Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall

User avatar
DadofTwins
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1206
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:11 am
Location: Fortress of SHC-itude
Contact:

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by DadofTwins » Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:20 pm

I fear it would take too long to adequately explain my feelings about what goes into good writing, so for the sake of time I'll point out some of the more egregious errors last night:

1) Ridiculous clue valuation. "Self-Storage Association" for 200, Pavlov for 2000. Never mind the fact that they spotted you two V's and threw in the word dog.

2) Cruel neg bait. Taxonomic classes, orders and families are difficult enough to keep straight. On the gypsy moth clue, who really knew before the answer was given whether they wanted "insect" "lepidoptera" (and would they have accepted "butterfly") or whatever the family was? In the same category you had to know that "mammal" was a class, not an order, and that "primate" was an order and not a family. Asking them to know the difference between a monotreme and a marsupial is OK, I guess, at 2K, provided that you expect some knowledge of "infraclasses."

And the less said about the "Autobiographies" category the better.

3) Misleading/inelegant wording. I challenge anyone among us to write a clue about a word that contains two V's and involves a procedure requiring a scalpel that will lead a medical doctor to say something other than "invasive." It's hard to be that terrible, but somehow they managed. In the 1600 box, no less.

4) Inconsistent playability. Sometimes you get a mismatch between the material the writers choose and the particular knowledge base of the three players on stage. There's nothing you can do about that. But when people get together later to discuss the game, it's generally a bad sign when their response to the board ranges from "easiest I've seen in a while" to "downright impossible." Last night felt like I was watching a baseball game where the umpire was flipping a coin instead of calling balls and strikes. It made the players hesitate and the game basically unplayable.

5) Spectacle. The purpose of a TOC board is not to show off how hard you can make the clues. It's to prove that the person who wins in some way deserves the prize they have won. The players are supposed to be the stars of the game. When the writers decide to make the game about themselves and not the players, you have problems.

Think about it in terms of golf. What's supposed to be on display -- especially in a major -- is not the conniving evilness of the course architect, but the out-of-this-world skill of the PGA pros. The best majors are not the ones that produce the worst scores, but the ones that give really good players a chance to do hard things well. The TOC is supposed to be Augusta. Last night we got Bethpage Black in the rain.

The worst part of all of this is that I know they can do better. Wednesday night's game was one of the best-written I've seen (well, read, since I had to go off the Archive, stupid DTV) in a while. Clearly-pinned clues, elegant wordplay, not too many misvaluations (Romulus & Remus for 10? Olympic mascots should have been SJ, swapped with Political Leaders), all in all a solid writing effort worthy of the talent on the stage.

Last night was a hot mess.

And to think, this is the short version . . .
Last edited by DadofTwins on Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:35 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
whoisalexjacob
2015 TOC'er
Posts: 561
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:19 am

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILER

Post by whoisalexjacob » Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:22 pm

DadofTwins wrote:Here's hoping the writing tonight lives up to the talent of the players on stage.

But after last night's game, I have my doubts.

When you're writing tough material for really good players, the goal is to give them a chance to shine while separating the merely awesome from the Immortals (and sometimes, as tonight, Immortals from one another). The best players deserve more than the hardest material; they deserve the best material.

Buddy deserves the congratulations he's getting for navigating that fire swamp of a board, but nobody deserves to have their fate decided there. The writers should be embarrassed, and may even owe Kara and Jay an apology, for subjecting good players to such awful, awful writing.

This is the TOC. The players know they have to step their game up. The writers do, too.
Yeah, add me to the list of people not getting this attitude. It's okay if the players get some wrong; it doesn't necessarily mean the writers are scum. In my mind, Zworykin and de havilland provided opportunities for someone to shine. I will agree that the orders category isn't ideal; I think they tend to forget that the majority of people can't sort out order, genus, class, etc. Besides that category, I'm wondering to what you guys are referring.

Congrats buddy! Tough luck jay, nice dd hunting, too bad it didn't work out that time.

User avatar
Mark B
Four-Time Swimmer in the Jeopardy! Pool
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 9:41 pm

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Mark B » Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:30 pm

Fishercat wrote:DoT: I trust you and StevenH on these matters, so could you explain to me (in all seriousness, I am missing something) what precisely made the writing on last night's boards terrible to that extent? I just don't get it.
While unclear writing occasionally makes its way into a J! board, I think that DoT and StevenH are talking more about board organization, choice of clues and clue valuation.

In this game for instance, the V V category was a mess. An oncologist couldn't come up with the rather weakly pegged "invasive". His intuition, that "vivisect" would be a much more likely V V clue, was right, thought obviously not right for the clue in question. Then, the clue right next to it asked for "vindictive". Basically two words that use the same v-containing suffix. Both were TS's. And the bottom clue in the cat.? The dead-easy Pavlov, giant TOM included. Uhhh, voivod? Valve? Tel Aviv? And so on.

I feel like the writers even messed the players up in the way they wrote the desired responses. I'm thinking of "Give the Order" and how "carnivore" was in plain language rather than carnivora. Then the players had to come up with lepidoptera. They likely weren't sure what the writers were shooting for, and feeling a bit gun shy by this point.

I mentioned above that SSA is, IMO, obscure, or at least wrongly valued in the top box. "My Wicked Wicked Ways" felt like neg bait, and it was, becoming a TS.

And so on.

User avatar
whoisalexjacob
2015 TOC'er
Posts: 561
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:19 am

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILER

Post by whoisalexjacob » Fri Nov 11, 2011 3:23 pm

DadofTwins wrote:I fear it would take too long to adequately explain my feelings about what goes into good writing, so for the sake of time I'll point out some of the more egregious errors last night:

1) Ridiculous clue valuation. "Self-Storage Association" for 200, Pavlov for 2000. Never mind the fact that they spotted you two V's and threw in the word dog.

2) Cruel neg bait. Taxonomic classes, orders and families are difficult enough to keep straight. On the gypsy moth clue, who really knew before the answer was given whether they wanted "insect" "lepidoptera" (and would they have accepted "butterfly") or whatever the family was? In the same category you had to know that "mammal" was a class, not an order, and that "primate" was an order and not a family. Asking them to know the difference between a monotreme and a marsupial is OK, I guess, at 2K, provided that you expect some knowledge of "infraclasses."

And the less said about the "Autobiographies" category the better.

3) Misleading/inelegant wording. I challenge anyone among us to write a clue about a word that contains two V's and involves a procedure requiring a scalpel that will lead a medical doctor to say something other than "invasive." It's hard to be that terrible, but somehow they managed. In the 1600 box, no less.

4) Inconsistent playability. Sometimes you get a mismatch between the material the writers choose and the particular knowledge base of the three players on stage. There's nothing you can do about that. But when people get together later to discuss the game, it's generally a bad sign when their response to the board ranges from "easiest I've seen in a while" to "downright impossible." Last night felt like I was watching a baseball game where the umpire was flipping a coin instead of calling balls and strikes. It made the players hesitate and the game basically unplayable.

5) Spectacle. The purpose of a TOC board is not to show off how hard you can make the clues. It's to prove that the person who wins in some way deserves the prize they have won. The players are supposed to be the stars of the game. When the writers decide to make the game about themselves and not the players, you have problems.

Think about it in terms of golf. What's supposed to be on display -- especially in a major -- is not the conniving evilness of the course architect, but the out-of-this-world skill of the PGA pros. The best majors are not the ones that produce the worst scores, but the ones that give really good players a chance to do hard things well. The TOC is supposed to be Augusta. Last night we got Bethpage Black in the rain.

The worst part of all of this is that I know they can do better. Wednesday night's game was one of the best-written I've seen (well, read, since I had to go off the Archive, stupid DTV) in a while. Clearly-pinned clues, elegant wordplay, not too many misvaluations (Romulus & Remus for 10? Olympic mascots should have been SJ, swapped with Political Leaders), all in all a solid writing effort worthy of the talent on the stage.

Last night was a hot mess.

And to think, this is the short version . . .
Yeah, it just really feels to me like you're making excuses for the players. And I don't think it's fair to take issue with a Pavlov clue; don't you realize that your view on how easy that one is might be different than the general public? What exactly was so bad about the invasive clue (I mean, I know the word vivisection exists and has two v's, but is there a reason besides that? Was it inaccurate in some way?)

Just feel I should defend the writers, as I enjoyed the step up in difficulty. The players may not have aced the boards, but fire swamp? Cmon.

User avatar
jpahk
Jeopardy! TOCer
Posts: 615
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 1:16 am

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by jpahk » Fri Nov 11, 2011 3:26 pm

i felt the same way about the weird and uneven boards, and i'm glad somebody has eloquently expressed just what was so unsatisfying about them. i actually didn't mind the "give the order" category, which was probably the most painful to watch, because i knew them all. but i totally agree that it can be tough to keep the levels straight in your head. i would much rather have seen a clue like "this order includes lemurs and hominids" (which are two different families) for $400, and "this order in class mammalia includes chinchillas" at $800. might not have helped jay, who dove into the bottom of the category first, but it would have been better writing—making the top clues easier than the bottom ones.

on a personal level, i'm gutted for jay, who played a really strong game and then got eaten up by the DDs (and FJ). and i feel for kara, who seemed (understandably) unable to get back into the game mentally/emotionally after telling that moving story about her late father. but i'm soooo happy for buddy. i didn't get to see FJ in the studio because roger, mark & i were whisked off for makeup/miking. when i saw buddy tear up at the end of the show, i nearly lost it myself. couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

User avatar
whoisalexjacob
2015 TOC'er
Posts: 561
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:19 am

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILER

Post by whoisalexjacob » Fri Nov 11, 2011 3:29 pm

Mark B wrote:
Fishercat wrote:DoT: I trust you and StevenH on these matters, so could you explain to me (in all seriousness, I am missing something) what precisely made the writing on last night's boards terrible to that extent? I just don't get it.
While unclear writing occasionally makes its way into a J! board, I think that DoT and StevenH are talking more about board organization, choice of clues and clue valuation.

In this game for instance, the V V category was a mess. An oncologist couldn't come up with the rather weakly pegged "invasive". His intuition, that "vivisect" would be a much more likely V V clue, was right, thought obviously not right for the clue in question. Then, the clue right next to it asked for "vindictive". Basically two words that use the same v-containing suffix. Both were TS's. And the bottom clue in the cat.? The dead-easy Pavlov, giant TOM included. Uhhh, voivod? Valve? Tel Aviv? And so on.

I feel like the writers even messed the players up in the way they wrote the desired responses. I'm thinking of "Give the Order" and how "carnivore" was in plain language rather than carnivora. Then the players had to come up with lepidoptera. They likely weren't sure what the writers were shooting for, and feeling a bit gun shy by this point.

I mentioned above that SSA is, IMO, obscure, or at least wrongly valued in the top box. "My Wicked Wicked Ways" felt like neg bait, and it was, becoming a TS.

And so on.
Voivod, valve, tel aviv? Sorry, but that strikes me as so arbitrary. Why would those be better responses to use? Voivod?? Had to google that, did you slip that in there to see if we were paying attention?

User avatar
Spaceman Spiff
One-and-done J! Champ (and proud of it!)
Posts: 1002
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 6:10 pm

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Spaceman Spiff » Fri Nov 11, 2011 3:53 pm

teapot37 wrote:FJ for me was basically "Olivia de Havilland and her sister! What's her sister's name?!?!? crapcrapcrapcrapcrapcrapcrap 5 seconds left JOAN FONTAINE!!!
I did exactly the same thing.

As far as the rest of the board, I stunk (but I did know Foster the People, since "Pumped Up Kicks" has been on my iPod for several months!)

User avatar
goforthetie
(username no longer operative)
Posts: 1336
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:01 pm

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by goforthetie » Fri Nov 11, 2011 4:03 pm

Maybe it's just because I've dealt with a few of its members recently, but I thought the SSA clue was pretty easy. I hadn't heard of the SSA before, but "Association" was given, "Storage" was the category, so really you only needed the other S, and given that they're bragging about square footage... what else could it be?

The "Give the Order" category was painful to watch, but I don't think it was a bad choice on the part of the writers either. Especially if it had been picked in order, it shouldn't have taken too long to calibrate one's sense of where "order" fell in the classification schema. "Mammal" no, so "primate" yes. Then rodents, the DD, lepidoptera rather than insects, and monotremes (appropriately placed at the bottom).

User avatar
Mark B
Four-Time Swimmer in the Jeopardy! Pool
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 9:41 pm

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILER

Post by Mark B » Fri Nov 11, 2011 4:05 pm

omgwheelhouse wrote:
Mark B wrote:
Fishercat wrote:DoT: I trust you and StevenH on these matters, so could you explain to me (in all seriousness, I am missing something) what precisely made the writing on last night's boards terrible to that extent? I just don't get it.
While unclear writing occasionally makes its way into a J! board, I think that DoT and StevenH are talking more about board organization, choice of clues and clue valuation.

In this game for instance, the V V category was a mess. An oncologist couldn't come up with the rather weakly pegged "invasive". His intuition, that "vivisect" would be a much more likely V V clue, was right, thought obviously not right for the clue in question. Then, the clue right next to it asked for "vindictive". Basically two words that use the same v-containing suffix. Both were TS's. And the bottom clue in the cat.? The dead-easy Pavlov, giant TOM included. Uhhh, voivod? Valve? Tel Aviv? And so on.

I feel like the writers even messed the players up in the way they wrote the desired responses. I'm thinking of "Give the Order" and how "carnivore" was in plain language rather than carnivora. Then the players had to come up with lepidoptera. They likely weren't sure what the writers were shooting for, and feeling a bit gun shy by this point.

I mentioned above that SSA is, IMO, obscure, or at least wrongly valued in the top box. "My Wicked Wicked Ways" felt like neg bait, and it was, becoming a TS.

And so on.
Voivod, valve, tel aviv? Sorry, but that strikes me as so arbitrary. Why would those be better responses to use? Voivod?? Had to google that, did you slip that in there to see if we were paying attention?
I guess voivod would be a bottom box clue, and a tough one, but my point is that they're uniquely double v words, giving the player something to latch on to, rather than just repeating words with the suffix -ive.

As for Pavlov, Kara had seen a clue similar to it in her 6th game. It was a regular season DJ $400 clue. Actually, since the writers spotted the players the V's, it played easier in the ToC game. Coulda been a $200.

reddpen
Thrice Unplucked from the Jeopardy! Pool
Posts: 637
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:51 am
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by reddpen » Fri Nov 11, 2011 4:59 pm

gnash wrote:It came right after a small glitch in my recording, so I am not 100% sure that I heard it right, but didn't Alex pronounce "Krugman" as rhyming with "bug man"? I can understand mispronouncing foreign names, but an American host should really know how to pronounce names of famous Americans.
To address someone else's concern, as economists go, Paul Krugman is as famous as they come these days, between his 2008 Nobel, his column in the paper of record, and his role of gadfly in opposition to much prevailing, misguided conventional economic wisdom. Given the cat title, I expected the writers to throw Frug in there, which at least rhymes with Krug-...

Just a few cat sweeps for me: Jeoportmanteau in J, and Booker and Economist in DJ. Tallied in the red for both Order (1 miss, 4 clams) and Pop Culture (2R, 1W). Clammed on Patton though I was 90% sure that was him.

I was surprised the judges credited Jay for "case", but a quick search confirms they made the right call. Aside from rack, the only TSs I converted were Woody Guthrie, invasive (albeit aided by a brief DVR pause), vindictive and Krugman. Should have rung in with lepidoptera but had no confidence in distinctions among classes, orders, families et al.

My dumbest negs? So many choices: director Leni Riefenstahl for architect Albert Speer, De Niro for Scorsese, Newport News for Norfolk, Ireland for Scotland, ape for primate, and my personal favorite, Paris Hilton for Roseanne.

Had FJ instantly, thankfully, my first get of the week. Always nice to nail a FJ TS, esp. in the ToC.

As for the goofy semi groupings, is there a reason why they couldn't have looked like this?
Semi 1: Roger Justin Erin
Semi 2: Tom Joon Kara
Semi 3: Jay Buddy Mark

Congrats, Buddy, on a hard-fought win and a much-deserved slot in the finals, and for your unguarded display of emotion on winning -- pretty sure, given the chance, I'd react the exact same way. Hearty applause to both Jay and Kara for getting this far and fighting so hard. With no slight to boardies from previous ToCs, this feels like the best one ever... and that's before tonight's epic.
Back in the pool

User avatar
StevenH
Not J! Contestant Material
Posts: 2281
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:24 pm
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by StevenH » Fri Nov 11, 2011 5:38 pm

Regarding the quality of the board, I can't really add anything to what DadofTwins and Mark B already said, and to what I said in my original post.

I will say that I thought that all three Daily Doubles and the FJ were good clues, and I didn't have a problem with the give the order category. But I still stand by this being an awful board on the whole, and DoT is right that Kara, Buddy, and Jay all deserve apologies from TPTB for having to play on this board after Justin, Erin, and Tom N. all got a top notch one.

User avatar
whoisalexjacob
2015 TOC'er
Posts: 561
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:19 am

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by whoisalexjacob » Fri Nov 11, 2011 5:47 pm

StevenH wrote: and DoT is right that Kara, Buddy, and Jay all deserve apologies from TPTB for having to play on this board after Justin, Erin, and Tom N. all got a top notch one.
I guess I will not ramble on about this anymore, except to say that I disagree very strongly with this.

alamble
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 841
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:09 pm

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILER

Post by alamble » Fri Nov 11, 2011 7:38 pm

omgwheelhouse wrote:
DadofTwins wrote:I fear it would take too long to adequately explain my feelings about what goes into good writing, so for the sake of time I'll point out some of the more egregious errors last night:

1) Ridiculous clue valuation. "Self-Storage Association" for 200, Pavlov for 2000. Never mind the fact that they spotted you two V's and threw in the word dog.

2) Cruel neg bait. Taxonomic classes, orders and families are difficult enough to keep straight. On the gypsy moth clue, who really knew before the answer was given whether they wanted "insect" "lepidoptera" (and would they have accepted "butterfly") or whatever the family was? In the same category you had to know that "mammal" was a class, not an order, and that "primate" was an order and not a family. Asking them to know the difference between a monotreme and a marsupial is OK, I guess, at 2K, provided that you expect some knowledge of "infraclasses."

And the less said about the "Autobiographies" category the better.

3) Misleading/inelegant wording. I challenge anyone among us to write a clue about a word that contains two V's and involves a procedure requiring a scalpel that will lead a medical doctor to say something other than "invasive." It's hard to be that terrible, but somehow they managed. In the 1600 box, no less.

4) Inconsistent playability. Sometimes you get a mismatch between the material the writers choose and the particular knowledge base of the three players on stage. There's nothing you can do about that. But when people get together later to discuss the game, it's generally a bad sign when their response to the board ranges from "easiest I've seen in a while" to "downright impossible." Last night felt like I was watching a baseball game where the umpire was flipping a coin instead of calling balls and strikes. It made the players hesitate and the game basically unplayable.

5) Spectacle. The purpose of a TOC board is not to show off how hard you can make the clues. It's to prove that the person who wins in some way deserves the prize they have won. The players are supposed to be the stars of the game. When the writers decide to make the game about themselves and not the players, you have problems.

Think about it in terms of golf. What's supposed to be on display -- especially in a major -- is not the conniving evilness of the course architect, but the out-of-this-world skill of the PGA pros. The best majors are not the ones that produce the worst scores, but the ones that give really good players a chance to do hard things well. The TOC is supposed to be Augusta. Last night we got Bethpage Black in the rain.

The worst part of all of this is that I know they can do better. Wednesday night's game was one of the best-written I've seen (well, read, since I had to go off the Archive, stupid DTV) in a while. Clearly-pinned clues, elegant wordplay, not too many misvaluations (Romulus & Remus for 10? Olympic mascots should have been SJ, swapped with Political Leaders), all in all a solid writing effort worthy of the talent on the stage.

Last night was a hot mess.

And to think, this is the short version . . .
Yeah, it just really feels to me like you're making excuses for the players. And I don't think it's fair to take issue with a Pavlov clue; don't you realize that your view on how easy that one is might be different than the general public? What exactly was so bad about the invasive clue (I mean, I know the word vivisection exists and has two v's, but is there a reason besides that? Was it inaccurate in some way?)

Just feel I should defend the writers, as I enjoyed the step up in difficulty. The players may not have aced the boards, but fire swamp? Cmon.
Specific to the "vivisect" clue - that's on Jay for not properly parsing the clue, given that it asked for an adjective, not a verb.

Sometimes it's very obvious that the writers intend for categories to be selected from top to bottom, and given how strenuously the producers and contestant coordinators stress that this is their preference, it's hardly the writers' fault that when contestants choose to ignore that advice, the clues fall flat.

shubhaghosh
Contributor
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 8:03 pm

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILER

Post by shubhaghosh » Sat Nov 12, 2011 10:16 am

alamble wrote: Sometimes it's very obvious that the writers intend for categories to be selected from top to bottom, and given how strenuously the producers and contestant coordinators stress that this is their preference, it's hardly the writers' fault that when contestants choose to ignore that advice, the clues fall flat.

There are instances when the contestants are required to pick from top to bottom. It was in the show taped before mine (Buddy's second win by the way). I forget the name of the category, but the first four answers were tokens in Monopoly, and the fifth clue was asking for what the previous four clues had in common. I am not sure what they would have done if someone ignored Alex. Probably just not reveal the mischosen clue. Maggie warned us that there may be something like this in one of he games before the taping began that day.

User avatar
boson
Trivial
Posts: 1616
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 9:01 pm

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILER

Post by boson » Sat Nov 12, 2011 11:38 am

alamble wrote: Sometimes it's very obvious that the writers intend for categories to be selected from top to bottom, and given how strenuously the producers and contestant coordinators stress that this is their preference, it's hardly the writers' fault that when contestants choose to ignore that advice, the clues fall flat.
It is the writers' fault if they assume the clues are going to be taken from top to bottom in a TOC semifinal. There is a well-known strategic advantage to finding a daily double, and these contestants are the best of the best. The contestants will use their individual advantages to win - and those advantages include superior knowledge, buzzer speed, and/or game play strategy. If you are a faster on the buzzer than your competitors, then maybe starting at the top row could be to your advantage, giving you a hint of what the category is about. However if you are being outbuzzed more often than not, then you need to find the daily doubles. The writers know this will happen with experienced players.

One way to avoid this would be to have truly random placement of the daily doubles. Sprinkle some in the first row. Sometimes have two in the same category. If you really want to stop daily double hunting by the contestants, then don't make it easy to find them.

User avatar
dhkendall
Pursuing the Dream
Posts: 8770
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:49 am
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Contact:

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by dhkendall » Sat Nov 12, 2011 2:47 pm

Part 2 in the series of the SF and Finals from the view of a gambler:

http://www.esquire.com/the-side/feature ... -2-6555316
"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

Follow my progress game by game since 2012

User avatar
alietr
Site Admin
Posts: 6724
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:20 pm
Location: Bethesda, MD

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by alietr » Sun Nov 13, 2011 6:07 pm

Buddy, congratulations on the hard-fought victory. Kara and Jay, I'm sorry to see both of you go. That's the part of the TOC that sucks. Somebody has to lose, and so few deserve to do so.

User avatar
periwinkle
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 350
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:45 pm

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by periwinkle » Mon Nov 14, 2011 3:18 pm

Mark B wrote:
Anyone else precall Vladimir Guerrero? I even expected to see him in the bottom box.
My kiddo was waiting for that, and was mad that it wasn't there.

User avatar
periwinkle
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 350
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:45 pm

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by periwinkle » Mon Nov 14, 2011 3:34 pm

I think the players did their best with tricky boards (I tend to agree with DofT on this, though he has much more experience with it, but he explained well why the boards felt so odd). Congrats to Buddy! Jay and Kara, I've enjoyed watching you play.

FJ was an instaget for me, but I am a classic movie fan (My Wicked, Wicked Ways was also an instaget).

Bamaman
Also Receiving Votes
Posts: 9228
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Game Recap & Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Bamaman » Mon Nov 14, 2011 9:01 pm

barandall800 wrote: I didn't know until a few months ago...and even with that recent revelation under my belt, it took me about 15 seconds to say to myself after I quickly answered with Katharine and Audrey, "Wait a minute...THEY'RE NOT RELATED!" From then on I was absolutely stuck. For some strange reason, Sissy Spacek kept coming to my head.
You weren't too far off in your thinking, just a little off track.

Spacek won Best Actress for playing Loretta Lynn. Lynn is the sister of recording artist Crystal Gayle. Perhaps that's where you got the Best Actress/sister thing.

Post Reply