Page 3 of 4

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 7:24 am
by alan tiger
greenwich village is located between 14th street and houston street (pronounced " how' - stun "). manhattan is separated into east and west sides by fifth avenue. the southern portion of fifth avenue ends at waverly place, which is basically 7th street. washington square park and new york university straddle what would be the southern portion of fifth avenue.
i lived at sheridan square (west 4th street between 6th and 7th avenues) in the very heart of the west village from 1975 - 2010. when new yorkers say "the village," they are usually referring to the west village. when new yorkers want to refer to the east village, they almost always say "the east village."
jayne was entitled to full credit for her answer.

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 8:37 am
by opusthepenguin
Volante wrote:Think that's going to be my favorite FJ of the season. Upon first glance, completely impenetrable. But process it for a few seconds, unbelievably obvious.
I have a lot of sympathy though for anyone who when from Hal to Ham, came up with Hamilton, and stuck with that. Once you have such a plausible response, it's hard to force the mind to keep working. My disorderly mind landed on Hancock first, so I was saved from embarrassment.

I totally went through all the stages of getting suckered on the Black Maria clue though. Hubris-induced Hamartia (It's obviously Spades. Boom!), Peripeteia (No?!??!! That's not right? How can it not be right?), Anagnorisis (Hearts? Really? I'm flabbergasted and discomfited by this revelation), Catharsis (Ooooohhhhh. Because of the Queen of Spades. It all makes sense now. I shall curse my fate and amputate my buzzing thumb).

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 9:33 am
by alietr
opusthepenguin wrote:It all makes sense now. I shall curse my fate and amputate my buzzing thumb).
Birds ain't got thumbs.

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 9:53 am
by opusthepenguin
alietr wrote:
opusthepenguin wrote:It all makes sense now. I shall curse my fate and amputate my buzzing thumb).
Birds ain't got thumbs.
Not anymore.

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 9:54 am
by patkav
This exchange is...disturbing.

One could say it has ruffled my feathers.

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 10:31 am
by dharrisf
Ironically, the day my three-day winnings total is passed is the day I taught Lord Byron--the FJ answer in my losing game, which I had hoped my opponents wouldn't get. Sigh.

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 10:47 am
by mikeyb
Strong game for me, though as an avid hearts player, I'm kicking myself for falling into the spades trap on Black Maria! I've never heard heard it called that, but it makes sense and reminds me of a scene in one of my favorite old tearjerkers, "Make Way For Tomorrow." Beulah Bondi is pestering the players at her daughter-in-law's bridge game, talking about how she prefers hearts and that they always called the queen of spades "Dirty Dora."

No single card really has any significance in spades (unless you count the ace of spades, which is unbeatable and fatal to have in your hand if you go for a blind nil).

Instaget final, though I certainly sympathize with those with Hamilton on the brain.

eta: The HoF category must have been REALLY easy, because even I went 5/5 on that one.

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 10:54 am
by billiej
triviawayne wrote:Was I the only one hoping someone would write the answer really large?
Nope - if I had been there I totally would've done so! :lol:

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 1:36 pm
by This Is Kirk!
triviawayne wrote:Was I the only one hoping someone would write the answer really large?
Was I the only one that sang the old John Hancock Insurance jingle?

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 3:40 pm
by dlbookman
Have to admit that I was rooting for Jayne as soon as I saw she would be on the show. She was in my KC audition group; stood beside her in the practice game. Still, played better than I did.

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 4:25 pm
by John Boy
triviawayne wrote:Was I the only one hoping someone would write the answer really large?
I thought it was just me. That would have been an extraordinarily nice touch to finish the game, I thought.

:)

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 4:35 pm
by John Boy
OSXpert wrote:To me, it seemed very clear that they wanted three letter responses, but I also agree that nothing was explicitly said that make her answer incorrect. So, I just hope they gave her the money back very begrudgingly.
In the end they gave her $1,000 for third place, so it's pretty much moot.

I also thought it was clear they wanted a 3-letter word, so I thought her response was correctly ruled incorrect initially. All the others were 3-letter words.

All thing considered, I think Jayne hit the trifecta for three of the worst wrong answers in a single game in a long time:

1. Mutt instead of cur for (many of us thought) 3-letter word;

2. Travel from Missouri to New Mexico becomes the Oregon Trail (seriously?); and

3. Given that they are asking for a name beginning with "P," she gives Yalta instead of Potsdam.

She seemed like a really likeable young woman, but those made me wonder whether she was really reading the clues.

Congrats to Sean on making the Hall of Fame, and I hope he continues his very nice run.

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 5:14 pm
by Volante
John Boy wrote: 2. Travel from Missouri to New Mexico becomes the Oregon Trail (seriously?);
Surely everyone knows the Oregon Trail ends in the Willamette Valley after you travel down the rock filled river (well, rock filled except for the far right which is always inexplicably clear...)

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 5:39 pm
by Vanya
TenPoundHammer wrote:Parts of the Whole weren't connecting. "Cementum? Well, I've never heard of that, so clearly it's NOT a tooth."

NHO Santa Fe Trail.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SposGx8dZts

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 5:49 pm
by Bamaman
I focused on "Founding Fathers" more than "Declaration of Independence signers" and got Hamilton and never looked back. :roll:

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 6:39 pm
by TenPoundHammer
John Boy wrote:2. Travel from Missouri to New Mexico becomes the Oregon Trail (seriously?);
That one I can kinda understand, because it's possible to latch onto "blah blah TRAIL blah blah Missouri", tune out the New Mexico part, and knee-jerk "Oregon Trail".

Since I figure I'm the only one who missed it because I had never heard of the Santa Fe Trail, at least.

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 7:02 pm
by triviawayne
Volante wrote:
John Boy wrote: 2. Travel from Missouri to New Mexico becomes the Oregon Trail (seriously?);
Surely everyone knows the Oregon Trail ends in the Willamette Valley after you travel down the rock filled river (well, rock filled except for the far right which is always inexplicably clear...)
I thought it ends when you get dysentery

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 7:28 pm
by Volante
triviawayne wrote:
Volante wrote:
John Boy wrote: 2. Travel from Missouri to New Mexico becomes the Oregon Trail (seriously?);
Surely everyone knows the Oregon Trail ends in the Willamette Valley after you travel down the rock filled river (well, rock filled except for the far right which is always inexplicably clear...)
I thought it ends when you get dysentery
I'd occasionally get one or two party members who didn't drink from Buffalo Runs.

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 7:51 pm
by Euphonium
nlw44 wrote:
OSXpert wrote:I said fen for bog - judges?

I'm fine with the "west village" correction, even though i said greenwich village, but i thought the "mutt" correction was odd. Sure, it technically has 2 consonants and a vowel, but...
The reason AT gave for the reversal was that supposedly he hadn't specified that there were ONLY going to be 2 consonants and 1 vowel...except that he DID specify just that when he introduced the category. He said something to the effect of "...and that's it" after giving the category name. That seems pretty clear to me.
A reasonable way to interpret that, and given Alex's explanation I think it's very probable that this was the judges' reasoning, is that "only two consonants" means "only two distinct consonants." And "mutt" does in fact have only two distinct consonants, "m" and "t."

Re: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 9:12 am
by El Jefe
Euphonium wrote:
nlw44 wrote:
OSXpert wrote:I said fen for bog - judges?

I'm fine with the "west village" correction, even though i said greenwich village, but i thought the "mutt" correction was odd. Sure, it technically has 2 consonants and a vowel, but...
The reason AT gave for the reversal was that supposedly he hadn't specified that there were ONLY going to be 2 consonants and 1 vowel...except that he DID specify just that when he introduced the category. He said something to the effect of "...and that's it" after giving the category name. That seems pretty clear to me.
A reasonable way to interpret that, and given Alex's explanation I think it's very probable that this was the judges' reasoning, is that "only two consonants" means "only two distinct consonants." And "mutt" does in fact have only two distinct consonants, "m" and "t."
All this hand-wringing over the merits of MUTT is for naught; Scrabble fans and others should tell you MUT has been an acceptable alternate spelling for the same word in Merriam-Webster for many (dozens of?) years. Certainly I have not encountered it 'in the wild,' as we say, but it avoids the debate over "that's it" nicely...