It's not about winning money, it's about winning games. You play the game that gives you the best chance of winning regardless of dollars won. One who searches for DD's is more likely to find them compared to one who does not. If one does not find a DD the lesser chance they have to win. And when a lesser player competes against a better player, the lesser player needs to find a take full advantage of DD's in order to win. It's not always about taking advantage of DD's, it's about keeping them out of your opponent's hands.MattKnowles wrote:I personally don't like the Forrest bounce because it finds the daily doubles faster and that reduces the amount of money that can be won. If the daily doubles are found at the end then the total score can be maximized and somebody can take home more money. If the stronger player wins regardless of which order the clues are chosen then finding the daily doubles late will give a bigger potential payday to the winner. I would advocate against it.
If I'm playing against a chemist and there's a chemistry category, I'm immediately going to that category to limit any damage my opponent can do. Conversely, if I'm a chemist I'm saving it for later in the round in hopes that I can find a late DD there. However, if another contestant takes an interest in the category then I'm forced to hunt there earlier than I'd like. Or if the DD is found elsewhere then I'll go ahead and clear the category. All this is basic logical strategy, but I'll be damned if many understand it, and even fewer still will apply it during the game.
So there is no question that finding DD's gives a better chance of winning, therefore searching for them is paramount. I wouldn't suggest advocating against a known winning strategy.