Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall

User avatar
jeff6286
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 5228
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 7:34 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by jeff6286 »

alietr wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:28 pm Re: DD hunting. I'll bet comments about failing to find the last DD have been made only by people who haven't been contestants. Until you're actually on, you really have no idea just how fast everything moves. Yes, there are contestants who can maintain enough awareness to recognize every aspect of the game at the time, but criticizing them for failing to find that last DD just isn't reasonable.
So you're saying we aren't allowed to comment on strategy anymore? Alex Jacob has brought this up in the past, are we to ignore gameplay analaysis because we might hurt someone's feelings? Should this board be simply 80 people posting their coryats and lach trash?

Is every legitimate point about strategy going to be countered with "They're under the lights, if you haven't been there then your criticism is unreasonable." Not to sound all Golf but that's why you go through preparation, if not for your first appearance on the show then certainly for the high pressure position of the TOC. You plan your strategy in advance so you aren't trying to formulate one on the spot when the lights are on and your palms are sweating, etc.

Finding Daily Doubles is not some exotic strategy, it's the most basic part of the game, and you say we can't point out that these players really made a glaring error in either forgetting about or ignoring the DD that was remaining at the end of the game. Jason said on reddit that he was trying to "stay the hell away from Widows in the Bible until absolutely necessary". Not sure if he's just trying to save face or what, but there was a "Women in the Bible" One Day earlier this year in Learned League and he got 11/12, including the 3 hardest question, finishing just outside the top 10%. Unless his online results are fraudulent, (which would be very sad, if true), I can't imagine why he would legitimately not want to find the 2nd row DD in a strong category, that very easily could have won him the game!

If there are players that don't care enough about winning to do adequate preparation, that's certainly their right, more power to the likes of Roger or Colby or Alex who get to benefit from others not being prepared. But to say we can't point out egregious errors in strategy.....again, why are we even here?
PhilKohn
Contributor
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2017 12:38 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by PhilKohn »

Bamaman wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:55 am
kprather895 wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:30 am I've got to say it warms my heart to see a slew of Jeopardy alumni band up to defend Lisa from naysayers on Twitter right now. It looks like they really are a close knit circle, one that I hope to have the privilege of joining one day.
I don’t do Twitter. Are people bashing her for losing so badly? She got caught between two buzzsaws, no shame in that. Of all the people that have been on the show in the last two years, only eight can say they made it as far as she did.
I also don't do Twitter, and it disturbs me (Season 34, Show 34 (Show #7619) - one and done) that people are "piling on" Lisa for losing. As Bamaman points out, Buzzy and Jason were CRUISING! And from my own experience on the show, a lot comes down to what categories are up there on the board. If your opponents are into them and you aren''t, well, there's not much one can do but watch them race ahead. I, too, in the DJ round (after a run of having had trouble beating Nan and Erica in buzzing in) did manage to buzz in first and had to pull a Jackie Gleason/Ralph Kramden "hommina hommina" as I pulled a blank on the answer, as Lisa did when she finally buzzed in first.

Bamaman is also right in saying: "Of all the people that have been on the show in the last two years, only eight can say they made it as far as she did." Lisa, regardless of how she did in this TOC is still a JEOPARDY! CHAMPION and always will be. The rest of us will never be able to say that.

And as I have said previously, the group of contestants I played with were extremely collegial, cordial and truly wishing each other would do well. And, while there were 12 of us (in addition to returning Champion Kathleen Kosman), only three (3) of the dozen actually became champions (Nan, Erica and Anand) the other nine of us were as I was: one and done. And of the three Champs, only Erica and Anand went beyond one game as champ (and neither won the requisite five to become a Jeopardy! Champion. That's why we are in awe of those folks in being able to put together a successful chain of winning games.

Bamaman, here's hoping we see you on a TOC someday!
Jeopardy! Contestant (finally!) after 51 years of trying! Jeopardy! match #34-34, Contestant #3, aired 10/26/2017
Peter the accountant
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2017 2:13 am

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Peter the accountant »

jeff6286 wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:07 pmBut to say we can't point out egregious errors in strategy.....again, why are we even here?
For me, it's not pointing out the errors which is the problem. It's how it's done.

It's one thing to point out that Jason missed the opportunity to look for the last DD. It's another to say that he is a failure and idiot for missing that opportunity. (Something that I would never say about Jason, BTW.) Lisa has been attacked rather brutally on social media because of her loss. That is the part which is completely inexcusable and shouldn't happen. I haven't seen anything too egregious here, but I think there has been a lack of empathy from time to time.

I also saw Jason's comments on reddit. The part that you left out of your quote was, "I was REALLY staring at the scoreboard and didn't realize there was still a DD on the board". THAT's the "pressure of the lights" coming into play.

Which all leads back to a strategy to consider. Even if you don't like a category, you still want to look for a DD in that category to keep your opponents from taking advantage of the DD. Wager $5 (or $100 if your Austin and want to keep your score in round numbers). Your potential loss is immaterial, but denying the other players the chance to get a big benefit from the DD is very material.
--Peter
User avatar
This Is Kirk!
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 6562
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:35 am
Location: Seattle

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by This Is Kirk! »

Peter the accountant wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:30 pm I also saw Jason's comments on reddit. The part that you left out of your quote was, "I was REALLY staring at the scoreboard and didn't realize there was still a DD on the board".
As far as I'm concerned there were really two plausible reasons they didn't hunt for that DD: 1. like Jason said, they forgot it was still up there, or 2. they were intentionally avoiding it. This second one seems rather strange, since they could have wagered $5 if they had no confidence, but I wouldn't want to discount it entirely.
User avatar
jeff6286
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 5228
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 7:34 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by jeff6286 »

This Is Kirk! wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:42 pm
Peter the accountant wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:30 pm I also saw Jason's comments on reddit. The part that you left out of your quote was, "I was REALLY staring at the scoreboard and didn't realize there was still a DD on the board".
As far as I'm concerned there were really two plausible reasons they didn't hunt for that DD: 1. like Jason said, they forgot it was still up there, or 2. they were intentionally avoiding it. This second one seems rather strange, since they could have wagered $5 if they had no confidence, but I wouldn't want to discount it entirely.
The first reason is no less strange than the second. You don't have to remember if there's a DD left. Hunt it whether it's out there or not! If the DDs are gone and you're still picking 800 or 1200 before 400, who cares? Unless you're in a specific late games situation where you're protecting a lead, why would you ever think it necessary to pick $400 clues before $800? The majority of the time all the clues will be played so the only reason the order matters is in who gets a DD. Yeah there could be a case where they call time and 2 clues get left unrevealed, but in general, who cares if $400s are left on the board or $800s. The potential value of a remaining DD dwarfs whatever slight differences there might be in who gets how much money based on which clues are played or unplayed. In this case Jason was trailing so all the more reason he should want to make sure the $800 gets played.
User avatar
This Is Kirk!
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 6562
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:35 am
Location: Seattle

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by This Is Kirk! »

jeff6286 wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:56 pm If the DDs are gone and you're still picking 800 or 1200 before 400, who cares? Unless you're in a specific late games situation where you're protecting a lead, why would you ever think it necessary to pick $400 clues before $800?
The only reason I can think of is that many players would default to running a category from top to bottom unless they were specifically seeking out DDs.
User avatar
squarekara
J! Reactionary
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 12:49 am
Location: USDA Zone 5

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by squarekara »

I would just refrain from faulting a contestant if your own personal favorite strategy is not employed. The gameplay we observe may not reflect a planned strategy at all, and, unless we know different, any commentary is just speculation. (Someone on this board commented that my DD wagers in the 11/3 game were too low when I got two of those three answers WRONG. Huh?) And thanks to Phil for mentioning Jackie Gleason, since "Chef of the Future" and "The $99,000 Answer" certainly figured into my J! preparation.
mujason
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 576
Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:08 pm
Location: Missouri

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by mujason »

What if the off-screen score display had a small section for lights signifying how many Daily Doubles were left, sort of like the part of a football scoreboard that displays how many timeouts are left?
-Jason
User avatar
alietr
Site Admin
Posts: 8980
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:20 pm
Location: Bethesda, MD

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by alietr »

jeff6286 wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:07 pm
alietr wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:28 pm Re: DD hunting. I'll bet comments about failing to find the last DD have been made only by people who haven't been contestants. Until you're actually on, you really have no idea just how fast everything moves. Yes, there are contestants who can maintain enough awareness to recognize every aspect of the game at the time, but criticizing them for failing to find that last DD just isn't reasonable.
So you're saying we aren't allowed to comment on strategy anymore? Alex Jacob has brought this up in the past, are we to ignore gameplay analaysis because we might hurt someone's feelings? Should this board be simply 80 people posting their coryats and lach trash?

Is every legitimate point about strategy going to be countered with "They're under the lights, if you haven't been there then your criticism is unreasonable." Not to sound all Golf but that's why you go through preparation, if not for your first appearance on the show then certainly for the high pressure position of the TOC. You plan your strategy in advance so you aren't trying to formulate one on the spot when the lights are on and your palms are sweating, etc.

Finding Daily Doubles is not some exotic strategy, it's the most basic part of the game, and you say we can't point out that these players really made a glaring error in either forgetting about or ignoring the DD that was remaining at the end of the game. Jason said on reddit that he was trying to "stay the hell away from Widows in the Bible until absolutely necessary". Not sure if he's just trying to save face or what, but there was a "Women in the Bible" One Day earlier this year in Learned League and he got 11/12, including the 3 hardest question, finishing just outside the top 10%. Unless his online results are fraudulent, (which would be very sad, if true), I can't imagine why he would legitimately not want to find the 2nd row DD in a strong category, that very easily could have won him the game!

If there are players that don't care enough about winning to do adequate preparation, that's certainly their right, more power to the likes of Roger or Colby or Alex who get to benefit from others not being prepared. But to say we can't point out egregious errors in strategy.....again, why are we even here?
No, Jeff, I'm not saying that at all. I was making what I felt like was an observation. I was just saying that it seems as if the likelihood of someone negatively commenting about it is indirectly proportional to the likelihood that the writer was on the show. I have this mental image of former contestants reading the criticism and going to themselves "Yeah, I can see how that happened" while people who haven't been on (yet) are going to themselves "How they could they not SEE that it was still up there?" The two different viewpoints is what I was commenting on, not the criticism itself.

I was speaking in part from personal experience -- I hit a DD on the last clue of the Jeopardy round, and I was shocked because I had no idea it was still up there (as quote aboved, it happened to Jason as well except he didn't hit it). It doesn't mean I didn't prepare to be on the show; it really is a case of everything moving at warp speed, and yes, "the lights". Some people (Alex, Matt, etc.) are clearly more capable of functioning at that speed, and kudos to them. It clearly was an error on his part, and I was implying that people who have been on have a better understanding of how that happened, and therefore don't point it out. I've never said, and didn't mean to imply, that criticism of gameplay is verboten here (though as always, it should be expressed gently, and with more consideration than some Boardies feel free to do).

OK?
Peter the accountant
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2017 2:13 am

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Peter the accountant »

This Is Kirk! wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:42 pmAs far as I'm concerned there were really two plausible reasons they didn't hunt for that DD: 1. like Jason said, they forgot it was still up there, or 2. they were intentionally avoiding it. This second one seems rather strange, since they could have wagered $5 if they had no confidence, but I wouldn't want to discount it entirely.
It's not "they" that weren't hunting. It's each individual player. And each may have their own reasons for specifically seeking out (or not) DDs.

In this particular case, we have Jason's own words as to why he stopped hunting for the second DD:
-He forgot that it was still there, and
-He was avoiding a category - the one that had the high likelihood for having the DD.

No one was avoiding the DD. Jason was avoiding a category.

Which is a legit strategy. Avoid a weak category so that the other players don't have the chance to get those right. Combine that with a slightly slower game play and perhaps time will run out and those questions won't hurt you.
--Peter
User avatar
opusthepenguin
The Best Darn Penguin on the Whole JBoard
Posts: 10319
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:33 pm
Location: Shawnee, KS
Contact:

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by opusthepenguin »

jeff6286 wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:56 pmThe first reason is no less strange than the second. You don't have to remember if there's a DD left. Hunt it whether it's out there or not! If the DDs are gone and you're still picking 800 or 1200 before 400, who cares?
In this case, Jason cares. If both DDs are gone and time is running out, why go to the category he feels less confident in? Why not have a shot at leaving those two clues unplayed? On a mental level, why not boost your confidence slightly by getting one right before hitting the less favored category? On an "under the lights" level, you've got a second to pick the next clue. PICK IT! NOW!!!!!! WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR?!!?!! PEOPLE ARE STARING! COME ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Oh, I'm sorry, says your inner voice. Were you trying to strategize while I was yelling at you? My bad.)
User avatar
jeff6286
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 5228
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 7:34 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by jeff6286 »

opusthepenguin wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:19 pm
jeff6286 wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:56 pmThe first reason is no less strange than the second. You don't have to remember if there's a DD left. Hunt it whether it's out there or not! If the DDs are gone and you're still picking 800 or 1200 before 400, who cares?
In this case, Jason cares. If both DDs are gone and time is running out, why go to the category he feels less confident in? Why not have a shot at leaving those two clues unplayed? On a mental level, why not boost your confidence slightly by getting one right before hitting the less favored category? On an "under the lights" level, you've got a second to pick the next clue. PICK IT! NOW!!!!!! WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR?!!?!! PEOPLE ARE STARING! COME ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Oh, I'm sorry, says your inner voice. Were you trying to strategize while I was yelling at you? My bad.)
He was behind and trying to catch up, as he said elsewhere, he was constantly looking at the scoreboard. Given that, it really doesn't make a lot of sense that he should avoid the highest value clue remaining. These defenses are getting a bit absurd. People make mistakes. I never said anyone was a terrible person for not looking for a DD, but assuming everyone there has the goal of winning the game, I don't really see how anyone can argue with a straight face that it wasn't a strategic blunder.

(Now you could argue that Jason somehow knew he wouldn't know the second row DD clue in Bible Widows, but also knew that if he allowed Buzzy to pick it, then Buzzy would recklessly wager 2K and miss, letting Jason back into the game. If Jason planned all that, then I bow to his superior strategy and foresight. Seems unlikely though)
User avatar
MTGcollegestudent
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 294
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 1:39 pm

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by MTGcollegestudent »

zerobandwidth wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 11:15 am
hscer wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:52 am Can someone point to similar prior examples of someone expressing frustration so outwardly on Jeopardy? It definitely struck me as unusual, starting really at the beginning of DJ. The audition process would very likely tend to select away from such a disposition, which would presumably be even rarer among successful players.
What seemed most unusual to me in this instance is that it seemed to happen during the break between J! and DJ!, like a "I'm cool / NOT COOL MAN" switch flipping. That's what led me to write it off as an unfortunately-timed adrenaline crash, and not anything related to Lisa's character or ability. As has already been stated, Being There For Real can be incredibly stressful, and stress does weird things to people. Even having played a regular-season game, I almost can't imagine the level of stress Lisa was under, having less than 24 hours before played the game of her life — arguably one of the best games we've seen all season — against two other ToC-caliber players, at least one of whom was favored to beat her, and then having to face two more opponents who were each widely favored to win the whole thing. I don't think this had anything to do with her, and everything to do with the truly extraordinary circumstances under which that game was played. Had the semifinal draws worked out differently, this matchup could easily have been the finals.

I feel like there have been several, and much more profound, instances of late-game crash-and-burn performances, exhibiting either frustration and/or panic. Christy Gibson's record-setting descent comes to mind. And I hate to mention it, because she's such a wonderful person and has already caught more than enough flak for it, but you could tell that Anupama Srirangan could feel the universe unravelling around her in DJ!. Heck, I was doing at least OK in my game and still panicked on both of my important wagers. And then of course there was the uncaught Teen Tournament F-bomb.
You forgot one other game. On 2011 Kids Week.

http://www.j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=3694

Maddie Harkington silently said "crap" and struggled to ring in on the remaining 9 clues.
Jeopardy! is like History. It's a mixed bag of categories that try to test your knowledge to see if you know or can recall answers that seem familiar to the viewer.
Golf
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 2727
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 pm

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Golf »

squarekara wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:05 pm I would just refrain from faulting a contestant if your own personal favorite strategy is not employed. The gameplay we observe may not reflect a planned strategy at all, and, unless we know different, any commentary is just speculation. (Someone on this board commented that my DD wagers in the 11/3 game were too low when I got two of those three answers WRONG. Huh?) And thanks to Phil for mentioning Jackie Gleason, since "Chef of the Future" and "The $99,000 Answer" certainly figured into my J! preparation.
Favorite strategy has nothing to do with it, optimal strategy has everything to do with it. DD's are like gold, the Scrabble blanks of Jeopardy. The chances of winning when a player finds one jump exponentially. Therefore it is optimal to hunt them down regardless if your plan is to play offense or defense with them.

Comments regarding your DD wagers have absolutely nothing to do with whether or not you answered correctly. You either wagered optimally or you did not.

The issue with strategy comments is and will always come down to the fact that so few people know how to play correctly. And the same goes with preparation, which I guess makes sense. If you don't know how to play, you won't know how to prepare. Or perhaps it's the other way around.

And all this talk about under the lights is just an excuse IMO. In both mental and physical competitions, if you prepare correctly and are confident, the game will slow to a crawl. If you do not prepare correctly and are not confident, the game will be nothing but a blur.

Regardless, I enjoy the strategic aspect of the show and will continue to respectfully point out both good and poor decisions.

And I have no issue whatsoever with Lisa showing emotion on the show.
User avatar
squarekara
J! Reactionary
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 12:49 am
Location: USDA Zone 5

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by squarekara »

Golf wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:33 pm
squarekara wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:05 pm I would just refrain from faulting a contestant if your own personal favorite strategy is not employed. The gameplay we observe may not reflect a planned strategy at all, and, unless we know different, any commentary is just speculation. (Someone on this board commented that my DD wagers in the 11/3 game were too low when I got two of those three answers WRONG. Huh?) And thanks to Phil for mentioning Jackie Gleason, since "Chef of the Future" and "The $99,000 Answer" certainly figured into my J! preparation.
Favorite strategy has nothing to do with it, optimal strategy has everything to do with it. DD's are like gold, the Scrabble blanks of Jeopardy. The chances of winning when a player finds one jump exponentially. Therefore it is optimal to hunt them down regardless if your plan is to play offense or defense with them.

Comments regarding your DD wagers have absolutely nothing to do with whether or not you answered correctly. You either wagered optimally or you did not.

The issue with strategy comments is and will always come down to the fact that so few people know how to play correctly. And the same goes with preparation, which I guess makes sense. If you don't know how to play, you won't know how to prepare. Or perhaps it's the other way around.

And all this talk about under the lights is just an excuse IMO. In both mental and physical competitions, if you prepare correctly and are confident, the game will slow to a crawl. If you do not prepare correctly and are not confident, the game will be nothing but a blur.

Regardless, I enjoy the strategic aspect of the show and will continue to respectfully point out both good and poor decisions.

And I have no issue whatsoever with Lisa showing emotion on the show.
Yep, there are myriad methods of playing and myriad reasons we enjoy watching. But to state that there is a "correct" way to play discounts the real-life ramifications when theoretical methods go wrong and carries with it a certain air of disdain, whether that's intentional or not. And "under the lights," the struggle is real, my friend. I don't think anyone is putting it forth as an "excuse," but it's a variable that can throw off the efforts of the most punctillious statistician.
User avatar
BigDaddyMatty
Hoping not to get pruney this time
Posts: 3300
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 11:05 am
Location: Anderson, IN

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by BigDaddyMatty »

Coryat: $28,000
39 R/2 W
DD: 2/3
FJ: :mrgreen:
LT: McCloud, Corinth, Ruth (DD)

The subject has been beaten to death, but I was really surprised to see Jason twice fail to choose the only clue likely to reveal the final DD after Lisa had made the exact same mistake at the end of the J! round. I had already been spoiled on the outcome by Jason's FB posts (and his Weird Al profile pic), but that didn't stop me from shouting out "NO! JASON! COME ON, MAN!"
Sprinkles are for winners.
User avatar
TheSunWillComeOut
Two-Morrow
Posts: 344
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 10:12 pm

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by TheSunWillComeOut »

squarekara wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 7:13 pm
Golf wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:33 pm
squarekara wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:05 pm I would just refrain from faulting a contestant if your own personal favorite strategy is not employed. The gameplay we observe may not reflect a planned strategy at all, and, unless we know different, any commentary is just speculation. (Someone on this board commented that my DD wagers in the 11/3 game were too low when I got two of those three answers WRONG. Huh?) And thanks to Phil for mentioning Jackie Gleason, since "Chef of the Future" and "The $99,000 Answer" certainly figured into my J! preparation.
Favorite strategy has nothing to do with it, optimal strategy has everything to do with it. DD's are like gold, the Scrabble blanks of Jeopardy. The chances of winning when a player finds one jump exponentially. Therefore it is optimal to hunt them down regardless if your plan is to play offense or defense with them.

Comments regarding your DD wagers have absolutely nothing to do with whether or not you answered correctly. You either wagered optimally or you did not.

The issue with strategy comments is and will always come down to the fact that so few people know how to play correctly. And the same goes with preparation, which I guess makes sense. If you don't know how to play, you won't know how to prepare. Or perhaps it's the other way around.

And all this talk about under the lights is just an excuse IMO. In both mental and physical competitions, if you prepare correctly and are confident, the game will slow to a crawl. If you do not prepare correctly and are not confident, the game will be nothing but a blur.

Regardless, I enjoy the strategic aspect of the show and will continue to respectfully point out both good and poor decisions.

And I have no issue whatsoever with Lisa showing emotion on the show.
Yep, there are myriad methods of playing and myriad reasons we enjoy watching. But to state that there is a "correct" way to play discounts the real-life ramifications when theoretical methods go wrong and carries with it a certain air of disdain, whether that's intentional or not. And "under the lights," the struggle is real, my friend. I don't think anyone is putting it forth as an "excuse," but it's a variable that can throw off the efforts of the most punctillious statistician.
Yeah, this has always been my take on it. Golf, you don't seem to get that the people who panic up there are experiencing a physiological misfire. There are ways to prepare for it, but you can't cover all bases, especially if you're prone to it in daily life, unless you recreate the conditions exactly - and by that I mean playing a real game of Jeopardy!, on the Jeopardy! set, with all the stakes, again and again until you become acclimated to it. I mastered it at home just as you did, and it HELPED for sure. I highly encourage everyone to do that, with all lamps turned on and standing with the clicky-pen. And the on-stage practice in advance helped, which is why they do it for every contestant until they get less freaked about it. But doing it for real? Not the same thing. That just allows you to go into autopilot while inside it's a race to win as much money as you can before you explode. You are basically the bus in SPEED up there. It's silly to blame people for not accounting for it, because it's like yelling at someone for falling asleep after spending 40 hours awake. Some can do it, others can't. It's not a moral failing.

I recognize that Alex Jacob has looked less leniently on this on JBoard, but we have to remember that before his great Jeopardy! run, Alex Jacob was a competitive poker player, so he stepped on that stage as someone who had an unusual amount of experience in risking large sums of money and enduring social approval/disapproval in front of a large audience. Not everybody has the chance to do that in advance, or the particular skill set for it.
User avatar
cf1140
Not Jeopardy! Material
Posts: 500
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 10:04 pm

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by cf1140 »

I see Jason went for the old Profiles in Courage wager
User avatar
squarekara
J! Reactionary
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 12:49 am
Location: USDA Zone 5

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by squarekara »

TheSunWillComeOut wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 7:59 pm
squarekara wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 7:13 pm
Golf wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:33 pm
squarekara wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:05 pm I would just refrain from faulting a contestant if your own personal favorite strategy is not employed. The gameplay we observe may not reflect a planned strategy at all, and, unless we know different, any commentary is just speculation. (Someone on this board commented that my DD wagers in the 11/3 game were too low when I got two of those three answers WRONG. Huh?) And thanks to Phil for mentioning Jackie Gleason, since "Chef of the Future" and "The $99,000 Answer" certainly figured into my J! preparation.
Favorite strategy has nothing to do with it, optimal strategy has everything to do with it. DD's are like gold, the Scrabble blanks of Jeopardy. The chances of winning when a player finds one jump exponentially. Therefore it is optimal to hunt them down regardless if your plan is to play offense or defense with them.

Comments regarding your DD wagers have absolutely nothing to do with whether or not you answered correctly. You either wagered optimally or you did not.

The issue with strategy comments is and will always come down to the fact that so few people know how to play correctly. And the same goes with preparation, which I guess makes sense. If you don't know how to play, you won't know how to prepare. Or perhaps it's the other way around.

And all this talk about under the lights is just an excuse IMO. In both mental and physical competitions, if you prepare correctly and are confident, the game will slow to a crawl. If you do not prepare correctly and are not confident, the game will be nothing but a blur.

Regardless, I enjoy the strategic aspect of the show and will continue to respectfully point out both good and poor decisions.

And I have no issue whatsoever with Lisa showing emotion on the show.
Yep, there are myriad methods of playing and myriad reasons we enjoy watching. But to state that there is a "correct" way to play discounts the real-life ramifications when theoretical methods go wrong and carries with it a certain air of disdain, whether that's intentional or not. And "under the lights," the struggle is real, my friend. I don't think anyone is putting it forth as an "excuse," but it's a variable that can throw off the efforts of the most punctillious statistician.
Yeah, this has always been my take on it. Golf, you don't seem to get that the people who panic up there are experiencing a physiological misfire. There are ways to prepare for it, but you can't cover all bases, especially if you're prone to it in daily life, unless you recreate the conditions exactly - and by that I mean playing a real game of Jeopardy!, on the Jeopardy! set, with all the stakes, again and again until you become acclimated to it. I mastered it at home just as you did, and it HELPED for sure. I highly encourage everyone to do that, with all lamps turned on and standing with the clicky-pen. And the on-stage practice in advance helped, which is why they do it for every contestant until they get less freaked about it. But doing it for real? Not the same thing. That just allows you to go into autopilot while inside it's a race to win as much money as you can before you explode. You are basically the bus in SPEED up there. It's silly to blame people for not accounting for it, because it's like yelling at someone for falling asleep after spending 40 hours awake. Some can do it, others can't. It's not a moral failing.

I recognize that Alex Jacob has looked less leniently on this on JBoard, but we have to remember that before his great Jeopardy! run, Alex Jacob was a competitive poker player, so he stepped on that stage as someone who had an unusual amount of experience in risking large sums of money and enduring social approval/disapproval in front of a large audience. Not everybody has the chance to do that in advance, or the particular skill set for it.
And as I wished to impart in my original post, if it can happen to Ralph Kramden, it can happen to anyone--regardless of their level of preparedness.
User avatar
AndyTheQuizzer
Lots and Lots of Interviews
Posts: 2594
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:01 am
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
Contact:

Re: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 Game Recap and Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by AndyTheQuizzer »

cf1140 wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:21 pm I see Jason went for the old Profiles in Courage wager
Is this supposed to be funny?
Andy Saunders
J! Archive Founding Archivist
Publisher - The Jeopardy! Fan
Post Reply