Glacier's the park in Montana. Glacier Bay is in Alaska. The body of water with an iceberg floating in it was the tip-off the stamp was depicting the latter.BigDaddyMatty wrote:I didn't realize I had until you brought it up. I assumed they were one and the same. Guess I need to amend my Coryat.morbeedo wrote:Why was Glacier Bay accepted for national park? Anyone else neg on Glacier National Park?
Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall
- This Is Kirk!
- Jeopardy! Champion
- Posts: 6562
- Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:35 am
- Location: Seattle
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
-
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 6030
- Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:55 pm
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
There are no bodies of water in the Montana park? I got caught by this one too. Wasn't familiar withe Glacier Bay.This Is Kirk! wrote:Glacier's the park in Montana. Glacier Bay is in Alaska. The body of water with an iceberg floating in it was the tip-off the stamp was depicting the latter.BigDaddyMatty wrote:I didn't realize I had until you brought it up. I assumed they were one and the same. Guess I need to amend my Coryat.morbeedo wrote:Why was Glacier Bay accepted for national park? Anyone else neg on Glacier National Park?
-
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 2189
- Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:18 am
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
There are lakes in Glacier National Park, but they don't have icebergs floating in them.davey wrote:There are no bodies of water in the Montana park? I got caught by this one too. Wasn't familiar withe Glacier Bay.This Is Kirk! wrote:Glacier's the park in Montana. Glacier Bay is in Alaska. The body of water with an iceberg floating in it was the tip-off the stamp was depicting the latter.BigDaddyMatty wrote:I didn't realize I had until you brought it up. I assumed they were one and the same. Guess I need to amend my Coryat.morbeedo wrote:Why was Glacier Bay accepted for national park? Anyone else neg on Glacier National Park?
-
- Swimming in the Jeopardy! Pool
- Posts: 856
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:30 pm
- Location: Harwich, MA
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
I'm positive Alex does this deliberately - bringing up something in the interview that he knows is going to be on the board later on - in order to level the playing field a bit for all of the contestants. He's done it plenty of times in the past, and it seems to me that by doing so, he puts it in the mind of the other two contestants as well as the one telling the story. He certainly knows the clues before the game is played, and it just seems impossible that it is not done for some purpose.Category 13 wrote:I don't recall what round the Georgia Songs category was in, but if Devil Went Down to Georgia was in one of the clues it would have been the second game in a row to feature a clue directly related to one of the contestant's interviews.MarkBarrett wrote:Kate had no luck solving the gettable (if one is old enough) Lonesome Dove or Alabama on her DDs
"And has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!"
He chortled in his joy.
Lewis Carroll, "Jabberwocky"
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!"
He chortled in his joy.
Lewis Carroll, "Jabberwocky"
- goatman
- Man Who Stares At Goats!
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 10:43 pm
- Location: Calvert, Maryland
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Instaget FJ, 43R. Knew Mind right away (they clued on it recently also!) and Nash game theory from watched the film AND study statistics. And yes, the Econ 'Nobel' is honorary, w/e.
LT: Joshua > Jericho; ribbed vault; burbank anagram; Nash. Ran cats: Happy, Drs. No get on "Hubba Bubba" lol!
LT: Joshua > Jericho; ribbed vault; burbank anagram; Nash. Ran cats: Happy, Drs. No get on "Hubba Bubba" lol!
The corridors of my mind are plastered with 3M Post-It notes!
-
- Undefeated in Reruns
- Posts: 8941
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:31 am
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Huh?Volante wrote:It does say 'subject of title' though, and given "i of j", "j i" usually (if memory serves) means the same thing.seaborgium wrote:Notice it doesn't say "title subject."econgator wrote:As someone mentioned his death in an auto accident a while ago, check out the article title:
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/joh ... sh-n363901
- Attachments
-
- subject.png (11.18 KiB) Viewed 4057 times
- Volante
- Harbinger of the Doomed Lemur
- Posts: 9254
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:42 pm
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
In the article, where they use normal English. Not the URL.seaborgium wrote:Huh?Volante wrote:It does say 'subject of title' though, and given "i of j", "j i" usually (if memory serves) means the same thing.seaborgium wrote:Notice it doesn't say "title subject."econgator wrote:As someone mentioned his death in an auto accident a while ago, check out the article title:
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/joh ... sh-n363901
...winner of the Nobel prize in economics and the subject of the movie "A Beautiful Mind"...John Nash, winner of the Nobel prize in economics and the subject of the movie "A Beautiful Mind," was killed with his wife Saturday in a car crash in New Jersey, according to state police.
...Nobel prize in economics winner and "A Beautiful Mind" subject...
The best thing that Neil Armstrong ever did, was to let us all imagine we were him.
Latest movies (1-10): Everything Everywhere All at Once (10), Ruby Gillman: Teenage Kraken (6), Black Sunday /1960/ (6), Marcel the Shell with Shoes On (7)
Latest movies (1-10): Everything Everywhere All at Once (10), Ruby Gillman: Teenage Kraken (6), Black Sunday /1960/ (6), Marcel the Shell with Shoes On (7)
-
- Undefeated in Reruns
- Posts: 8941
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:31 am
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
The URL wasn't the point, it was the text search on the right, indicating "subject of title" (that's normal English?) is nowhere in the article (which your quotation further shows).Volante wrote:In the article, where they use normal English. Not the URL.seaborgium wrote:Huh?Volante wrote:It does say 'subject of title' though, and given "i of j", "j i" usually (if memory serves) means the same thing.seaborgium wrote:Notice it doesn't say "title subject."econgator wrote:As someone mentioned his death in an auto accident a while ago, check out the article title:
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/joh ... sh-n363901
...winner of the Nobel prize in economics and the subject of the movie "A Beautiful Mind"...John Nash, winner of the Nobel prize in economics and the subject of the movie "A Beautiful Mind," was killed with his wife Saturday in a car crash in New Jersey, according to state police.
...Nobel prize in economics winner and "A Beautiful Mind" subject...
- opusthepenguin
- The Best Darn Penguin on the Whole JBoard
- Posts: 10319
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:33 pm
- Location: Shawnee, KS
- Contact:
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Right? Might as well give one to Henry Kissinger.goforthetie wrote:The thought of Patton winning a Nobel is hilarious.
-
- Just Starting Out on JBoard
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 9:15 am
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Yes, it may be named in his memory, but it is not a Nobel.davey wrote:The economics prize wasn't endowed by Nobel, but it's named in his memory and listed and discussed at the Nobel Prize official website along with all the others.jwatcher16 wrote:Hi there -teapot37 wrote:Some would argue this FJ has no correct answers. The "Nobel Prize in Economics" isn't, technically, a Nobel Prize.
Didn't keep me from saying Nash.
The Nobel Prize in Econ isn't a Nobel Prize??? How is that? I know there's no Nobel in Math... but????
[/i]
-
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 2981
- Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:11 am
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Exactly what I would have said if I were articulate and knowledgeable.jeff6286 wrote:Knowing whether Nash or Gandhi won the prize or knowing if the films about them won Best Picture, absolutely that is fair game, and I don't think anyone is arguing that it isn't. The point about the Economic Prize not being a true Nobel Prize, I guess that's an interesting fact, though i don't think anyone is strenuously arguing that it breaks this clue.Golf wrote:Some would argue this FJ has no correct answers. The "Nobel Prize in Economics" isn't, technically, a Nobel Prize.There are several posters in this thread who are being argumentative just for sake of doing so. The Nobel Prize discussion as it pertains to a Jeopardy clue is silly and detracts from what was a straightforward FJ.This is correct. The official name is the " Swedish National Bank's Prize In Economic Sciences In Memory Of Alfred Nobel." It's awarding in the Nobel ceremony is controversial, as economics cannot be termed a science in the same way chemistry or biology is, since it is not subject to peer reviewed journals.
And don't get me started on the "title subject" part. This FJ should be taken out and shot.
Oscars is standard Jeopardy fare that should be studied by all contestants before taping, but as we know very few actually do.
I do think this clue had one major flaw, the choice of the words "title subject". I think it would be very plausible for someone to, in parsing this clue in 30 seconds, to be able to think "I know A Beautiful Mind won Best Picture, and I know John Nash won the Nobel for Economics, but is that the answer they're looking for? Is the title subject John Nash, or is it his mind? Did his mind win the Nobel Prize? I suppose in a sense it did, as his mind did the work that was honored, but no prize has ever been engraved with "The Mind of ______" on it, I presume. Maybe they just didn't think of Nash when they wrote this. I bet the answer is someone else...did Gandhi win the Nobel Peace Prize? I know the film won Best Picture. I'm at 24 seconds so I don't have much more time to think about this, I'm gonna guess that Gandhi is the answer they want, I sure don't want to answer Nash and get ruled wrong on a technicality.
Try the clue again without the word "title": The only Nobel Prize winner to be the subject of a Best Picture Oscar winner is this man
Does this leave any ambiguity? Is there any Nobel Prize winner that was a part of a Best Picture winning film but not in the title? No one that I can think of. But then again, someone could have had some small mention or reference. Maybe this is better: The only Nobel Prize winner to be the main subject of a Best Picture Oscar winner is this man
This tells us we're not necessarily looking for someone named in the title. So something like The King's Speech or A Man for All Seasons or A Beautiful Mind should be fair game, if any of them were about a Nobel winner. I think the writers failed a bit on this one. There should never be a time in processing an FJ clue that you think of an answer that you know factually fits all the parts of the clue, you're just not sure if you're correctly reading what they want you to see as the factual parts of the clue. Certainly some could argue that of course John Nash is the title subject, it's his mind, duh, but again, I think a reasonable person could very easily be unsure about this and try to search for an alternate answer instead of going with something they're concerned might be ruled out by the clue.
- dhkendall
- Pursuing the Dream
- Posts: 8789
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:49 am
- Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba
- Contact:
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
At least, thankfully, this didn't affect the outcome of the game.mjgX wrote:Yes, it may be named in his memory, but it is not a Nobel.davey wrote:The economics prize wasn't endowed by Nobel, but it's named in his memory and listed and discussed at the Nobel Prize official website along with all the others.jwatcher16 wrote:Hi there -teapot37 wrote:Some would argue this FJ has no correct answers. The "Nobel Prize in Economics" isn't, technically, a Nobel Prize.
Didn't keep me from saying Nash.
The Nobel Prize in Econ isn't a Nobel Prize??? How is that? I know there's no Nobel in Math... but????
[/i]
"Jeopardy! is two parts luck and one part luck" - Me
"The way to win on Jeopardy is to be a rabidly curious, information-omnivorous person your entire life." - Ken Jennings
Follow my progress game by game since 2012
"The way to win on Jeopardy is to be a rabidly curious, information-omnivorous person your entire life." - Ken Jennings
Follow my progress game by game since 2012
- AleBelly
- Jeopardy! Champion
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 8:57 pm
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Are you saying economics papers aren't peer-reviewed? Because this is patently untrue. And I say this as a chemist who is all too happy to cast aspersions on other sciences.Kenny wrote:This is correct. The official name is the " Swedish National Bank's Prize In Economic Sciences In Memory Of Alfred Nobel." It's awarding in the Nobel ceremony is controversial, as economics cannot be termed a science in the same way chemistry or biology is, since it is not subject to peer reviewed journals.teapot37 wrote:Some would argue this FJ has no correct answers. The "Nobel Prize in Economics" isn't, technically, a Nobel Prize.
And don't get me started on the "title subject" part. This FJ should be taken out and shot.
- jwatcher16
- Loyal Jeopardista
- Posts: 244
- Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 2:29 am
- Contact:
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Hi all -
I see the Nobel discussion is still "around." My own take is this, the best 'analogy' I've thought of to explain my thinking:
Those who watch crime/courtroom shows (reality-based or fictional) know that facts, even forensic facts, can be interpreted differently. One doesn't have to dispute the fact that teapot 37 and Ontario Quizzer brought out that Nobel himself didn't establish the prize. However, other considerations, such as the facts that it IS listed along with the other prizes on the Nobel site, and that it IS presented at the SAME CEREMONY as the others (even though that may be controversial), except for the Nobel Peace Prize (which happens to be Human Rights Day, good folks!) leads me to draw a different conclusion, that is IS a Nobel Prize.
And I wasn't going to do this here, but it has been bothering me and maybe I should. Just a note to Davey. I found your reply to me: "It's not just you, it's the world we live in..." just a bit dismissive and disrespectful. I'm not sure what you were meaning to say, but I felt you were lumping me into some dismissive category. I didn't appreciate that. I take pride in being an individual, and try to conduct myself with some sort of integrity. Also, in the statement you quoted, I was trying to be nice about not really agreeing with their conclusion. I hope you understand why I didn't care for that remark.
I see the Nobel discussion is still "around." My own take is this, the best 'analogy' I've thought of to explain my thinking:
Those who watch crime/courtroom shows (reality-based or fictional) know that facts, even forensic facts, can be interpreted differently. One doesn't have to dispute the fact that teapot 37 and Ontario Quizzer brought out that Nobel himself didn't establish the prize. However, other considerations, such as the facts that it IS listed along with the other prizes on the Nobel site, and that it IS presented at the SAME CEREMONY as the others (even though that may be controversial), except for the Nobel Peace Prize (which happens to be Human Rights Day, good folks!) leads me to draw a different conclusion, that is IS a Nobel Prize.
And I wasn't going to do this here, but it has been bothering me and maybe I should. Just a note to Davey. I found your reply to me: "It's not just you, it's the world we live in..." just a bit dismissive and disrespectful. I'm not sure what you were meaning to say, but I felt you were lumping me into some dismissive category. I didn't appreciate that. I take pride in being an individual, and try to conduct myself with some sort of integrity. Also, in the statement you quoted, I was trying to be nice about not really agreeing with their conclusion. I hope you understand why I didn't care for that remark.
-
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 6030
- Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:55 pm
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
You've misinterpreted. You saidjwatcher16 wrote:Hi all -
I see the Nobel discussion is still "around." My own take is this, the best 'analogy' I've thought of to explain my thinking:
Those who watch crime/courtroom shows (reality-based or fictional) know that facts, even forensic facts, can be interpreted differently. One doesn't have to dispute the fact that teapot 37 and Ontario Quizzer brought out that Nobel himself didn't establish the prize. However, other considerations, such as the facts that it IS listed along with the other prizes on the Nobel site, and that it IS presented at the SAME CEREMONY as the others (even though that may be controversial), except for the Nobel Peace Prize (which happens to be Human Rights Day, good folks!) leads me to draw a different conclusion, that is IS a Nobel Prize.
And I wasn't going to do this here, but it has been bothering me and maybe I should. Just a note to Davey. I found your reply to me: "It's not just you, it's the world we live in..." just a bit dismissive and disrespectful. I'm not sure what you were meaning to say, but I felt you were lumping me into some dismissive category. I didn't appreciate that. I take pride in being an individual, and try to conduct myself with some sort of integrity. Also, in the statement you quoted, I was trying to be nice about not really agreeing with their conclusion. I hope you understand why I didn't care for that remark.
I'm not sure I'd argue it's NOT a Nobel Prize
and I was agreeing (just as I agree with what you say in this post) that it's not something to argue about. In the world we live in, it's a Nobel Prize. To say it's not is to indulge in a trivia gotcha. The Nobel family disapproves of the award. The Nobel Foundation awards it.
-
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 477
- Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 1:29 am
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Count me on the side of those who think the wording of FJ was dishonest.
- jwatcher16
- Loyal Jeopardista
- Posts: 244
- Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 2:29 am
- Contact:
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Hi Davey -davey wrote: You've misinterpreted. You said
I'm not sure I'd argue it's NOT a Nobel Prize
and I was agreeing (just as I agree with what you say in this post) that it's not something to argue about. In the world we live in, it's a Nobel Prize. To say it's not is to indulge in a trivia gotcha. The Nobel family disapproves of the award. The Nobel Foundation awards it.
Well, thanks for responding and clarifying. Sorry if I misinterpreted, but I'm not sure how I was to get what you just said from that one sentence! Was there perhaps another previous post I somehow overlooked? Yes, I have to agree that to most it IS indeed a Nobel. It's a shame the Nobel family disapproves.
I'm reminded of anther sort of analogy here that I thought of in thinking of this little "conundrum." If anyone used to watch The Locator with Troy Dunn (I'm a sucker for these reunion type stories), you may remember the Leonard family. This fellow was searching for his birth family. Turned out his birth father had died and the widow and the fellow's half-siblings had no idea he even existed. BUT they accepted him as one of their own. That's the way I think of this. Too bad that the Nobel family doesn't see it that way as well, that this particular prize may be a "half-sibling" but one of the family nonetheless.
- Robert K S
- Jeopardy! Champion
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:26 pm
- Location: Cleveland, Ohio
- Contact:
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
Just noticed a freak bug in the post-production of this game--they never added the graphic showing Mukund's 2-day total of $31,799 after Final. Alex said it aloud (and got it right), but no little subtitle thingy.
-
- Rank
- Posts: 5424
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 12:26 pm
- Location: Hamilton Ontario
Re: Friday, December 30, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]
I thought I noticed that when it aired and was going to go back and verify...Robert K S wrote:Just noticed a freak bug in the post-production of this game--they never added the graphic showing Mukund's 2-day total of $31,799 after Final. Alex said it aloud (and got it right), but no little subtitle thingy.
But I forgot.
Brian
...but the senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity.
If I had 50 cents for every math question I got right, I'd have $6.30 by now.
If I had 50 cents for every math question I got right, I'd have $6.30 by now.