Against the Wagering Vikings [SPOILERS up to May 12, 2014]

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall

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

Re: Against the Wagering Vikings [SPOILERS up to May 12, 2014]

Post by gnash »

Kingrat47 wrote:
lieph82 wrote:I think that if, in every single one of his appearances on the show, Brad screwed up a basic "this is the state capital of ___" clue, you would hear no end of comments about it on this board. It's frustrating when someone has a weakness that is very easily correctable and it seems as though he does nothing about it.

That being said, everyone has weaknesses in their game, and when Brad's weaknesses have been exposed, he has won due to weaknesses in the wagering strategies of other players. There's really no doubt as to Brad's greatness. And you're right that posters sometimes get a little too frustrated and start moralizing and whatnot. But I think the consternation is warranted, if not to the degree of some of those posts.
I appreciate the response. A subsidiary point of mine, buried in my overlong initial post, is that wagering, particularly of the Final Jeopardy variety that seems to preoccupy most of the wagering analysis, is an awful lot less important than it's being treated.
I really don't know how you can say that without a huge dose of irony, especially in the context of discussing Brad Rutter, who won $3 million largely due to wagering mistakes by his opponents.

(I am by no means diminishing his phenomenal Jeopardy! game playing ability. Clearly, no one has dominated so many opponents of the highest caliber as Brad. But it is a simple fact that he was about to lose the MMM semifinal and the UTOC 3rd round game, but for the wagering mistakes by his opponents.)

Kingrat47
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 182
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 4:09 pm

Re: Against the Wagering Vikings [SPOILERS up to May 12, 2014]

Post by Kingrat47 »

gnash wrote:
Kingrat47 wrote:
lieph82 wrote:I think that if, in every single one of his appearances on the show, Brad screwed up a basic "this is the state capital of ___" clue, you would hear no end of comments about it on this board. It's frustrating when someone has a weakness that is very easily correctable and it seems as though he does nothing about it.

That being said, everyone has weaknesses in their game, and when Brad's weaknesses have been exposed, he has won due to weaknesses in the wagering strategies of other players. There's really no doubt as to Brad's greatness. And you're right that posters sometimes get a little too frustrated and start moralizing and whatnot. But I think the consternation is warranted, if not to the degree of some of those posts.
I appreciate the response. A subsidiary point of mine, buried in my overlong initial post, is that wagering, particularly of the Final Jeopardy variety that seems to preoccupy most of the wagering analysis, is an awful lot less important than it's being treated.
I really don't know how you can say that without a huge dose of irony, especially in the context of discussing Brad Rutter, who won $3 million largely due to wagering mistakes by his opponents.

(I am by no means diminishing his phenomenal Jeopardy! game playing ability. Clearly, no one has dominated so many opponents of the highest caliber as Brad. But it is a simple fact that he was about to lose the MMM semifinal and the UTOC 3rd round game, but for the wagering mistakes by his opponents.)
Conceding, for the sake of argument, that you're right about wagering mistakes being the cause of Brad's two victories in those games (for the record, I think it's significantly more complicated with regard to the UTOC game, at the very least) I don't think that proves what you think it does. Brad Rutter was completely unharmed by his supposed lack of wagering savvy, which is the thrust of my argument.

You want to say that savvy wagering can make a difference at the margins, I agree with you - but if you're making more sweeping claims than that, I think you have to show where wagering's made more than a marginal difference. The one guy I can think of where that's true is Dan Pawson, who is an all-time great. How much of his success is due to his very canny betting? A good chunk, I agree, but I can't say a majority of it, and he's the absolute best case for What Wagering Theory Can Do For You. In the absence of other examples, I'm left with my initial belief - wagering theory is helpful, and can help at the margins, but is a small part of what makes a player great.

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

Re: Against the Wagering Vikings [SPOILERS up to May 12, 2014]

Post by jpahk »

fj wagering nous matters more for average players than great players, because great players are likely to be leading going into fj, and the leader generally faces fewer difficult decisions than the trailing players.

User avatar
TomKBaltimoreBoy
Lucky to be Here
Posts: 580
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 8:30 am

Re: Against the Wagering Vikings [SPOILERS up to May 12, 2014]

Post by TomKBaltimoreBoy »

The problem with most of the Wagering Vikings is that they believe themselves to be Ragnar, when in truth they are far closer to Horik.

Except for Opus. He is Floki, and that is wondrous.
Life IS pain, Princess. Anyone telling you differently is selling something.

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

Re: Against the Wagering Vikings [SPOILERS up to May 12, 2014]

Post by TheyCallMeMrKid »

jpahk wrote:fj wagering nous matters more for average players than great players, because great players are likely to be leading going into fj, and the leader generally faces fewer difficult decisions than the trailing players.
Completely agree, which is probably why it is of more interest to those of us who dream of being on the show, since we assume that if we did make it, we would probably be wagering from behind, and could use a strategy edge to have a chance at victory.
Sheepin' it real.

Golf
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1937
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 pm

Re: Against the Wagering Vikings [SPOILERS up to May 12, 2014]

Post by Golf »

TheyCallMeMrKid wrote:those of us who dream of being on the show, since we assume that if we did make it, we would probably be wagering from behind
Why the hell would "we" think that garbage?

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

Re: Against the Wagering Vikings [SPOILERS up to May 12, 2014]

Post by Bamaman »

Golf wrote:
TheyCallMeMrKid wrote:those of us who dream of being on the show, since we assume that if we did make it, we would probably be wagering from behind
Why the hell would "we" think that garbage?
Damn straight. I have a lock in my Jeopardy fantasies. But I agree it is a good idea to at least know the basics of both FJ and penultimate wagering.

User avatar
skullturf
Married to a Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 1793
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:34 am
Location: Miami

Re: Against the Wagering Vikings [SPOILERS up to May 12, 2014]

Post by skullturf »

OK golf, if you don't like the word "probably" there, how about this: You have to consider the possibility that you could be wagering from behind.

Look, I understand the importance of a positive attitude, and playing to win. But if you ever get on the show, you have to play against a defending champ. They have more buzzer practice than you. They might be a better player than you.

Yes, you plan to finish in first place. You intend to finish in first place. You try to finish in first place. But you also have a plan for what to do if you finish in second or third place.

Golf
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1937
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 pm

Re: Against the Wagering Vikings [SPOILERS up to May 12, 2014]

Post by Golf »

skullturf wrote:OK golf, if you don't like the word "probably" there, how about this: You have to consider the possibility that you could be wagering from behind.
How about this, you have to consider all possibilities even though you expect to win.

If I was playing against somebody who stated they expect to be wagering from behind I'd tell them to enjoy their $1k.

User avatar
opusthepenguin
The Best Darn Penguin on the Whole JBoard
Posts: 8333
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:33 pm
Location: Shawnee, KS
Contact:

Re: Against the Wagering Vikings [SPOILERS up to May 12, 2014]

Post by opusthepenguin »

TomKBaltimoreBoy wrote:The problem with most of the Wagering Vikings is that they believe themselves to be Ragnar, when in truth they are far closer to Horik.

Except for Opus. He is Floki, and that is wondrous.
[sniff]... ya mean it?

Post Reply