Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall

User avatar
billiej
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 695
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:56 pm
Location: Maine

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by billiej » Wed Feb 01, 2017 6:22 pm

This Is Kirk! wrote:
doriko wrote:Who knew that Dr. J was so saucy!?
Everyone. :lol:
Ha! Where's that "like" button? ;)

davey
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 3609
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:55 pm

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by davey » Wed Feb 01, 2017 7:56 pm

This Is Kirk! wrote:
John Boy wrote:THAT makes me wonder if they specified before FJ that they were REQUIRING both names(which they do, only in such cases)
You sure about that? That would seem to be a pretty big tip-off.

I just remember being told that, for Final Jeopardy, you should be prepared to give a full name if you feel it's necessary. I'm pretty sure they never told us "you'll be told if you need to give a full name." I think it's on the contestants to make a judgment call.
Here's a post in which Roger Craig suggests that players may have been given an extra tipoff for specificity prior to FJ

http://jboard.tv/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=17 ... ible#p1626

Here's another in which a player suggests he was given one (at least, that's how I took it)-
http://jboard.tv/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=62 ... ble#p27132


And here's an unambiguous example-
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=323&p=10273#p10273

I don't know if these are the only posts that gave me (and apparently John Boy) the impression that former players had said that extra warnings were sometimes given before FJ. But of course only players who were present for one would know.
Last edited by davey on Wed Feb 01, 2017 8:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

seaborgium
Undefeated in Reruns
Posts: 6486
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by seaborgium » Wed Feb 01, 2017 8:08 pm

My dad and his opponents were told to be specific on an FJ about George Bernard Shaw.

User avatar
Cat Hammarskjold
Feline Secretary-General
Posts: 927
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 12:35 am

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Cat Hammarskjold » Wed Feb 01, 2017 8:22 pm

I also went with Elizabeth Taylor because I figured that going through all of those divorces would take enough time out of the studio and in law offices and courtrooms.

User avatar
opusthepenguin
The Best Darn Penguin on the Whole JBoard
Posts: 7014
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:33 pm
Location: Shawnee, KS
Contact:

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by opusthepenguin » Wed Feb 01, 2017 8:36 pm

davey wrote:
This Is Kirk! wrote:
John Boy wrote:THAT makes me wonder if they specified before FJ that they were REQUIRING both names(which they do, only in such cases)
You sure about that? That would seem to be a pretty big tip-off.

I just remember being told that, for Final Jeopardy, you should be prepared to give a full name if you feel it's necessary. I'm pretty sure they never told us "you'll be told if you need to give a full name." I think it's on the contestants to make a judgment call.
Here's a post in which Roger Craig suggests that players may have been given an extra tipoff for specificity prior to FJ

http://jboard.tv/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=17 ... ible#p1626

Here's another in which a player suggests he was given one (at least, that's how I took it)-
http://jboard.tv/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=62 ... ble#p27132


And here's an unambiguous example-
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=323&p=10273#p10273

I don't know if these are the only posts that gave me (and apparently John Boy) the impression that former players had said that extra warnings were sometimes given before FJ. But of course only players who were present for one would know.
Right. The point is not that they NEVER do this. The point is that in this case it would've been a pretty big tip-off. In the cases you helpfully cite, the instruction doesn't narrow the field much if at all. E.g. the singing brothers will almost certainly have the same last name, so it doesn't reveal anything to tell contestants they'd better specify which brother. But if they're asking for an actress with multiple Oscar nominations and they tell you they're going to need a first name, that pretty much narrows it down to two possibilities.

So my belief is a) The contestants were not given specific instructions about this FJ, b) Like all contestants, they were given general instructions to be as specific as they feel they need to be, and c) This was enough to make it clear that this FJ required at least a first initial; therefore d) "Who is Hepburn?" would not have been accepted.

User avatar
opusthepenguin
The Best Darn Penguin on the Whole JBoard
Posts: 7014
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:33 pm
Location: Shawnee, KS
Contact:

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by opusthepenguin » Wed Feb 01, 2017 8:49 pm

seaborgium wrote:My dad and his opponents were told to be specific on an FJ about George Bernard Shaw.
I wonder why. Is there another playwright named Shaw who might come up?

User avatar
AFRET CMS
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 2:48 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by AFRET CMS » Wed Feb 01, 2017 9:09 pm

This Is Kirk! wrote:
Kevin Shrum wrote:Wonder how many other viewers in the Mountain time zone missed part of the show. Our Denver affiliate pre-empted the first part of the show for the announcement of the SCOTUS nominee and joined the show in progress about half-way through DJ.
I guess this explains your FJ response of "Who is Gorsuch?"
He was one of my possible responses, but I couldn't remember if he'd been nominated for four Oscars or only three......

JKS
I'm not the defending Jeopardy! champion. But I have played one on TV.

davey
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 3609
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:55 pm

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by davey » Wed Feb 01, 2017 10:56 pm

opusthepenguin wrote:
davey wrote:
This Is Kirk! wrote:
John Boy wrote:THAT makes me wonder if they specified before FJ that they were REQUIRING both names(which they do, only in such cases)
You sure about that? That would seem to be a pretty big tip-off.

I just remember being told that, for Final Jeopardy, you should be prepared to give a full name if you feel it's necessary. I'm pretty sure they never told us "you'll be told if you need to give a full name." I think it's on the contestants to make a judgment call.
Here's a post in which Roger Craig suggests that players may have been given an extra tipoff for specificity prior to FJ

http://jboard.tv/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=17 ... ible#p1626

Here's another in which a player suggests he was given one (at least, that's how I took it)-
http://jboard.tv/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=62 ... ble#p27132


And here's an unambiguous example-
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=323&p=10273#p10273

I don't know if these are the only posts that gave me (and apparently John Boy) the impression that former players had said that extra warnings were sometimes given before FJ. But of course only players who were present for one would know.
Right. The point is not that they NEVER do this. The point is that in this case it would've been a pretty big tip-off. In the cases you helpfully cite, the instruction doesn't narrow the field much if at all. E.g. the singing brothers will almost certainly have the same last name, so it doesn't reveal anything to tell contestants they'd better specify which brother. But if they're asking for an actress with multiple Oscar nominations and they tell you they're going to need a first name, that pretty much narrows it down to two possibilities.

So my belief is a) The contestants were not given specific instructions about this FJ, b) Like all contestants, they were given general instructions to be as specific as they feel they need to be, and c) This was enough to make it clear that this FJ required at least a first initial; therefore d) "Who is Hepburn?" would not have been accepted.
When I first brought it up, I was thinking about a clue from last week. (It's in the poll thread.)

User avatar
Linear Gnome
One Miner Gal
Posts: 1764
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2012 9:55 am
Location: Missouri

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Linear Gnome » Wed Feb 01, 2017 11:03 pm

I enjoyed watching Mr. Dr. J.

Like some others, I was surprised at the stand-and-stare on "for whom the bell tolls".

I thought of Julie Andrews first, but switched to and stuck with Katharine Hepburn.

User avatar
This Is Kirk!
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 4800
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:35 am
Location: Seattle

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by This Is Kirk! » Wed Feb 01, 2017 11:37 pm

davey wrote:
This Is Kirk! wrote:
John Boy wrote:THAT makes me wonder if they specified before FJ that they were REQUIRING both names(which they do, only in such cases)
You sure about that? That would seem to be a pretty big tip-off.

I just remember being told that, for Final Jeopardy, you should be prepared to give a full name if you feel it's necessary. I'm pretty sure they never told us "you'll be told if you need to give a full name." I think it's on the contestants to make a judgment call.
Here's a post in which Roger Craig suggests that players may have been given an extra tipoff for specificity prior to FJ

http://jboard.tv/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=17 ... ible#p1626

Here's another in which a player suggests he was given one (at least, that's how I took it)-
http://jboard.tv/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=62 ... ble#p27132


And here's an unambiguous example-
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=323&p=10273#p10273

I don't know if these are the only posts that gave me (and apparently John Boy) the impression that former players had said that extra warnings were sometimes given before FJ. But of course only players who were present for one would know.
That's interesting, but I guess as long as all three are being given the same information it's fair.

User avatar
Dr. J
Decade Battler and Mustache Maker
Posts: 566
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 1:35 pm

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Dr. J » Wed Feb 01, 2017 11:50 pm

Doug will affirm that the contestants were not given any special instructions other than the "who is" prompt that all contestants are given. (The producers tell you to write the correct question phrasing before the clue goes up, probably to give you more time to answer. So they say, "write down WHO" or "write down WHERE" and the rest is up to you.)

Interestingly, after the game I was chatting with John Lauderdale, and he seemed to think that just HEPBURN would've been considered correct. But he's not a judge, so I have my doubts. It was great seeing everyone, and we were grateful for the diversion on Election Day (which is when this week's shows taped).

As for my sauciness, that's pretty well established in these parts. And speaking of parts, the rest of the story that Doug didn't reveal on air is not only that I said that, but I also placed my foot in his lap. So there's saucy and then there's Frank's Hot Sauce-y. :twisted: :lol: And yes, I won that Trivial Pursuit game right quick after that! But lest you think that Doug is not a strong competitor, we played Scrabble on our 2nd date, and he beat me soundly. (He also won the game. <rimshot>)

10 years later, we're still enjoying the ride!

User avatar
Woof
Swimming in the Jeopardy! Pool
Posts: 4096
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:53 pm

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Woof » Thu Feb 02, 2017 12:40 am

Dr. J wrote:Doug will affirm that the contestants were not given any special instructions other than the "who is" prompt that all contestants are given. (The producers tell you to write the correct question phrasing before the clue goes up, probably to give you more time to answer. So they say, "write down WHO" or "write down WHERE" and the rest is up to you.)

Interestingly, after the game I was chatting with John Lauderdale, and he seemed to think that just HEPBURN would've been considered correct. But he's not a judge, so I have my doubts. It was great seeing everyone, and we were grateful for the diversion on Election Day (which is when this week's shows taped).

As for my sauciness, that's pretty well established in these parts. And speaking of parts, the rest of the story that Doug didn't reveal on air is not only that I said that, but I also placed my foot in his lap. So there's saucy and then there's Frank's Hot Sauce-y. :twisted: :lol: And yes, I won that Trivial Pursuit game right quick after that! But lest you think that Doug is not a strong competitor, we played Scrabble on our 2nd date, and he beat me soundly. (He also won the game. <rimshot>)

10 years later, we're still enjoying the ride!
Great story, Dr J, that put a smile on my face. It pales, however, in comparison to the behavior of my wife on our first date: she pushed me into the back of a Yellow Cab, got in behind me, shut the door and left our 3 friends standing at the curb. :shock: That was 30 years ago and she's still the aggressive one in the family.

User avatar
This Is Kirk!
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 4800
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:35 am
Location: Seattle

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by This Is Kirk! » Thu Feb 02, 2017 12:52 am

Dr. J wrote: As for my sauciness, that's pretty well established in these parts. And speaking of parts, the rest of the story that Doug didn't reveal on air is not only that I said that, but I also placed my foot in his lap. So there's saucy and then there's Frank's Hot Sauce-y. :twisted: :lol:
If he'd added that part of the story it would have prompted a patented Trebek "Hello!" for sure.

User avatar
dhkendall
Pursuing the Dream
Posts: 8771
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:49 am
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Contact:

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by dhkendall » Thu Feb 02, 2017 1:29 pm

alietr wrote:
This Is Kirk! wrote:
Dr. J wrote:So am I the only one who thought Bette Davis?
That was my wife's guess, too, so you're in good company :)

Nice to see you here again. Stick around!
Seriously. What do we have to do, find more relatives of yours to get on the show to keep you around?
She doesn't need relatives. Her avatar shows that she just has a fake moustache she can use.

Be on the lookout for an oddly facial-haired contestant named Jephanie Stass on an upcoming episode.
"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
dhkendall
Pursuing the Dream
Posts: 8771
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:49 am
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Contact:

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by dhkendall » Thu Feb 02, 2017 1:31 pm

opusthepenguin wrote:Here are another couple of clues where I found it surprising that they accepted last name only:

I GUESTED ON LAW & ORDER
HE WAS A HOOLIGAN IN THE 1991 EPISODE "THE VIOLENCE OF SUMMER"; HE LATER WROTE ABOUT VIOLENCE AS "CAPOTE"

WHO PLAYED 'EM?
2008: FATHER BRENDAN FLYNN, WHOSE BEHAVIOR CAUSES DOUBT
Spoiler
Show
According to the archive, "Who is Hoffman?" was accepted in both cases.
That said, I can't find any case of "Who is Hepburn?" being offered as a response. Unless I missed it, this case has never been tested.
Keep in mind my Oscar and other movie-related weakness but I can't think of another famous
Spoiler
Show
Hoffman
"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
Volante
Harbinger of the Doomed Lemur
Posts: 6767
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Volante » Thu Feb 02, 2017 1:48 pm

dhkendall wrote:
opusthepenguin wrote:Here are another couple of clues where I found it surprising that they accepted last name only:

I GUESTED ON LAW & ORDER
HE WAS A HOOLIGAN IN THE 1991 EPISODE "THE VIOLENCE OF SUMMER"; HE LATER WROTE ABOUT VIOLENCE AS "CAPOTE"

WHO PLAYED 'EM?
2008: FATHER BRENDAN FLYNN, WHOSE BEHAVIOR CAUSES DOUBT
Spoiler
Show
According to the archive, "Who is Hoffman?" was accepted in both cases.
That said, I can't find any case of "Who is Hepburn?" being offered as a response. Unless I missed it, this case has never been tested.
Keep in mind my Oscar and other movie-related weakness but I can't think of another famous
Spoiler
Show
Hoffman

Bamaman
Also Receiving Votes
Posts: 9320
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Bamaman » Thu Feb 02, 2017 2:08 pm

davey wrote: Here's a post in which Roger Craig suggests that players may have been given an extra tipoff for specificity prior to FJ

http://jboard.tv/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=17 ... ible#p1626
This game seems to disprove Roger's theory about what would be accepted.


http://www.j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=5187

User avatar
alietr
Site Admin
Posts: 6822
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:20 pm
Location: Bethesda, MD

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by alietr » Thu Feb 02, 2017 3:16 pm

Dr. J wrote:Doug will affirm that the contestants were not given any special instructions other than the "who is" prompt that all contestants are given. (The producers tell you to write the correct question phrasing before the clue goes up, probably to give you more time to answer. So they say, "write down WHO" or "write down WHERE" and the rest is up to you.)
It was a long, long time ago, but my recollection is that the explanation they gave was that they didn't want you to forget to put it in the form of a question, thus invalidating your response (and gave a specific example of it) and causing a debacle. I don't remember it having anything to do with the amount of time to write.

User avatar
opusthepenguin
The Best Darn Penguin on the Whole JBoard
Posts: 7014
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:33 pm
Location: Shawnee, KS
Contact:

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by opusthepenguin » Thu Feb 02, 2017 3:37 pm

Bamaman wrote:
davey wrote: Here's a post in which Roger Craig suggests that players may have been given an extra tipoff for specificity prior to FJ

http://jboard.tv/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=17 ... ible#p1626
This game seems to disprove Roger's theory about what would be accepted.


http://www.j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=5187
I'd forgotten about that! Our discussion of that game ran to 8 pages, much of it focused on this controversy. OntarioQuizzer was able to point us to another example where the name without the number was accepted.

DEDICATIONS for $400
http://j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_ ... ardy_round

However, as I pointed out, the dedication page was written while the man was still alive. You never get called "the first" while you're still reigning. That would be like me introducing Mrs Penguin as "my first wife."

User avatar
alietr
Site Admin
Posts: 6822
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:20 pm
Location: Bethesda, MD

Re: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by alietr » Thu Feb 02, 2017 3:41 pm

opusthepenguin wrote:That would be like me introducing Mrs Penguin as "my first wife."
I seem to remember you doing that ...

Post Reply