spell4yr wrote: ↑Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:57 pm
I'm surprised how difficult the FJ is seeming to be. Warren came to mind early on, and then it was very easy to move over to the other senator.
I'd be curious, of those who got the correct answer, how many started with Warren and how many with Warner.
I went first for “the female senator from Mass. who’s in the news all the time”, although I had a brief brain freeze on her name, then got Warner immediately after.
I did come up with FJ thinking of Warren first and just looking for anagrams of that. I have a feeling I would have laid an egg "under the lights." I hate anagrams.
My mind immediately went to Kaine/Aiken as well and I was convinced I was right. Don't think I would have ever come up with Warren/Warner. Another tough board imo.
dhkendall wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2018 1:37 am
DOUBLE TALK $1200: would “no-no” be good for “matchy-matchy”?
Tough call. You might get it on a technicality, but the I'm sure they thought the clue was drawn up specifically enough to elicit the longer answer. FWIW, I didn't allow "no-no" for myself...Also FWIW, "fashion no-no" gets 143,000 Google hits while "matchy-matchy" gets 4.4 million.
Thought I was sunk when I saw the FJ category, certain of it when I read the clue, but it only took a second to remember the very famous Warren, and Warner came right behind...Come on, does the switching of 2 letters even rise to the level of an anagram...?
boson wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2018 8:23 am
If you are going to miss FJ based on the category, then wagering 0 is the most reasont bet, no matter what place you are in.
If you have zero chance of answering correctly you wouldn't have been there in the first place.
Zero wagers have merit in certain situations, this is not one of them.
boson wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2018 8:23 am
If you are going to miss FJ based on the category, then wagering 0 is the most reasont bet, no matter what place you are in.
If you have zero chance of answering correctly you wouldn't have been there in the first place.
Zero wagers have merit in certain situations, this is not one of them.
It looks like I'm in the minority here: I got Warner first, then quickly got to Warren. Ironically, I wouldn't have been able to recall Tim Kaine in that time span.
Fleeboy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 10, 2018 9:53 pm
Just the other day, the $2000 clue in "Anagrammed Names" from the Rutter/Frates/Cooper M$M semifinal popped into my head, making tonight's FJ an instaget:
Why did the use a euphemism for "Hell" in Hand for $400? I've heard far saltier language not get bowdlerized.
I didn't grasp that Twilight Zone for $200 was asking for a person, not a character.
Jobfuscation was entirely over my head. In particular, I thought "Ends with the same 4 letters" meant "end in the same 4 letters as chips/salsa".
I knew beri-beri from the Garfield Thanksgiving special, of all things.
No guess on FJ!
I'm surprised 2/3 had Warren but not Warner. As soon as I saw "Warren + ?" I said, "well, the other one must be Warner, because that's the only other name I can make out of those letters."
The article about the unused Twilight Zone clue said it would be hard for it to fit into another category. How is that? You could do a category about Bond films and it would fit in perfectly. Or even just a generic movie category.
spell4yr wrote: ↑Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:57 pm
I'd be curious, of those who got the correct answer, how many started with Warren and how many with Warner.
I started trying to think of a VA senator, came up with nothing and then got Warren quickly when I switched to MA. The names were close enough that I was able to remember Mark Warner although I had no idea he was still a senator.
You may be thinking of John Warner; Mark Warner has been there since 2008 - 10 years isn't very long for a Senate career. Mark Warner was in the news somewhat recently in the context of the Senate investigations about Trump's Russia connections.