Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, econgator, dhkendall, trainman

Post Reply
Bamaman
Also Receiving Votes
Posts: 8640
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm

Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by Bamaman » Thu Nov 20, 2014 3:57 pm

It had been rumored on here it was going to happen and it was confirmed in the thread about boson's wife. There will no longer be co-champions on the show, all games ending in a tie will be settled by a tie breaker question.

They can do what they want, but I'm not a fan of this move. While I disagree that one should always offer a tie, there are instances where circumstance demands offering a tie, such as having double second place's score or an exact 2/3 situation.
Complete the List champion, Episode 12.

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

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by lieph82 » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:11 pm

Those circumstances demanded offering a tie because of the rule that was in place. They no longer demand offering a tie. The only situation for which I think the change sucks is when two players are tied for the lead pre-FJ.

User avatar
BobF
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 2057
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 3:03 pm
Location: Westmonster, MD
Contact:

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by BobF » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:19 pm

Bamaman wrote:It had been rumored on here it was going to happen and it was confirmed in the thread about boson's wife. There will no longer be co-champions on the show, all games ending in a tie will be settled by a tie breaker question.

They can do what they want, but I'm not a fan of this move. While I disagree that one should always offer a tie, there are instances where circumstance demands offering a tie, such as having double second place's score or an exact 2/3 situation.
Although I cheered it in the other thread, I do see the problems with it. IMO, they should both get the cash and then play the tiebreaker to see who returns.
Was once hugged by Maggie Speak!

User avatar
jjwaymee
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 697
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 8:28 am
Location: Holland, Michigan

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by jjwaymee » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:23 pm

I'm neutral about this. As a hopeful future contestant it makes me happy because it means more people will get on the show. As a hopeful future contestant who takes an interest in the strategic aspects of the game play, it's a bummer because it makes the game slightly harder to win.

I hearby predict that the next annoyance/problem for TPTB to "correct" will be the rise of the John Campbell "Four Corners Offense" technique of stalling when you have a lead in DJ. Watch for a shot clock to be added in Season 33.
Last edited by jjwaymee on Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
goforthetie
(username no longer operative)
Posts: 1321
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:01 pm

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by goforthetie » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:25 pm

I will definitely miss the extra strategy that comes from the possibility of co-champions.

To analyze the point that lieph82 brings up:

Two players have $10000 and third place has $9000. Let's posit 50% chance of getting FJ for each player, but of course these chances are not independent. As an estimate, let's say there's a 35% chance both leaders get FJ right, 15% chance that player A gets it but B does not, 15% vice versa, and 35% chance both leaders get FJ wrong? In this scenario, the third place player C bets fairly small. Both leaders are probably still compelled to bet everything. But if they do so, player C has a 35% chance of winning the entire game, whereas players A and B split the remaining 65% chance; in other words, they have just a 32.5% chance each. This is pretty awful.

User avatar
jjwaymee
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 697
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 8:28 am
Location: Holland, Michigan

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by jjwaymee » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:35 pm

goforthetie wrote:I will definitely miss the extra strategy that comes from the possibility of co-champions.

To analyze the point that lieph82 brings up:

Two players have $10000 and third place has $9000. Let's posit 50% chance of getting FJ for each player, but of course these chances are not independent. As an estimate, let's say there's a 35% chance both leaders get FJ right, 15% chance that player A gets it but B does not, 15% vice versa, and 35% chance both leaders get FJ wrong? In this scenario, the third place player C bets fairly small. Both leaders are probably still compelled to bet everything. But if they do so, player C has a 35% chance of winning the entire game, whereas players A and B split the remaining 65% chance; in other words, they have just a 32.5% chance each. This is pretty awful.
Your analysis is true for any situation where two players are tied for the lead, whether they are tied at >2X Player 3's total or <2X Player 3's total. Basically, there is no reason for player 3 to risk any money from this point forward (in this scenario).

User avatar
StevenH
Not J! Contestant Material
Posts: 1992
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:24 pm
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by StevenH » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:38 pm

I thought that this thread would be about neckties being banned on the show.

User avatar
alietr
Site Admin
Posts: 5455
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:20 pm
Location: Bethesda, MD

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by alietr » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:44 pm

StevenH wrote:I thought that this thread would be about neckties being banned on the show.
... only for Jeff Kirby (he keeps coming up, doesn't he?)

Austin Powers
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1563
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 8:09 pm

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by Austin Powers » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:47 pm

It was never a rumor. I pretty much told everyone here this was happening.

Anyway, America loves winners, not this candyass backing into a tie crap to maximize your chances of returning.

User avatar
TheyCallMeMrKid
Swimming in the Jeopardy! Pool
Posts: 1143
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:35 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by TheyCallMeMrKid » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:57 pm

I should do this as a poll, I guess, but I'm just going to throw it out here. If someone else wants to create the poll, feel free.

Do people think that the reason for this change is:

A. The show wants to give away less money
B. The show wants to give more players the opportunity to appear on the show
C. Allowing tied leaders to advance gives the appearance that there might be collusion


So...what are the consequences? Will things be vastly different? Not a lot of people generally wager to tie from the lead, although it did seem to be growing in popularity. (Should we blame Vermonter for the rule change? :shock: )

I guess it makes it less certain what to do in some situations, e.g. in a 50% winners tie scenario, the strategy for both players is should be obvious. With ties not allowed, it becomes more about mind games.

As a math lover, I am sad to see it go.
Sheepin' it real.

Golf
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1426
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 pm

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by Golf » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:58 pm

Classic overreaction to an odd variance of games over a very short term from TPTB.

User avatar
Magna
Hooked on Jeopardy
Posts: 2898
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2012 2:37 pm

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by Magna » Thu Nov 20, 2014 5:01 pm

StevenH wrote:I thought that this thread would be about neckties being banned on the show.
Not only banned - confiscated and shredded. (RIP!)

User avatar
goforthetie
(username no longer operative)
Posts: 1321
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:01 pm

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by goforthetie » Thu Nov 20, 2014 5:08 pm

jjwaymee wrote:
goforthetie wrote:I will definitely miss the extra strategy that comes from the possibility of co-champions.

To analyze the point that lieph82 brings up:

Two players have $10000 and third place has $9000. Let's posit 50% chance of getting FJ for each player, but of course these chances are not independent. As an estimate, let's say there's a 35% chance both leaders get FJ right, 15% chance that player A gets it but B does not, 15% vice versa, and 35% chance both leaders get FJ wrong? In this scenario, the third place player C bets fairly small. Both leaders are probably still compelled to bet everything. But if they do so, player C has a 35% chance of winning the entire game, whereas players A and B split the remaining 65% chance; in other words, they have just a 32.5% chance each. This is pretty awful.
Your analysis is true for any situation where two players are tied for the lead, whether they are tied at >2X Player 3's total or <2X Player 3's total. Basically, there is no reason for player 3 to risk any money from this point forward (in this scenario).
Maybe, but if player C has $1000 then it's probably better for the leaders to bet small.

I really hate for a victory to come down to a single buzzer race. Too much variance. They should at least have an exception that states that players that are tied for the lead going into FJ and double up will come back as co-champs.

whatisbishkek
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 2:03 pm

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by whatisbishkek » Thu Nov 20, 2014 5:09 pm

This would make for an interesting dilemma for the leader in a lock-tie game. Assuming each player has a 50% chance of getting FJ and a 50% chance on a tiebreaker, a $0 wager would mean a 75% chance of winning. A $1 wager means your chance of losing is the chance that you miss FJ and second gets it right. Since there's some correlation in FJ get rates that chance of losing would overall be less than 25%, so the $1 wager would make more sense, but if you didn't like the FJ category and felt more confident about winning a tiebreaker you might bet $0.

User avatar
dhkendall
Pursuing the Dream
Posts: 8588
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:49 am
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Contact:

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by dhkendall » Thu Nov 20, 2014 5:13 pm

Bamaman wrote:I'm not a fan of this move.
I figured at the least as a fellow ATB (yet to get The Call) you'd be happy! (Now gfft, despite being another ATB, doesn't surprise me, given the nick. :))
"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

User avatar
dhkendall
Pursuing the Dream
Posts: 8588
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:49 am
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Contact:

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by dhkendall » Thu Nov 20, 2014 5:15 pm

Magna wrote:
StevenH wrote:I thought that this thread would be about neckties being banned on the show.
Not only banned - confiscated and shredded. (RIP!)
Good thing my tuxedo (what I hope to wear for my first game because I look damn sharp in it) has a bow tie!
"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

GoodStrategy
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 179
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:59 pm

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by GoodStrategy » Thu Nov 20, 2014 5:17 pm

TheyCallMeMrKid wrote:I guess it makes it less certain what to do in some situations, e.g. in a 50% winners tie scenario, the strategy for both players is should be obvious. With ties not allowed, it becomes more about mind games.
It's still straightforward for the player in second - bet it all.

User avatar
TheyCallMeMrKid
Swimming in the Jeopardy! Pool
Posts: 1143
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:35 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by TheyCallMeMrKid » Thu Nov 20, 2014 5:32 pm

GoodStrategy wrote:
TheyCallMeMrKid wrote:I guess it makes it less certain what to do in some situations, e.g. in a 50% winners tie scenario, the strategy for both players is should be obvious. With ties not allowed, it becomes more about mind games.
It's still straightforward for the player in second - bet it all.
And I guess the player in first would weigh his/her confidence in the FJ category and decide whether they want to wager, or take their chances on a buzz-in tiebreaker, which in most cases I'd think you'd rather risk it on the FJ. But if you're in first place, since you are betting, do you go ahead and bet big?

EDIT: "Bet big" meaning, if leader has $10k, 2nd place has $5k, should leader wager $4999? This still guarantees a win when either 1st is correct or 2nd is incorrect.
Last edited by TheyCallMeMrKid on Thu Nov 20, 2014 5:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sheepin' it real.

User avatar
econgator
Let's Go Mets!
Posts: 7194
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:32 am

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by econgator » Thu Nov 20, 2014 5:35 pm

Golf wrote:Classic overreaction to an odd variance of games over a very short term from TPTB.
That.

seaborgium
Undefeated in Reruns
Posts: 4940
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Ties on Jeopardy! RIP

Post by seaborgium » Thu Nov 20, 2014 5:44 pm

What would be interesting is if the players knew the tiebreaker category in advance of making their FJ wagers. (Of course, that would necessitate having multiple clues ready in the same category for the event of a double -- or triple -- stumper.)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: seaborgium and 20 guests