SHC Round 2 Instant Replay Thread [SPOILERS]
Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall
- thejeopardyfan
- (Unranked)
- Posts: 861
- Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 2:37 am
Re: SHC Round 2 Instant Replay Thread [SPOILERS]
I agree with Paucle, but I did get the question right on a WAG. Hbomb, your argument was that the clue "tricked" "a lot" of people. Not grounds for an RQ. The question isn't flawed.
-
- Jeopardy! Contestant
- Posts: 198
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:50 am
Re: SHC Round 2 Instant Replay Thread [SPOILERS]
Given the points value/loss, I don't care that much, but I think a six-point question would be a term that's commonly found and defined, yes? I used to make costumes for theater, and the term 'outseam' was never used. Given that it's not even in most dictionaries, I think it must be a relatively new term to tailoring. Ah well.
- gnash
- Jeopardy! Champion
- Posts: 1678
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:24 am
Re: SHC Round 2 Instant Replay Thread [SPOILERS]
Exactly - it has always been the principle in SHC (and similarly on J!) that giving points to one player does not punish another. I have always thought that to be incorrect, and still do, but an incorrect principle applied consistently is far better in game play than inconsistent rulings.hbomb1947 wrote:AFAIK, whether some players were able to correctly answer a flawed question has never been a criterion for whether an RQ gets issued. The invocation of the remedy does not "punish" those people; they still get the points and they don't have to worry about whether they can correctly answer the replacement clue.Paucle wrote:Still, some players braver than me were able to infer the correct answer. They took a chance and got it right. I think an RQ would essentially punish them.
Granted, DoT deserves a break these days and I'd be perfectly happy to accept a higher bar for RQs on those grounds, but that's a very different reason from "RQ would punish those who guessed".
- TomKBaltimoreBoy
- Lucky to be Here
- Posts: 580
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 8:30 am
Re: SHC Round 2 Instant Replay Thread [SPOILERS]
You wouldn't lose points for getting the answer DoT was going for - -a replacement question has never penalized anyone that chose to keep their original points. But the question was flawed in and of itself -- not because I want the answer to be "inseam", but because the seam as identified by the clue doesn't exist. That's why I CLAMmed on it.thejeopardyfan wrote:I agree with Paucle, but I did get the question right on a WAG. Hbomb, your argument was that the clue "tricked" "a lot" of people. Not grounds for an RQ. The question isn't flawed.
Life IS pain, Princess. Anyone telling you differently is selling something.
-
- The support is non-zero
- Posts: 2727
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:10 pm
- Contact:
- RandyG
- Founder of the Royal House of JBoardie of the Month
- Posts: 2006
- Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:23 pm
- Location: Marana, AZ
- Contact:
Re: SHC Round 2 Instant Replay Thread [SPOILERS]
As the mystery writer of the category, I should comment regarding the outseam question. (I've been out of touch these past several days.) DoT, as is his prerogative, changed the intent of the original question, so he should be the sole arbiter. Given that, I do see a number of references to "outseam" as described in the clue, and the clue clearly does not describe an inseam. This might have been easier all around if a higher point value had been assigned, as outseam is not nearly as common a term as inseam.
- DadofTwins
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 1206
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:11 am
- Location: Fortress of SHC-itude
- Contact:
Re: SHC Round 2 Instant Replay Thread [SPOILERS]
We're RQ-ing "outseam."
Ultimately, the clue succombed to death by a thousand cuts. No one flaw was fatal enough to kill it, but there were enough there (word not in dictionary, technical difference between "waist" and "waistline," the "I want to give you points" principle) to justify RQ-ing in this case.
I'll post the new clue with tomorrow's set.
-DoT
Ultimately, the clue succombed to death by a thousand cuts. No one flaw was fatal enough to kill it, but there were enough there (word not in dictionary, technical difference between "waist" and "waistline," the "I want to give you points" principle) to justify RQ-ing in this case.
I'll post the new clue with tomorrow's set.
-DoT
-
- Jeopardy! Contestant
- Posts: 198
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:50 am
Re: SHC Round 2 Instant Replay Thread [SPOILERS]
Thanks for that, DoT.
- Paucle
- Trekardy! Writer
- Posts: 3233
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 3:36 pm
- Location: near Albany NY
Re: SHC Round 2 Instant Replay Thread [SPOILERS]
I understand they get to keep their "outseam" points. Thier losing them wasn't my issue. My argument for keeping it was merely that I didn't view it as flawed enough to toss. I thought the main argument against it was that the answer wasn't a mainstream-enough word, and therefore unfair for obscurity reasons. But it was for that very reason I believed those who took a chance and got it right (did you notice how many as much said, 'Never heard of it, but it followed") deserved their 6 (or 9) point gain on their fellow players. Now their intrepidness, in many instances, will go unrewarded. But if the definition itself was lacking, then, so be it. (Still and all, even if the definition had been spot-on, outseam was outofmyleague.)TomKBaltimoreBoy wrote:You wouldn't lose points for getting the answer DoT was going for - -a replacement question has never penalized anyone that chose to keep their original points. But the question was flawed in and of itself -- not because I want the answer to be "inseam", but because the seam as identified by the clue doesn't exist. That's why I CLAMmed on it.thejeopardyfan wrote:I agree with Paucle, but I did get the question right on a WAG. Hbomb, your argument was that the clue "tricked" "a lot" of people. Not grounds for an RQ. The question isn't flawed.
BTW, I'm suitably (apt adverb, yes?) impressed that you are so incredibly well-versed in a definition of a word that most of us didn't even know existed!
- TomKBaltimoreBoy
- Lucky to be Here
- Posts: 580
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 8:30 am
Re: SHC Round 2 Instant Replay Thread [SPOILERS]
Thanks for the kind words, Paucle, but my knowledge comes from the same experience as Suze and --Pete; I spent a lot of time working with costumers and in theatre costume shops. I'm lucky they were as confused as I.
Life IS pain, Princess. Anyone telling you differently is selling something.