Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall

User avatar
badgerfellow
One and Done
Posts: 524
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 2:44 pm
Location: Louisville, KY

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by badgerfellow » Fri Mar 10, 2017 10:47 pm

That was an interesting game to say the least.

Anyone else find the Jay Cutler clue...timely?

heppm01
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:30 pm

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by heppm01 » Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:02 pm

Three word answer on the delegate clue: "all or nothing" vs "winner take all". What say ye judges?

User avatar
CailinGaoilge
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 426
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:36 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada; formerly resident in UK and Ireland

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by CailinGaoilge » Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:24 pm

MinnesotaMyron wrote: Since it's Saint Patrick's day today, they should have done all the DDs (and FJ!) about famous Scotsmen, instead of just 3 of 4.
Leaving aside the wrong date that others have pointed to, what have famous Scotsmen to do with St Patrick's Day?

User avatar
This Is Kirk!
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 4638
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:35 am
Location: Seattle

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by This Is Kirk! » Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:26 pm

I could have sworn Annie mouthed "MacGyver" near the end of the think music. Did anyone else see that? Maybe it just came to her too late.

artshep
Contributor
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 1:59 pm

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by artshep » Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:27 pm

heppm01 wrote:Three word answer on the delegate clue: "all or nothing" vs "winner take all". What say ye judges?
I also answered "all or nothing" and think that would be accepted.

What about "authoritarianism" instead of "totalitarianism" on the $2,000 clue in 12 LETTERS OR MORE?

IronNeck
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1270
Joined: Fri May 13, 2016 12:26 am

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by IronNeck » Sat Mar 11, 2017 12:13 am

artshep wrote:
heppm01 wrote:Three word answer on the delegate clue: "all or nothing" vs "winner take all". What say ye judges?
I also answered "all or nothing" and think that would be accepted.

What about "authoritarianism" instead of "totalitarianism" on the $2,000 clue in 12 LETTERS OR MORE?
I would say no. Not all authoritarian governments are totalitarian, and the clue was clearly indicating the latter in terms of controlling all aspects of citizens' lives. As Wikipedia accurately notes, authoritarian governments are mainly concerned with complete political power and can allow a certain amount of freedom outside of that, as they're not trying to alter human nature. Totalitarian governments mean total control.

User avatar
OrangeSAM
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 2038
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 9:00 pm

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by OrangeSAM » Sat Mar 11, 2017 12:26 am

MattKnowles wrote:
xxaaaxx wrote:
MinnesotaMyron wrote:Since it's Saint Patrick's day today

If you want to get drunk, go get drunk...you don't need an excuse, and you don't need to make things up
If you try that vanilla vodka and seltzer water drink let us know how it is. What was the third ingredient?
Chambord, IIRC.

Must have been coincidental that this FJ! ran on Friday when CBS airs the new version of the show.
OCSam

User avatar
twelvefootboy
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1419
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2016 11:18 pm
Location: Tornado Alley / Southwest Missouri

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by twelvefootboy » Sat Mar 11, 2017 12:56 am

Category 13 wrote:
xxaaaxx wrote:Annie's wager...I guess she just wanted more money.
I guess she just didn't know much about FJ wagering strategy from the get go. I wonder if/when she found out she threw away close to $4,000 in her first game.
I kind of disagree she threw away money. She had a lock and wasn't playing with house money. If I'm an unemployed bartender and someone offers to bet me several grand whether I know the answer to an unknown question (with topical limits), I say no thanks. Sure she just won with 8 grand to spare, but that's what casinos count on: you treat winnings like free money. You wanna go drop 5 green (?) chips on Red or Black at Roulette?

I got to the FJ answer circuitously because of being sidetracked trying to connect "Jerry-rigged" (sometimes "jury-rigged") to a TV origin, and also convincing myself to quit thinking about Rube Goldberg. Once I reset to the "build" definition, McGyver came through the clutter.

Great game by a gunslinger. What a ballsy DD in SJ!
Disclaimer - repeated exposure to author's musings may cause befuddlement.

MattKnowles
selwonKttaM
Posts: 468
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 12:33 pm

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by MattKnowles » Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:17 am

twelvefootboy wrote:
Category 13 wrote:
xxaaaxx wrote:Annie's wager...I guess she just wanted more money.
I guess she just didn't know much about FJ wagering strategy from the get go. I wonder if/when she found out she threw away close to $4,000 in her first game.
I kind of disagree she threw away money. She had a lock and wasn't playing with house money. If I'm an unemployed bartender and someone offers to bet me several grand whether I know the answer to an unknown question (with topical limits), I say no thanks. Sure she just won with 8 grand to spare, but that's what casinos count on: you treat winnings like free money. You wanna go drop 5 green (?) chips on Red or Black at Roulette?
That doesn't really make sense.

She had 15,600 against the next player's 3,600. She ended up betting 4,400 to make 20,000. She could have bet up to 8,399 and still guaranteed a lock game. The optimal wager depends on the probability she expects to answer FJ correctly. If she thinks she answers FJ correctly 51 times out of 100 or greater then she should bet 8,399. If she thinks she answers FJ correctly 49 times out of 100 or less then she should bet 0. Betting Red or Black on Roulette usually has a probability of 18/38 and the optimal strategy is to not play.

There was a study performed where educated people were given money and allowed to bet on a coin that had a 60% probability of landing on heads to see if they could maximize their earnings. Two-thirds of the participants bet on tails at some point in the experiment. http://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonwo ... /investing

Also for anybody interested in the mathematics of optimal bet sizes for more general betting scenarios: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion
I had a dream that I was asleep and then I woke up and Jeopardy! was on.

User avatar
Category 13
Wagering Viking
Posts: 1560
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 1:43 pm
Location: This side of paradise

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Category 13 » Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:53 am

MattKnowles wrote:
twelvefootboy wrote:
Category 13 wrote:
xxaaaxx wrote:Annie's wager...I guess she just wanted more money.
I guess she just didn't know much about FJ wagering strategy from the get go. I wonder if/when she found out she threw away close to $4,000 in her first game.
I kind of disagree she threw away money. She had a lock and wasn't playing with house money. If I'm an unemployed bartender and someone offers to bet me several grand whether I know the answer to an unknown question (with topical limits), I say no thanks. Sure she just won with 8 grand to spare, but that's what casinos count on: you treat winnings like free money. You wanna go drop 5 green (?) chips on Red or Black at Roulette?
That doesn't really make sense.

She had 15,600 against the next player's 3,600. She ended up betting 4,400 to make 20,000. She could have bet up to 8,399 and still guaranteed a lock game. The optimal wager depends on the probability she expects to answer FJ correctly. If she thinks she answers FJ correctly 51 times out of 100 or greater then she should bet 8,399. If she thinks she answers FJ correctly 49 times out of 100 or less then she should bet 0.
This.
And to further deplete the evidence of cautious behaviour in her FJ betting just look at how she wagered in her second game, per the situation she was in.

Tonight she wagered as if she thought the two challengers could combine their totals against her somehow.

IronNeck
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1270
Joined: Fri May 13, 2016 12:26 am

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by IronNeck » Sat Mar 11, 2017 3:26 am

And yet, and yet...Annie still bet better, and gave up less equity in wagering than the average Jeopardy contestant, courtesy of proper betting on Daily Doubles. I find that very amusing; despite her random FJ bets, the unemployed bartender still bet more correctly than many scientists, computer programmers, economists, and doctors on the show.

User avatar
goatman
Man Who Stares At Goats!
Posts: 1430
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 10:43 pm
Location: Calvert, Maryland

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by goatman » Sat Mar 11, 2017 8:52 am

cheezguyty wrote:
goatman wrote:Did anyone else notice that Annie clearly and unequivocally stated " TOTALITARIAN-ISM" which is a 15-letter word, not 12, but not negged?!
The category was 12 LETTERS OR MORE.
OFGS!!! :roll: OTH I do agree with above thread that the TOM in clue pointed to TOTAL... rather than Authoritarianism-ish. :)
The corridors of my mind are plastered with 3M Post-It notes!

artshep
Contributor
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 1:59 pm

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by artshep » Sat Mar 11, 2017 9:20 am

IronNeck wrote:
artshep wrote:
heppm01 wrote:Three word answer on the delegate clue: "all or nothing" vs "winner take all". What say ye judges?
I also answered "all or nothing" and think that would be accepted.

What about "authoritarianism" instead of "totalitarianism" on the $2,000 clue in 12 LETTERS OR MORE?
I would say no. Not all authoritarian governments are totalitarian, and the clue was clearly indicating the latter in terms of controlling all aspects of citizens' lives. As Wikipedia accurately notes, authoritarian governments are mainly concerned with complete political power and can allow a certain amount of freedom outside of that, as they're not trying to alter human nature. Totalitarian governments mean total control.
I agree 'totalitarianism' is the better answer. I counted 'authoritarianism' wrong in my scoring. Nevertheless, I think it would be a tough call and the latter might be given credit in a game.

Wikipedia has a whole section on authoritarianism vs totalitarianism if anyone's interested.
Last edited by artshep on Sat Mar 11, 2017 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
twelvefootboy
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1419
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2016 11:18 pm
Location: Tornado Alley / Southwest Missouri

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by twelvefootboy » Sat Mar 11, 2017 12:16 pm

MattKnowles wrote:
twelvefootboy wrote:
Category 13 wrote:
xxaaaxx wrote:Annie's wager...I guess she just wanted more money.
I guess she just didn't know much about FJ wagering strategy from the get go. I wonder if/when she found out she threw away close to $4,000 in her first game.
I kind of disagree she threw away money. She had a lock and wasn't playing with house money. If I'm an unemployed bartender and someone offers to bet me several grand whether I know the answer to an unknown question (with topical limits), I say no thanks. Sure she just won with 8 grand to spare, but that's what casinos count on: you treat winnings like free money. You wanna go drop 5 green (?) chips on Red or Black at Roulette?
That doesn't really make sense.

She had 15,600 against the next player's 3,600. She ended up betting 4,400 to make 20,000. She could have bet up to 8,399 and still guaranteed a lock game. The optimal wager depends on the probability she expects to answer FJ correctly. If she thinks she answers FJ correctly 51 times out of 100 or greater then she should bet 8,399. If she thinks she answers FJ correctly 49 times out of 100 or less then she should bet 0. Betting Red or Black on Roulette usually has a probability of 18/38 and the optimal strategy is to not play.

There was a study performed where educated people were given money and allowed to bet on a coin that had a 60% probability of landing on heads to see if they could maximize their earnings. Two-thirds of the participants bet on tails at some point in the experiment. http://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonwo ... /investing

Also for anybody interested in the mathematics of optimal bet sizes for more general betting scenarios: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion
I definitely feel the optimum bet was Zero, unless it was a strong category, and even then, risk aversion is not a foible. Others have explained the focus on winning games, not money. I think she chose (subconsciously or overtly) to indulge/reward her good play by rolling 4 months rent (or whatever), knowing she'd split the difference and not be sick to her stomach for losing. As a low roller, I can empathize with that.

It's been awhile since I've seen game theory articles, but casinos count on you to perceive winnings and losings differently. I recall articles in Scientific American - maybe even by Martin Gardner about gender perception of risk and reward. She was betting her own money, period. She could easily have been MacGuyver'ed by the answer.

Anyhow, congrats to her. Interesting synopsis of the stupidity study. I use a split stack method to deal cards for my elderly father and he swears they aren't shuffled because he gets pairs and straights sometimes. Sigh.
Disclaimer - repeated exposure to author's musings may cause befuddlement.

User avatar
twelvefootboy
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1419
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2016 11:18 pm
Location: Tornado Alley / Southwest Missouri

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by twelvefootboy » Sat Mar 11, 2017 12:36 pm

badgerfellow wrote:That was an interesting game to say the least.

Anyone else find the Jay Cutler clue...timely?
YES!

We should see a Tony Romo clue soon. Brock Ostweiler, not so much.
Disclaimer - repeated exposure to author's musings may cause befuddlement.

User avatar
skullturf
Married to a Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 1793
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:34 am
Location: Miami

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by skullturf » Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:00 pm

MattKnowles wrote:
twelvefootboy wrote:
Category 13 wrote:
xxaaaxx wrote:Annie's wager...I guess she just wanted more money.
I guess she just didn't know much about FJ wagering strategy from the get go. I wonder if/when she found out she threw away close to $4,000 in her first game.
I kind of disagree she threw away money. She had a lock and wasn't playing with house money. If I'm an unemployed bartender and someone offers to bet me several grand whether I know the answer to an unknown question (with topical limits), I say no thanks. Sure she just won with 8 grand to spare, but that's what casinos count on: you treat winnings like free money. You wanna go drop 5 green (?) chips on Red or Black at Roulette?
That doesn't really make sense.

She had 15,600 against the next player's 3,600. She ended up betting 4,400 to make 20,000. She could have bet up to 8,399 and still guaranteed a lock game. The optimal wager depends on the probability she expects to answer FJ correctly. If she thinks she answers FJ correctly 51 times out of 100 or greater then she should bet 8,399. If she thinks she answers FJ correctly 49 times out of 100 or less then she should bet 0.
Spoilerized because of length:
Spoiler
Show
I'm a mathematician so I understand expected value. But expected value isn't necessarily the only thing to consider. There's also variability. In games in general, some people might prefer an option that has lower expected value but also lower variability. This is where personal taste comes in, and different people may simply have different tastes.

Here's a different example to illustrate that point. Consider the following three hypothetical scenarios.

Scenario 1. I give you 5,000 dollars, with no element of chance involved.
Scenario 2. We toss a fair coin. If it comes up heads, I give you 12,000 dollars. If it comes up tails, I give you nothing.
Scenario 3. We roll a balanced 10-sided die (which has one red side and 9 blue sides). If the red side comes up, I give you 100,000 dollars. If any of the blue sides come up, I give you nothing.

In scenario 1, your expected winnings are $5,000. In scenario 2, your expected winnings are $6,000. In scenario 3, your expected winnings are $10,000.

There's no debate about which of those numbers is largest. (And there's no debate about the best long-term strategy if you were to repeat one of those scenarios many many times.)

But if you're only going to play the game once (or twice or even three times), it's not inherently irrational to prefer an option with lower expected value because you like the decreased variability.

It's personal taste.

And in the case of Final Jeopardy!, it might be genuinely difficult to know whether your success probability in a given category is greater or less than 50 percent.

Furthermore, even if I somehow knew that my FJ success probability in a given category was, say, 55 percent, I might still choose to bet an amount between 0 and the maximum lock-preserving amount if I were in a lock situation.

It's personal preference as to which game you want to play.

Suppose I'm going into FJ, I have a lock with $15,000, and second place's doubled score is just under $8,000. So I can wager $7,000 while still guaranteeing a win, but I might also choose to make a smaller wager like $1,000.

Game #1: I have a 55% chance of winning $16,000 and I have a 45% chance of winning $14,000.
Game #2: I have a 55% chance of winning $22,000 and I have a 45% chance of winning $8,000.

I know which of those games has the higher expected value. I'm a mathematician.

But probability distributions have other characteristics besides expected value. They also have variance.

It's not irrational for variance to be one of the properties you take into consideration when deciding between two (or more) probability distributions.

It's not irrational to have a personal preference for an option that has lower variance. (Especially if you're not even sure how accurate the estimate of 55% is!)

French Rage
Valued Contributor
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 9:27 pm

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by French Rage » Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:32 pm

Jessica was one of the local alternates. She went into the last game not knowing if she would be called, and then half an hour later was the champion! So a crazy 30 minutes for her.

User avatar
alietr
Site Admin
Posts: 6645
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:20 pm
Location: Bethesda, MD

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by alietr » Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:38 pm

French Rage wrote:Jessica was one of the local alternates. She went into the last game not knowing if she would be called, and then half an hour later was the champion! So a crazy 30 minutes for her.
'Cause it was a normal 30 minutes for the rest of us???

User avatar
Volante
JBOARDIE OF THE MONTH!
Posts: 6599
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Volante » Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:52 pm

twelvefootboy wrote:
badgerfellow wrote:That was an interesting game to say the least.

Anyone else find the Jay Cutler clue...timely?
YES!

We should see a Tony Romo clue soon. Brock Ostweiler, not so much.
Heck with a Brock Osweiler clue, we likely won't see Brock Osweiler again at all.

User avatar
AFRET CMS
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 846
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 2:48 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: Friday, March 10, 2017 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by AFRET CMS » Sat Mar 11, 2017 2:34 pm

twelvefootboy wrote: I got to the FJ answer circuitously because of being sidetracked trying to connect "Jerry-rigged" (sometimes "jury-rigged") to a TV origin, and also convincing myself to quit thinking about Rube Goldberg. Once I reset to the "build" definition, McGyver came through the clutter.
I'm embarrassed to have to admit to a brain hiccup on that one. McGyver never popped up for me at all. To avoid leaving a blank, I probably would have scribbled "Jerry Rigg" at the last second.... you know, he was the brother of "The Avengers" Emma Peel.....

That one was a definite smack-myself-in-the-forehead answer after the reveal. I just wish they came infrequently enough that the bruise had time to heal before the next one arrives.
I'm not the defending Jeopardy! champion. But I have played one on TV.

Post Reply