Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall

User avatar
lieph82
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2013 12:48 am

Re: Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by lieph82 »

JoshuaRQI wrote:What would have been an appropriate wager by Chuck? I had $14,400 on my fake scorecard and wagered $900 (assuming Ken, Chuck, and Russ were playing as my opponents). Was that also foolish?
The Final Wager suggests $6800 to $8400, but given Ken's history of always making the MSB from the lead, I think anything $8400 or less is fine.

User avatar
jpahk
Jeopardy! TOCer
Posts: 615
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 1:16 am

Re: Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by jpahk »

StevenH wrote:I wasn't a fan of the "Robert Scott" DD or Ken's wager on it. In Ken's position I probably would have wagered $3000.
i just want to point out that ken absolutely nailed this wager. if he gets it right, and the rest of the board goes the way it did, he ends up locking out chuck by $200, $30600 to $15200. a larger wager would not have significantly improved his chances at a lockout, but would have increased the risk of surrendering the pre-FJ lead on a miss.

i'm a wordplay guy, and i did just fine on the spy novels (i missed harrison protocol but got the others), but i was a bit behind on the last two anagrams. that was some top-drawer stuff.

i'd appreciate it if all the chuck haters would just. shut. up. about his fj wager. you can say that ken "always" makes the MSB, but we have seen plenty of cases in this tournament of unorthodox wagering by the leader. this is literally the first time ken has had to wager from the lead in a non-lock game against two experienced players; i don't know how you can look at the available information and be so confident that he's going to bet to cover. and if he doesn't, then chuck going big could win him the game on a double- or triple-get. there is nothing to say it is a better or worse strategy than going small and trying to stay ahead of ken if ken should miss; it is merely an alternate strategy.

(that said, i think betting it all would have been better than holding enough back to keep russ locked out. ken has no reason to ever let russ back into the game, so russ is a non-factor when it comes to winning (and 2nd pays the same as 3rd). if you are going to go big, in this case, you might as well go all-in.)

User avatar
rschumac12
The Storm from Colorado
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 11:41 pm

Re: Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by rschumac12 »

hscer wrote:
Tygor wrote:A couple of things I noticed here:

-the look Chuck gave to the audience at the end of the J! Round was fantastic. Almost a "what can you do?" look
I loved that look too. I think there was one entering the mid-1st-round commercial as well. I'm guessing he was looking more at the other semi-finalists than the audience in general.
This is going to be my everlasting memory of Chuck, watching him make that look (throwing up "your arms", if you will) to the other contestants at the end of the J! round, while I was thinking exactly the same thing. I loved seeing him make that big comeback in the second round. It's not news to anyone here, but Ken's buzzer timing is amazing. Also not news to most people here: it's immensely frustrating to not be able to ring in when you know stuff! :) Wish I had been able to be a more active participant in this game, but being up on the stage with Ken and Chuck as they do what they do is something I'll always treasure.

I'm very grateful to the archivists and the community here (even though I don't hang around as much as I used to), and it was great to get a chance to plug j-archive on the show. (That whole interview segment was totally off-the-cuff, BTW.) I can with all honesty say that I never would've gotten into this position without this community...the people I met (virtually or IRL) from the old Sony board taught me how to win on the buzzer (except against Ken, apparently), how to wager, how to handle the intricacies of the game. And the archive provided a whole lot of material to study going into this tournament: a little computer code plus an iPad app gives you thousands of FJ clues to pore over. Thanks to Robert KS and the whole team for keeping it going all these years!

Some other collected thoughts on the game: http://russandalexandspam.blogspot.com/ ... iddle.html, including a potential FJ strategy for your consideration. ;)

User avatar
rschumac12
The Storm from Colorado
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 11:41 pm

Re: Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by rschumac12 »

Rex Kramer wrote: I got all the clues that Ken got, and surely would have gotten "The Harrison Protocol", too, if I'd been behind the podium (I only memorize the numerical positions of presidents when I know it might win me some cash), but I, too, stumbled on "The Xanadu Encyclical" because I couldn't pull the last term. Jerome got it.
I hesitated just ever so slightly about ringing in with "The Xanadu Encyclical" on the rebound and Chuck beat me to it. I think the length of the clues in that category, along with Chuck's joking about it, were one major reason the board didn't get cleared. We were all a little surprised to hear the beeps signaling the end of the round, as it didn't feel like we had been playing particularly slowly.

yclept
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 239
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 3:43 am

Re: Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by yclept »

I told my wife after the Jeopardy round to not be surprised if Chuck made a run at it. Not that I expected him to ever take the lead (which he did), but Chuck is just too darn good to not make it interesting at some point. Of course, a nicely timed DD doesn't hurt.

Russ just ran into Jeopardy royalty here. Let us not forget that he did defeat a Jeopardy queen (Larissa) in this tournament, so he did quite well to stamp his own place as a legitimate player who will be a threat to win games in any future big tournament. The big second round comeback was just reserved for Chuck tonight instead.

I wouldn't have minded seeing Chuck getting into the final to take a shot at the million. But you can't ever argue with Ken Freakin Jennings going for the win.

Just a great game all around. Chuck's expressions after the Jeopardy round were classic. Of course, almost 30 years ago, there were contestants on the show that were probably thinking the same when they were playing him.

User avatar
Sage on the Hudson
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 480
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 6:32 am
Location: Croton-on-Hudson, NY

Just So

Post by Sage on the Hudson »

Bamaman wrote:No chance on FJ. I thought the phrase was associated with slavery.
It has nothing to do with slavery, in a strict sense, everything to do with colonialism, and the mental and moral contortions European colonial powers used to justify the unjustifiable: When in doubt, invoke paternalistic "concern" for the "childlike savages" you've subjugated, and whose natural resources you've stolen "for their own benefit."

JeopRDFan
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 165
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 8:34 am

Re: Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by JeopRDFan »

UniquePerspective wrote:
heelsrule1988 wrote:
opusthepenguin wrote:Maybe Brad will make one of his bad bets tomorrow and lose to Leszek. I can always hope.
Either you don't want the Dream Final™ or you really like Leszek.
See, this is my thought.

Is there really one universal "Dream Final" to the point where it needs to be jokingly trademarked? I think a lot of different people want different things. I wouldn't mind seeing Leszek win tomorrow for the sake of something different. I wouldn't mind seeing Pam win Wednesday to make her first big final in some times, and I also wouldn't mind seeing Colby win because of his new style.

I know you're very excited about this as you should be, it's a very competitive tournament, but to me, saying that there's only one dream final is a little bit silly.
Agreed. Not really a fan of Colby, but I would also like to see either Pam or Leszek (or both!) in the final game. Very exciting match tonight and I was rooting for Chuck after his come from behind run. Missed FJ as I'd never heard of the quote; I said "Your Arms" as well, just to have something.

Bamaman
Also Receiving Votes
Posts: 10677
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: Just So

Post by Bamaman »

Sage on the Hudson wrote:
Bamaman wrote:No chance on FJ. I thought the phrase was associated with slavery.
It has nothing to do with slavery, in a strict sense, everything to do with colonialism, and the mental and moral contortions European colonial powers used to justify the unjustifiable: When in doubt, invoke paternalistic "concern" for the "childlike savages" you've subjugated, and whose natural resources you've stolen "for their own benefit."
Thanks, I think I remember the origin of the phrase now. I associate it with slavery I suppose because people seemed to use that concept as a justification for slavery. That they were doing them a favor by rescuing them from Africa.

I don't consider the term "now controversial". I think of it as a relic of a bygone era and way of thinking. I have never even heard it used outside of a historical discussion.

John Boy
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 2795
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:11 am

Re: Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by John Boy »

Boo, hiss. Didn't get to see the game at all, which was pre-empted throughout the Cleveland area by coverage of severe weather.

A quick glance at this thread tells me I had zero chance at this FJ. And what, Ken advanced to the finals? I'm dumbfounded.

User avatar
sarah0114
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 329
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:15 am
Location: Iowa
Contact:

Re: Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by sarah0114 »

xxaaaxx wrote:After the last time they used it, I was hoping they'd burn that @!@#ing Spy Novel category and never speak of it again...and it rises from the ashes for the BotD. WTF.
What was going on in that category? Was it just supposed to be "tell us a funny-sounding word and a longish noun but add The at the beginning" for each response? I don't remember seeing that category before and if Alex explained it last night, I missed it.

User avatar
georgespelvin
The Charlie Brown of Jeopardy Auditions
Posts: 885
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 3:40 pm

Re: Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by georgespelvin »

Rex Kramer wrote: I do love those figure-it-out-type categories, and usually do well on them, but I must say Ken's speed in the anagrams category was unreal. To get "trust fund baby" without enumeration before Alex had finished reading the question was top-level wordplay that even few in the National Puzzlers League would be capable of.

Rex
I think that Ken's uncanny speed at the wordplay categories gives him that extra dimension that makes him almost unbeatable on Jeopardy. In addition to Jeopardy, I thought that Ken's gets in winning on the (unfortunately) one-shot tournament TV quiz show "Grand Slam" were amazing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Slam ... game_show)
I used to be AWSOP but wanted to be more theatrical.

User avatar
georgespelvin
The Charlie Brown of Jeopardy Auditions
Posts: 885
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 3:40 pm

Re: Just So

Post by georgespelvin »

Bamaman wrote:
Sage on the Hudson wrote:
Bamaman wrote:No chance on FJ. I thought the phrase was associated with slavery.
It has nothing to do with slavery, in a strict sense, everything to do with colonialism, and the mental and moral contortions European colonial powers used to justify the unjustifiable: When in doubt, invoke paternalistic "concern" for the "childlike savages" you've subjugated, and whose natural resources you've stolen "for their own benefit."
Thanks, I think I remember the origin of the phrase now. I associate it with slavery I suppose because people seemed to use that concept as a justification for slavery. That they were doing them a favor by rescuing them from Africa.

I don't consider the term "now controversial". I think of it as a relic of a bygone era and way of thinking. I have never even heard it used outside of a historical discussion.
I knew the term without this, but some of you might find this Washington Post review from earlier this month interesting, as the author of the book reviewed, William Easterly, believes that the "white man's burden" philosophy still exists, at least implicitly, in today's First World attempts to fight global poverty. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... story.html

The author wrote an earlier, similarly themed book in 2006 that contained the term in its title. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/014303 ... aspos09-20
I used to be AWSOP but wanted to be more theatrical.

User avatar
jeff6286
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 4916
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 7:34 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN

Re: Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by jeff6286 »

sarah0114 wrote:
xxaaaxx wrote:After the last time they used it, I was hoping they'd burn that @!@#ing Spy Novel category and never speak of it again...and it rises from the ashes for the BotD. WTF.
What was going on in that category? Was it just supposed to be "tell us a funny-sounding word and a longish noun but add The at the beginning" for each response? I don't remember seeing that category before and if Alex explained it last night, I missed it.
You have to go back quite a ways, all the way to the November 2011 TOC. I didn't realize it had been that long until I went looking for it.

http://www.j-archive.com/showgame.php?g ... hlight=Spy

User avatar
gnash
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 1678
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:24 am

Re: Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by gnash »

This is, as far as I can remember, the first time I decided not to delete a J! game after watching it because I thought I might want to watch it again.

Historians, am I right that, in any game not featuring Brad Rutter, this was the latest in the game Ken was trailing? (I suppose the game against Matt Ottinger would be the only viable competitor.)

Odd how one can write a very good book on how to prepare for Jeopardy!, be a pioneer in game strategy, yet never bother to consider the basics of FJ wagering. Given the increased clue difficulty in the tournament, the probability of both Ken and Chuck being wrong was at least 20%. If Chuck makes it to the final, his winning chances are at least 25%. (I gave him 25% against Ken, who I think is the hardest of all to beat.) So, 0.20 x 0.25 x 1 million = $50,000 is a conservative estimate of how much this skill (that can be learned in the Green Room in a few minutes) was worth to Chuck at the end of the DJ round.

Ken's wagering is just about perfect now (making him an even stronger favorite), but he seems psychologically uncomfortable with it. Will we see him go back to smaller wagers in the final?

Joon made a valid point about no opponent's wager being certain, but come on, what's the probability of Ken making a highly unorthodox wager? 1% is generous. Compared to the probability of a double stumper, it's negligible.

Bamaman
Also Receiving Votes
Posts: 10677
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Bamaman »

I was pretty certain what Ken was going to bet.

I agree Chuck was at a disadvantage in the wordplay category. I watched all the 1980s games on Vrackle and some of the 90s and was struck by the lack of punny type categories they had back then. Also, Chuck has lived abroad for many years and probably has watched the show very little recently.

I did get KB Toys but did say edict.

jeopardyhopeful
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 150
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by jeopardyhopeful »

I think there is just too much money on the line for KenJen not to make the bet to cover a Chuck all-in. If he lost because he got FJ right but didn't wager enough, I don't know if he'd ever be able to forgive himself. And for Chuck, that makes it easy: just use the old 3b - 2a formula and he bets exactly $8,400 and wins if he and Ken both miss.

User avatar
TheyCallMeMrKid
Swimming in the Jeopardy! Pool
Posts: 1151
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:35 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO

Re: Just So

Post by TheyCallMeMrKid »

Bamaman wrote:
Sage on the Hudson wrote:
Bamaman wrote:No chance on FJ. I thought the phrase was associated with slavery.
It has nothing to do with slavery, in a strict sense, everything to do with colonialism, and the mental and moral contortions European colonial powers used to justify the unjustifiable: When in doubt, invoke paternalistic "concern" for the "childlike savages" you've subjugated, and whose natural resources you've stolen "for their own benefit."
Thanks, I think I remember the origin of the phrase now. I associate it with slavery I suppose because people seemed to use that concept as a justification for slavery. That they were doing them a favor by rescuing them from Africa.

I don't consider the term "now controversial". I think of it as a relic of a bygone era and way of thinking. I have never even heard it used outside of a historical discussion.

Was not familiar with the Kipling quote (poetry is a real knowledge weakness for me), so I, like many others, would've written "your arms" just to write something, but had heard the phrase maybe only because I saw the John Travolta movie several years ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Man% ... den_(film)
Sheepin' it real.

bleezy
Valued Contributor
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 9:36 am

Re: Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by bleezy »

Is anyone else surprised that all missed "arbitrary"? It seemed like one of the easier questions on the board.

User avatar
This Is Kirk!
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 5426
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:35 am
Location: Seattle

Re: Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by This Is Kirk! »

The ability to unscramble anagrams seems to be a "you have it or you don't" kind of ability. My wife is probably a notch below Ken, meanwhile I struggle with anything longer than five letters. :)

User avatar
lieph82
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2013 12:48 am

Re: Monday, May 12, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by lieph82 »

jpahk wrote: i'd appreciate it if all the chuck haters would just. shut. up. about his fj wager. you can say that ken "always" makes the MSB, but we have seen plenty of cases in this tournament of unorthodox wagering by the leader. this is literally the first time ken has had to wager from the lead in a non-lock game against two experienced players; i don't know how you can look at the available information and be so confident that he's going to bet to cover. and if he doesn't, then chuck going big could win him the game on a double- or triple-get. there is nothing to say it is a better or worse strategy than going small and trying to stay ahead of ken if ken should miss; it is merely an alternate strategy.

(that said, i think betting it all would have been better than holding enough back to keep russ locked out. ken has no reason to ever let russ back into the game, so russ is a non-factor when it comes to winning (and 2nd pays the same as 3rd). if you are going to go big, in this case, you might as well go all-in.)
Even if you consider that Ken might make an unorthodox wager, Chuck's $11,000 bet doesn't make much sense, to me at least. The strategy in that would be as follows: Ken expects Chuck to bet $8400 or less, so Ken bets $5,001 to cover, and Chuck predicts this so Chuck can win the game on a double get if he bets MORE than $8400, and $11,000 is a round number more than $8400 so that works.

I think the idea that Ken expects Chuck to bet $8400 or less is very out there, considering it's pretty well-known that Chuck has never bet small in the many, many times he's been in second place pre-FJ. Knowing his opponent, a $5,001 bet from Ken wouldn't be very smart there. And I just don't think that Chuck thinks on that many levels for FJ. Personally, I would have been shocked if Ken didn't make the MSB from the lead. But if he didn't, I think a small wager a la Pam or Colby would have been his next option. And then, yes, Chuck can win on a double get, but there'd be no reason for him to bet more than $8400 and lose his chance of winning on a double stumper.
Last edited by lieph82 on Tue May 13, 2014 10:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply