in sky is a voiceless stop that is unaspirated because it is in a sound cluster with /s/ and not word-initial; it is therefore misheard as a [g], its voiced twin.) The language-specific nuance called voice onset time, or VOT, causes these issues, especially with non-native eavesdroppers. But this doesn't mean /p/ and /b/ (or even /k/ and /g/) are swappable. These are troubles with perception - "this guy" isn't equivalent now with "the sky".

2) Dutch like German devoices word-final obstruents (voiced stops like /b/, /d/ and /g/; and voiced fricatives like /v/ and /z/). Here is a video that might help explain the phenomenon:

This certainly does not mean that /p/ and /b/ are merging. This is a conditional sound change within a limited environment with a strict unidirectionality. The [p] in this situation is not misspoken or misunderstood, nor does its presence alter meaning. It is simply a natural realization (an allophone) of what is actually the phoneme /b/. Moreover, uttering /b/ in this word-final environment would be wrong in that Dutch has this devoicing rule. And this weird rule even creates homophones: berk "bed" and berg "mountain" are pronounced the same way. So how is that even interchangeability? It's not. The g on berg is still deep-down a /g/; it's just pronounced as [k]. And you don't pronounce the k in berk as a /g/. Are /s/ and /z/ almost interchangeable in English - both represent plural and both are spelled with an s? Can you pluralize cat with a /z/ sound? Try it. You should be able to since /z/ means "plural". But just like Dutch devoicing, we have a rule here. (There are some interesting and surprising papers on what the underlying form of plural in English might actually be.)

Ryan's response falls under rule #1. I analyzed the audio and there was something about his VOT. If it were a regular English voiced /b/ that he uttered in his "Kuiper", there would have been normal pre-voicing before he released the consonant. But there was barely any - like it was dampened. Maybe he was shooting for that Dutch /p/. Nevertheless, I think he mostly got away with this one under the Leeway with Foreign Names rule.

[Vermonter]

Loved it. (I got it wrong because I responded How Green Is My Valley).

Seeing as though it takes 120 days for the check to arrive, maybe you should have responded How Green Will Be My Valley.

[MarkBarrett]

The goal is to maximize my earnings for the benefit of my family. If that requires me to offer a tie, I will. If it doesn't, I won't. For the record, I did not offer a tie in my fifth game (a lock game where I had the wrong answer in FJ).

Your game #5

9300-700=8600
Sharon: 3100+1200=4300
Alan: 4200+2100=6300 (Interesting coincidence with the player's name.)

Any 5x champ with a lock on the last day did not "owe" the 2nd place player anything.

[lieph82]

The goal is to maximize my earnings for the benefit of my family. If that requires me to offer a tie, I will. If it doesn't, I won't. For the record, I did not offer a tie in my fifth game (a lock game where I had the wrong answer in FJ).

Your game #5

9300-700=8600
Sharon: 3100+1200=4300
Alan: 4200+2100=6300 (Interesting coincidence with the player's name.)

Any 5x champ with a lock on the last day did not "owe" the 2nd place player anything.

Absolutely not--you never owe a competitor anything. But personally, I'd jump at the chance to give someone thousands of dollars at very little cost to myself, though I wouldn't blame someone for not doing the same.

[dhkendall]

Loved it. (I got it wrong because I responded How Green Is My Valley).

Alex's favourite movie! You deserved the neg!

[StevenH]

I just went to the archive, and the random FJ that came up was the one from this game: http://j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=4492

[TenPoundHammer]

I still see literally no way to keep these names straight.

[econgator]

I still see literally no way to keep these names straight.

Well, that's your problem.