New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall

New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Poll ended at Fri Nov 28, 2014 10:49 am

Yea
24
24%
Nay
74
76%
 
Total votes: 98

Vanya
The support is non-zero
Posts: 2727
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:10 pm
Contact:

New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by Vanya » Fri Nov 21, 2014 10:49 am

New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay.

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

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by lieph82 » Fri Nov 21, 2014 10:50 am

I'm fine with it in the vast majority of cases because I think it will disincentivize wagering for the tie. I just wish it didn't apply to cases in which players are tied for the lead pre-FJ. But players should count themselves lucky that for the past 30 years an absurdly generous rule has been in place. This new rule could easily have been put in place from the beginning.

GoodStrategy
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 214
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:59 pm

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by GoodStrategy » Fri Nov 21, 2014 10:58 am

I think the co-champion rule stems from the first time there was a tie on the Fleming version, and TPTB of the time didn't have a way to handle ties in place so they decided to declare the tied players both winners to play again (or so I was told). There were no major issues with that rule when the Trebek-era started (like there was when all the players kept their winnings with some distant trailers reluctant to bet enough for the win) so it was kept in place. Now that we have Keith Williams's site that recommended betting for the tie, and Arthur Chu who put the idea to practice on a large scale, TPTB probably decided that there may be issues with frequent ties (including the logistics of "bumped" contestants-to-be) and so decided to use the tiebreaker rule devised for tournament games for regular ones as well.

User avatar
grindcore
Some Guy
Posts: 507
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 7:38 pm
Location: Winnipeg

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by grindcore » Fri Nov 21, 2014 11:21 am

i like it. three players, one winner. repeat ad infinitum.

User avatar
econgator
Let's Go Mets!
Posts: 8222
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:32 am

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by econgator » Fri Nov 21, 2014 11:29 am

Big fat NO!

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

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by sarah0114 » Fri Nov 21, 2014 11:40 am

If it weren't just a binary yes/no, I think my answer would be "No, at least not with a sudden-death tiebreaker." Maybe dividing winnings in half between co-winners would have been a way to go.

User avatar
grindcore
Some Guy
Posts: 507
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 7:38 pm
Location: Winnipeg

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by grindcore » Fri Nov 21, 2014 11:48 am

in the case of a tie-breaker question, if one player answers wrong will the other be declared champion right away? or will they need to actually get a question right?

GoodStrategy
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 214
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:59 pm

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by GoodStrategy » Fri Nov 21, 2014 12:18 pm

grindcore wrote:in the case of a tie-breaker question, if one player answers wrong will the other be declared champion right away? or will they need to actually get a question right?
Alex has said in some of the tournament tiebreakers that you can't win by default and that you must give a correct response. If none of the tied players responds correctly they do another tiebreaker question (the DS/TS ones may be edited out like they were in May 1992 when the first tournament tie occurred).

User avatar
nightreign
#TeamAlsoRans
Posts: 1281
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 3:18 pm
Contact:

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by nightreign » Fri Nov 21, 2014 1:06 pm

My answer for this is not exactly yes or no; like many others I'd prefer the leaders split the winnings, or similar, but I do think the ties were getting to be a bit much. Honestly, though, I think tiebreakers are exciting, especially in tournaments, but they would be more exciting than having a constant stream of co-champions.
Last edited by nightreign on Fri Nov 21, 2014 6:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

evanakm
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 8:07 am

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by evanakm » Fri Nov 21, 2014 1:31 pm

Nay for me. I like the fact that you can find a YouTube video of a game from 1987 and it still feels like the same game. They've accomplished this by making minimal changes. Doubling the dollar values and removing the 5 day limit were certainly significant, but those didn't change the flow of an individual game.

GoodStrategy
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 214
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:59 pm

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by GoodStrategy » Fri Nov 21, 2014 1:41 pm

evanakm wrote:Nay for me. I like the fact that you can find a YouTube video of a game from 1987 and it still feels like the same game. They've accomplished this by making minimal changes. Doubling the dollar values and removing the 5 day limit were certainly significant, but those didn't change the flow of an individual game.
IMO probably the rule change that changed the flow of the game itself was when they implemented the buzz-in-only-when-the-clue-is-read rule at the start of Season 2.

User avatar
Tigershark
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 448
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by Tigershark » Fri Nov 21, 2014 2:36 pm

I don't like ties at all. One of the reasons I can't get into soccer despite being a huge football, baseball, and basketball fan is too many freaking ties. I don't like it when contestants play for the tie. I don't fault the second place player for going all in with a big wager on an FJ if the category they know really, really well, but I don't like it when there is a tie because the 1st place player could have bet $1 more, but didn't. However, on occasion ties do happen. The only thing worse than a tie is an arbitrary tiebreaker. (Another reason I don't like soccer- PK's are arbitrary.) From what it seems, this tiebreaker is pretty arbitrary.

User avatar
Volante
Harbinger of the Doomed Lemur
Posts: 6670
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:42 pm
Contact:

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by Volante » Fri Nov 21, 2014 4:12 pm

At least we managed a three way tie before this rule went in effect.

cosmos
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 11:56 pm

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by cosmos » Fri Nov 21, 2014 4:21 pm

If they use difficult clues for the tie-breaker, then won't they risk having multiple double stumpers in a row which would take too much time? If they use easy clues, then is it not essentially same as a coin toss? To help determine the truly better contestant they could, say, make one player win by two clues in different categories instead of just one clue, except there isn't time for that. So how do they make it not take too long and also not be the same as a coin toss? One solution is to use a lengthier tie-breaker method, only show a quick recap on the show, and put the full tie-breaker on YouTube. I don't expect that to happen.

User avatar
Volante
Harbinger of the Doomed Lemur
Posts: 6670
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:42 pm
Contact:

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by Volante » Fri Nov 21, 2014 4:44 pm

cosmos wrote:...One solution is to use a lengthier tie-breaker method, only show a quick recap on the show, and put the full tie-breaker on YouTube. I don't expect that to happen.
Yeah, they'd probably put it on Crackle. :roll:

User avatar
Linear Gnome
One Miner Gal
Posts: 1751
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2012 9:55 am
Location: Missouri

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by Linear Gnome » Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:16 pm

I voted no. I can understand why they want to change the rule, but I'd prefer something like splitting the money and returning as co-champions. This would reduce the number of ties offered by players in a dominant position. Ties would mainly be attained by (1) co-leaders going into FJ and (2) people who randomly happen to end up with the same score (such as Ryan and Allison).

User avatar
Robert K S
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 1616
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:26 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by Robert K S » Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:37 pm

grindcore wrote:i like it. three players, one winner. repeat ad infinitum.
Except when there's two, http://www.j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=2452
Or except when there's none http://www.j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=2874

User avatar
makeabeilein
Jeopardy! Champion/Second-Best Performer
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2014 2:44 pm

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by makeabeilein » Fri Nov 21, 2014 6:01 pm

cosmos wrote:If they use difficult clues for the tie-breaker, then won't they risk having multiple double stumpers in a row which would take too much time? If they use easy clues, then is it not essentially same as a coin toss? To help determine the truly better contestant they could, say, make one player win by two clues in different categories instead of just one clue, except there isn't time for that. So how do they make it not take too long and also not be the same as a coin toss? One solution is to use a lengthier tie-breaker method, only show a quick recap on the show, and put the full tie-breaker on YouTube. I don't expect that to happen.
I believe the process will be "Sudden Victory," requiring only a single correct answer. If any clues are unanswered/only answered incorrectly, they will be edited out of the show that airs.

WilliamPorygon
Contributor
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2012 12:25 pm

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by WilliamPorygon » Sat Nov 22, 2014 11:43 am

I think the best way they could handle tiebreaks, if they really feel they're necessary, is the same way they break ties between second and third: whoever had the higher pre-FJ! score wins. For simplicity's sake, I'd say they should still declare co-champs if they're tied both at the beginning and end of FJ!, or if they really can't ever have co-champs again no matter what, go to a tie-breaker question in that case only.

User avatar
heelsrule1988
Sports Jeopardy! Alum/VVL #19
Posts: 1900
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:19 pm
Location: Fayetteville, NC

Re: New tie-breaker rule: Yea or nay

Post by heelsrule1988 » Sat Nov 22, 2014 1:53 pm

Works for me... adds a bit more excitement.

Post Reply