Wednesday, December 10, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall
-
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 1605
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 10:52 pm
Re: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
I believe that if players tied for second at the end of FJ! are tied at the end of FJ!, second goes to the player leading at the end of the first round. Alex said this a few times in the early years of the show, it's probably still true.
- TheyCallMeMrKid
- Swimming in the Jeopardy! Pool
- Posts: 1156
- Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:35 pm
- Location: St. Louis, MO
Re: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Your posts are really long.goatman wrote:Toyed with TR then recall he was Gov NY not Congressman...Thomas More: Utopia.
Sheepin' it real.
-
- Loyal Jeopardista
- Posts: 229
- Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2014 10:20 pm
Re: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Kind of an all or nothing wager from the tied 2nd/3rd. Going back to frequency analysis
About 53% of time historically, 1st gets it right. We can assume 1st is going to bet to cover. So basically we lose.
About 19% of the time its a triple stumper
About 20% of the time its a single get by either 2nd or 3rd, so lets assume 10% its us and 10% its the other player.
So if we bet 0, we win triple stumpers (19%) and when we are a single get (10%), which is 29% out of about 47% of the time we even have a chance. So>60% we can win by betting 0 and 1st misses.
Seems like betting 0 is superior to shoving from the 2nd/3rd tie with the scores so close.
About 53% of time historically, 1st gets it right. We can assume 1st is going to bet to cover. So basically we lose.
About 19% of the time its a triple stumper
About 20% of the time its a single get by either 2nd or 3rd, so lets assume 10% its us and 10% its the other player.
So if we bet 0, we win triple stumpers (19%) and when we are a single get (10%), which is 29% out of about 47% of the time we even have a chance. So>60% we can win by betting 0 and 1st misses.
Seems like betting 0 is superior to shoving from the 2nd/3rd tie with the scores so close.
Re: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Don't forget, with a zero bet we also have a chance on a single get by the other tied player, if s/he also went with zero.danspartan wrote:Kind of an all or nothing wager from the tied 2nd/3rd. Going back to frequency analysis
About 53% of time historically, 1st gets it right. We can assume 1st is going to bet to cover. So basically we lose.
About 19% of the time its a triple stumper
About 20% of the time its a single get by either 2nd or 3rd, so lets assume 10% its us and 10% its the other player.
So if we bet 0, we win triple stumpers (19%) and when we are a single get (10%), which is 29% out of about 47% of the time we even have a chance. So>60% we can win by betting 0 and 1st misses.
Seems like betting 0 is superior to shoving from the 2nd/3rd tie with the scores so close.
I analyzed the situation based on the fact that triple stumpers are much more common than double gets with the leader/champ missing, and in addition to what I noted above, those two situations are the only ones where our bet makes a difference (provided the leader bets to cover, and ignoring the tie rule). So a zero bet is more likely to win. Perhaps the category influenced the decisions of the players.
Travis might have some extra incentive to go all in, as he was losing the tiebreaker for 2nd. Let's assume the leader gets it right. There are 16 combinations of the two trailing players betting either everything or zero and either getting it right or wrong. In 8 of those he bets it all. Of those 8, he gets 2nd place three times (RW for him, with Mindy betting zero and Mindy betting everything, and RR when Mindy bets zero). Of the 8 combinations where he bets zero, he only gets 2nd place twice (Mindy going all in and getting it wrong, so RW and WW). Still, doesn't seem nearly enough to overcome the -EV noted earlier.
Re: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Brevity is the soul of wit.TheyCallMeMrKid wrote:Your posts are really long.goatman wrote:Toyed with TR then recall he was Gov NY not Congressman...Thomas More: Utopia.
Re: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Technically, a senator is a congressman. They are very, very rarely referred to that way around here, though. "Congressman" almost always refers to a member of the House.
Re: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
This technical point would be worth noting if anyone could point to a source of any authority that refers to a Congressman McConnell or Congressman Feinstein. You can't, because senators are of course part of Congress, but the term "Congressman" is reserved for members of the House of Representatives.alietr wrote:Technically, a senator is a congressman. They are very, very rarely referred to that way around here, though. "Congressman" almost always refers to a member of the House.
Re: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
A Senator is a congressman, but not a Congressman.davey wrote:This technical point would be worth noting if anyone could point to a source of any authority that refers to a Congressman McConnell or Congressman Feinstein. You can't, because senators are of course part of Congress, but the term "Congressman" is reserved for members of the House of Representatives.alietr wrote:Technically, a senator is a congressman. They are very, very rarely referred to that way around here, though. "Congressman" almost always refers to a member of the House.
The best thing that Neil Armstrong ever did, was to let us all imagine we were him.
Latest movies (1-10): Shadows (5), Foxy Brown (7), Everything Everywhere All at Once (10), Ruby Gillman: Teenage Kraken (6)
Latest movies (1-10): Shadows (5), Foxy Brown (7), Everything Everywhere All at Once (10), Ruby Gillman: Teenage Kraken (6)
Re: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
I doubt she would take kindly to that anyway.davey wrote: Congressman Feinstein.
Re: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
I'm not even sure I would go that far, unless someone showed that good sources make that distinction. There's often a marked lack of evidence in these discussions.Volante wrote:A Senator is a congressman, but not a Congressman.davey wrote:This technical point would be worth noting if anyone could point to a source of any authority that refers to a Congressman McConnell or Congressman Feinstein. You can't, because senators are of course part of Congress, but the term "Congressman" is reserved for members of the House of Representatives.alietr wrote:Technically, a senator is a congressman. They are very, very rarely referred to that way around here, though. "Congressman" almost always refers to a member of the House.
The expression "senators and congressmen" is common, as Google shows.
-
- Contributor
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2014 9:30 pm
Re: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
I will always, always get "Endymion" and "Keats" wrong for the sole reason that my childhood neighborhood was Longfellow, with all of the street names coming from Longfellow's writings, including "Endymion Way."
- Winchell Factor
- Jeopardy! Champion
- Posts: 505
- Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 4:07 pm
Re: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
So, FW, you grew up in these parts then?
-
- Contributor
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2014 9:30 pm
Re: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Indeed. I'm actually in D.C. these days, but that's why I had my billing as being from ye ol' hometown.Winchell Factor wrote:So, FW, you grew up in these parts then?
- Robert K S
- Jeopardy! Champion
- Posts: 5239
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:26 pm
- Location: Cleveland, Ohio
- Contact:
Re: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Y'all check out my post here on this problem.legendneverdies wrote:I believe that if players tied for second at the end of FJ! are tied at the end of FJ!, second goes to the player leading at the end of the first round. Alex said this a few times in the early years of the show, it's probably still true.
- Silverfox
- Don't Step on My Tail!
- Posts: 279
- Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2014 1:27 pm
- Location: Deptford, New Jersey
Re: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
I didn't get FJ. Not enough time for me to tease it out. I put down FDR just to have an answer, any answer.
Overall, I liked the Energy category best.
Overall, I liked the Energy category best.
Be alert. Stupid never takes a day off!