Monday, September 29, 2014 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

[Paucle]

Acadian = Cajun? News to me.

Say "acadian" fast. Faster still. Again, faster. Now so fast you elide the leading "a."
See?

[Steppenwolf]

Negging "chubby cherub" was bogus. "Pick an Agatha Christie word a bit past the middle of the alphabet" was bogus.

I totally agree with Opus on both these points (with the stipulation that it's a much-used 6-letter Agatha Christie word). My first thought
was Marple... then considered that M is in the first half of the alphabet, so perhaps the TOM is pages 224-238 out of 400 (being 55 to 60 % of the way through
the book), pushing me toward Poirot for the answer. The correct answer didn't occur to me until after the think music was over.
When I saw Alan's answer, I thought it was also a very reasonable guess.

I can certainly understand all the people for whom this was an 'instaget', but having an instaget and being confident that your instaget
is correct are two different things! If this was a question on WWTBAM with those four choices for answers, going for the million dollars,
I'm pretty sure I would prefer to stick with the half-million rather than go for it all. But maybe that's just me...

[MTGcollegestudent]

Alan needs to go down in the Hall of Shame as the dumbest contestant in history. He had the chance to squash Catherine like a bug on Friday but instead saw her eat his lunch today.

I have said it before and say it again: Jeopardy! and College Bowl players again and again show themselves to be masters of regurgitating knowledge but are completely flat-footed when it comes to figuring something out. When I saw that FJ today was the kind that relies on figuring out the answer rather than memorized trivia, I predicted that it would either be a TS or at most one player would get it correct. I was right.

At the end of last season, I (and others) said that the writers were out of steam for the season which led them to produce lame categories. That was only a partial explanation because we're already seeing silliness aplenty on the board early this season. Widowed waitresses? Chafed cherubs? Really. It's time for some fresh horses in the writing stable.

You consider this a "Dumb Contestant"? If it's anyone that should be considered the dumbest contestant, that one is Heather Chapman from season 24. She had -$6,200 in the red. Plus too, at one point, Jennifer Morgan from season 28 had -$6,600 in the red. THAT's what is considered a dumb contestant.

Surely everyone can understand that, right?

[Onairb]

Bummed for Catherine; I also had "Poirot" but crossed it out for "murder" because I thought the clue writers would have specified "name" if they wanted a character. "Murder" seemed way too easy, though, and had me second-guessing it up to the reveal. ("Marple" didn't really enter serious contention for me, mostly because it's always "Miss Marple.")

"Marple" was my guess. I've never heard of the book they cited, but if it's written as an encyclopedia, it most likely would have the entry under, MARPLE, JANE.

[davey]

Bummed for Catherine; I also had "Poirot" but crossed it out for "murder" because I thought the clue writers would have specified "name" if they wanted a character. "Murder" seemed way too easy, though, and had me second-guessing it up to the reveal. ("Marple" didn't really enter serious contention for me, mostly because it's always "Miss Marple.")

"Marple" was my guess. I've never heard of the book they cited, but if it's written as an encyclopedia, it most likely would have the entry under, MARPLE, JANE.

As others have pointed out, the clue referred to "entries." There'd be one main entry for Miss Marple, multiple entries for all the books starting with Murder.
And "chubby cherubs" wasn't specific enough. If the chubby cherubs use Gold Bond (a Jeopardy! sponsor!) they won't fit the clue...

[JeopRDFan]

I felt bad for Catherine, especially after that bold wager on the last DD -- if she made it, she would have been golden; at the same time, I'm happy for Elisa as she was super excited on her win (she couldn't stop clapping, haha); I do hope Catherine makes the TOC cut (is she on the bubble?). I got FJ pretty much instantly, but as another poster noted, more often than not you're never really sure until the reveal. An exciting game it was.

[floridagator]

Doofi is plural.

I know Catherine didn't win the game. I didn't say she did. I said she ate Alan's lunch. He stood there and watched as she dominated the game, beating him (and Elisa) most of the time. Others here seem to be arguing that Elisa is better than Alan (mostly on the basis of her getting a complicated FJ correct). But would she (or more to the point, a new contestant) have dominated the game the way Catherine did? All I can say for sure is that it would have been better for Alan today if Catherine hadn't been there.

No, you can't say that for sure. I'll bet you $1000 you can't even make a compelling case that it would likely have been better for Alan if Catherine hadn't been there.

I can make such a case. There are 40 weeks of regular J! a year (plus 6 weeks of tournaments, 6 weeks of repeats makes 52 weeks). That's 200 episodes. There are two new contestants introduced every day, roughly. That makes 400 new contestants a year. Of those, only about 20 will achieve four-time champion status or higher. So a fresh contestant has a 20/400 = 1/20 = 5% chance of being a four time champ or higher.

Alan knew that Catherine was already a three time champ, and if, by dint of his allowing her a tie, she would be co-champion for Friday's game, she would become a four-time champion. That's a 100% chance. 100>5. So Alan went from a 1 in 20 chance of encountering someone equal to or better than Catherine on Monday to a 100% chance.

Even if we discount the probability by the likelihood of Catherine getting FJ right and achieving a tie (50%, perhaps), that still means he picked a 50% chance of encountering a four-time or more champ over a 5% chance.

I don't think you have $1000, but I can give you the bank transfer information if you PM me.

[zakharov]

I thought we'd reached a general agreement that appearing on Jeopardy is not an intelligence test? The rhetoric here gets pretty silly sometimes.

[This Is Kirk!]

Judges: "Cat" for $800, they wanted only the nickname — would "Catfish" suffice without "Hunter", or would that get a BMS?

I think Catfish would be enough. As you said they just wanted the nickname.

[goforthetie]

Alan knew that Catherine was already a three time champ, and if, by dint of his allowing her a tie, she would be co-champion for Friday's game, she would become a four-time champion. That's a 100% chance. 100>5. So Alan went from a 1 in 20 chance of encountering someone equal to or better than Catherine on Monday to a 100% chance.

Catherine doesn't magically become a better player by dint of Alan letting her tie him and winning a 4th game. She's a 3-time champ that got a big break, that Alan knew he can beat (i.e., is not really at a top ToC level), and that bets non-strategically.

That said, she is clearly a stronger-than-average competitor. But you can definitely argue that the additional chances of winning on Friday (plus the added inducement to bet non-strategically, plus the possibility that she might reciprocate, plus the lowered chance of running into a true ToC-level contestant on Monday) make up for it.

[Golf]

The fact that it's floridagator who is emphatically stating the AT is an expert on wagering and whatever else he is spewing is convincing proof that there's no way in hell it could possibly be true.

[Sherm]

My local PBS station had a one hour show on Agatha Christie on Sunday night.

It was hosted by David Sachet, and I said Poirot, not even thinking of murder. The "m" that came to me was Marple, who had just been on masterpiece theatre. Had I not seen those shows, I think I might have stood a shot at getting murder.

[opusthepenguin]

Doofi is plural.

I know Catherine didn't win the game. I didn't say she did. I said she ate Alan's lunch. He stood there and watched as she dominated the game, beating him (and Elisa) most of the time. Others here seem to be arguing that Elisa is better than Alan (mostly on the basis of her getting a complicated FJ correct). But would she (or more to the point, a new contestant) have dominated the game the way Catherine did? All I can say for sure is that it would have been better for Alan today if Catherine hadn't been there.

No, you can't say that for sure. I'll bet you $1000 you can't even make a compelling case that it would likely have been better for Alan if Catherine hadn't been there.

I can make such a case.

[Snip case.]

I don't think you have $1000, but I can give you the bank transfer information if you PM me.

You made a case for something I wasn't disputing. See my earlier post. I think we've been talking at cross-purposes. I assumed that references to "tonight's game," "this game," and "today" involved the actual boards and FJ we saw. You appear to be talking about Alan's chances in general and saying his odds were better without Catherine there. I agree. We all pretty much agreed on that on Friday. I wasn't wagering $1000 that you couldn't summarize that consensus.

Am I right in assuming you wouldn't have taken the bet if you'd understood my meaning? I certainly don't feel you owe me $1000 over a misunderstanding. But if you'd like to consider it a debt of honor....

[opusthepenguin]

As others have pointed out, the clue referred to "entries." There'd be one main entry for Miss Marple, multiple entries for all the books starting with Murder.

I think this is a good argument. If I'd keyed in on the plurality of the word "entries," that would have helped steer me in the right direction. I still think the clue was weak, but I'm not as chafed about it as I was.

And "chubby cherubs" wasn't specific enough. If the chubby cherubs use Gold Bond (a Jeopardy! sponsor!) they won't fit the clue...

I agree that "chafing" was a better response that more neatly fit the clue. But the judges frequently reverse themselves when an unexpected response fits the clue well enough to be plausible. I feel they should have done that in this case.

[flemmingfan]

I enjoyed this game immensely, one of the better games in quite a while. I thought the contestants style complimented each other. Speaking of style (dress style this time), I see Alan wore his good luck tie again (my interpretation). And Catherine made the fatal mistake of correcting the devil in the interview. Elisha, you hung in there and didn't appear to be intimidated by your formidable opponents. Congrats to all three. And as a bonus-- no lecturing!

[econgator]

It was hosted by David Sachet

Suchet.

And yeah, I saw it, too. Was an interesting show. I think that may be the first time in my life I've heard Suchet speak in his actual voice.

[dexterG]

I was actually surprised this was a single get.

That's the most shocking thing of all. It took me literally 1 second to get this clue.

Same here, I got FJ immediately. I couldn't think of another word it could be.

[opusthepenguin]

I enjoyed this game immensely, one of the better games in quite a while. I thought the contestants style complimented each other. Speaking of style (dress style this time), I see Alan wore his good luck tie again (my interpretation). And Catherine made the fatal mistake of correcting the devil in the interview. Elisha, you hung in there and didn't appear to be intimidated by your formidable opponents. Congrats to all three. And as a bonus-- no lecturing!

Elisa put on a show of being quite intimidated during Alex's opening remarks. It's impossible to tell how much of that was real. Her outtake interview proved she's adept at riffing off whatever scenario she's handed.

I assume, at least, that her excitement at winning was unfeigned.

[bpmod]

I can certainly understand all the people for whom this was an 'instaget', but having an instaget and being confident that your instaget
is correct are two different things! If this was a question on WWTBAM with those four choices for answers, going for the million dollars,
I'm pretty sure I would prefer to stick with the half-million rather than go for it all. But maybe that's just me...

If I had been given the four choices, murder, poison, Poirot and Marple (I think those are the four you are referring to), I would have been even more confident than I was without any choices, and that confidence was about 100%. It is highly unlikely that multiple entries would start with any of the other three words, plain and simple.

Brian

[Category 13]

$4400 and a Daily Double in State Capital Nicknames? Especially in the J! round, bet it all. Catherine bet 2000 instead.

I noticed Elisa beat Catherine to the buzzer on the first two State Capital clues. And that was very early in the game, thus she would have had minimal familiarity with the signaling device. Maybe that was an indication that Catherine was not as up to snuff on her Capitals, or a little leery of the category?

I realize she did have to select that category to find the DD, but it seemed like she kind of 'stole' the clue from Elisa, who was on her way to running the category. JMO