Even though it was a US History FJ, we Canadians had a slight advantage, because our press got a little bit gossipy a few years back about rumours of flirtation between Condi Rice and her Canadian counterpart, Peter McKay. I'm not proud of our news media, but it's how I remembered that she was unmarried.
As for Buchanan, I took the stab in the dark that the writers intended me to take.
Congrats to Roger (moved up in the all time standings) as well as to Brad and Ken for a very good tournament and to everyone else who played these last two weeks.
And thanks to TPTB for organizing such a fun competition.
Maybe another one in a decade or so.
And from my facebook post...
"Roger is now the #3 all time winner - beating my record. so in my book, not a complete loser. Nice job Roger (i[ll tell myself that my original monies would have been different in later seasons - -Third place finish in ToC and double money in regular round.. - but that's all asterisk talk)"
evanakm wrote:Even though it was a US History FJ, we Canadians had a slight advantage, because our press got a little bit gossipy a few years back about rumours of flirtation between Condi Rice and her Canadian counterpart, Peter McKay. I'm not proud of our news media, but it's how I remembered that she was unmarried.
As for Buchanan, I took the stab in the dark that the writers intended me to take.
It's okay, I went with Rice based on her 30 Rock appearances, hoping her brief relationship with Jack meant she was unmarried (and made the same guess on Buchanan).
I think the hint the one other than Rice served a long time ago was a big arrow pointing to James Buchanan. Even if you don't know he was Sec of State, you should know he never married (probably all he is known for) so he'd be a logical guess for the 19th century person.
evanakm wrote:Even though it was a US History FJ, we Canadians had a slight advantage, because our press got a little bit gossipy a few years back about rumours of flirtation between Condi Rice and her Canadian counterpart, Peter McKay. I'm not proud of our news media, but it's how I remembered that she was unmarried.
As for Buchanan, I took the stab in the dark that the writers intended me to take.
It's okay, I went with Rice based on her 30 Rock appearances, hoping her brief relationship with Jack meant she was unmarried (and made the same guess on Buchanan).
James Buchanan was on 30 Rock?
"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
evanakm wrote:Even though it was a US History FJ, we Canadians had a slight advantage, because our press got a little bit gossipy a few years back about rumours of flirtation between Condi Rice and her Canadian counterpart, Peter McKay. I'm not proud of our news media, but it's how I remembered that she was unmarried.
As for Buchanan, I took the stab in the dark that the writers intended me to take.
It's okay, I went with Rice based on her 30 Rock appearances, hoping her brief relationship with Jack meant she was unmarried (and made the same guess on Buchanan).
James Buchanan was on 30 Rock?
Unfortunately no...made the same guess as evanakm.
mbclev wrote:That is exactly right. Honesty will not be muzzled, even if I somehow get banned from this board. The truth will eventually come out. (I will post someplace else where my views are more receptive should it come to that.)
And the fact you don't realize these are the rantings of a madman is the big issue here.
I suppose this has been asked and answered before, but please indulge me.
Why were the players introduced as "former champions" during the tournament? Every one is and always will be a champion. Is it to avoid confusing the viewers in the audience who think J! is like boxing where there is only one champion at a time and all previous champions lose their title?
I guess this is about semantics, but they have always called the most recent winner the champ. Past ones were defeated or retired. In Pam's case, she was college champ for one year and then someone else took over.
What about the Tournament of Champions? Are those contestants introduced as "former champions" making it more correctly a Tournament of Former Champions?
seaborgium wrote:Another detail that helps the FJ make sense, if you know a little more than just "bachelor" about Buchanan's biography, is that he was pretty old as president (he was in his 70s when he left office, I believe; by contrast, Lincoln was 52 when he took over). This gives him plenty of room in his pre-Presidential career to, say, hold a cabinet position. I don't think knowing that would have helped one guess Buchanan, but if I had settled on him, I would have used that knowledge to justify him as a response.
(He was the last president born in the 18th century, and the last former SoS to become president. One of these may change.)
Nah. Hillary has brain damage from running into brick walls.
pdano wrote:Congratulations to Brad on his well-deserved win, and to Ken and Roger for a phenomenal finals!
I have to say that I'm a little surprised with the number of people saying "well, that settles it, Brad is the best ever." It certainly doesn't hurt his case, and maybe he is. But if Roger hits either one of his daily doubles, or if Ken gets the last FJ, there's a different winner. What this tournament showed me was that Brad and Ken are probably the best two players ever, but that several players - Roger among them - are close enough to have a damn good chance.
Two things I don't think anyone's said yet:
1. Ken didn't land on a single daily double, and he had money at every stage of the game. If he gets just his fair share - or even one, at the right place - he might have had a 2/3 game and won the whole thing.
2. Ken and Brad took FOREVER to make their final wagers. I didn't bother working out ideal wagers, other than to see that Ken had Brad covered by the slimmest of margins. Keith might have a field day.
I agree with all the assessments, but want to comment on the taking forever to wager. (Mostly for aspiring contestants; Dan clearly knows this.) I am very good at math, including being very quick and accurate in calculating things in my head. And I have a lot of confidence in my math ability. But in both of my games I used all the paper available and checked my arithmetic over and over. I am sure I took forever to make my wagers even though they were strategically very simple, especially the first one. It is the one part of Jeopardy! where errors can be completely eliminated and the one kind of mistake I could not live with. So it's worth taking your time.
MarkBarrett wrote:I think it worked best to have the five weeks of the BotD spread out over 5 weeks during four months instead of one big 25-game straight affair. Usually at this point it's a big let down to return to regular play on Monday.
This statement is a diss for the intermezzo form of Shore's Conjunction. The player making the statement cut "deep".
a1srvng wrote:
Re: Condoleeza: for me, that was no brains. But Buchanan? Now, I knew he never married (as well as being our first "alternate sexuality" president), but, in regard to normality, WHO would know that? (Two out of three guys obviously.).
All three got Buchanan, Ken missed Rice.
Too bad it's not Uncle Ken's rice, or he could have an avatar as cool as Russ's.