Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall

John Boy
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 2624
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:11 am

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by John Boy » Tue Dec 10, 2019 7:08 pm

MinnesotaMyron wrote:
Mon Dec 09, 2019 2:00 pm
Jennifer's 4-day total is $100 more than Brian Weikle's 4-day total.

Also, I gotta get those damn Presidential dates on some flashcards.
I did the math and arrived at 1836, and honestly didn't know if it was Jackson or Van Buren. Then it occurred to me that the general would likely never have consented to be anyone's #2 guy. So Van Buren it was, and I'll take the W no matter how I arrived at it.

Meanwhile, Jennifer is looking really, really strong. You go, girl!!

1stlvlthinker
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 493
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 12:01 am

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by 1stlvlthinker » Tue Dec 10, 2019 9:15 pm

TenPoundHammer wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 6:55 pm
1stlvlthinker wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:42 am
Do you notice anything in common between say, WHH and JFK with regards to these Presidents?
No.

I can't even remember out of eight planets which is the largest.
Literally look at that list. Is there anything that sticks out about commonalities between any of them?
Won some of Ben Stein's money, some of Roger Lodge's, some of Chris Harrison's. None of Alex Trebek's.

User avatar
BigDaddyMatty
Save Me, Maggie!
Posts: 2983
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 11:05 am
Location: Wherever I May Roam
Contact:

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by BigDaddyMatty » Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:18 pm

Coryat: 42,800
49 R/1 W
DD: 3/3
FJ: :mrgreen:
LT: archetype, Paradise Lost, Godwin

I was aware of the MVB/GHWB nugget--I think I may have written a question about it several months ago--but I have also recently memorized the presidents' years in office, so this FJ! was up my alley.

I really liked the path of the Godwin clue. You have to be aware of Harold Godwinson, then realize what that implies with respect to his father's name.

I always thought people were just saying "disassociative" lazily. Thankful for the reversal there.
Last edited by BigDaddyMatty on Fri Dec 13, 2019 5:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sprinkles are for winners.

harrumph
Voyeur
Posts: 1701
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 12:00 pm
Location: Princeton, NJ

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by harrumph » Wed Dec 11, 2019 2:04 am

TenPoundHammer wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 6:55 pm
1stlvlthinker wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:42 am
Do you notice anything in common between say, WHH and JFK with regards to these Presidents?
No.

I can't even remember out of eight planets which is the largest.
It's Uranus

heppm01
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 482
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:30 pm

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by heppm01 » Wed Dec 11, 2019 11:28 am

harrumph wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2019 2:04 am
TenPoundHammer wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 6:55 pm
1stlvlthinker wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:42 am
Do you notice anything in common between say, WHH and JFK with regards to these Presidents?
No.

I can't even remember out of eight planets which is the largest.
It's Uranus
I suspect you were reaching for a joke here but on principle I think it is a bad idea to intentionally feed someone bad information.

merica
Valued Contributor
Posts: 98
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by merica » Wed Dec 11, 2019 11:57 am

I didn't see any mention here about Jennifer's FJ! wager. Had she missed, she put herself at exactly 2x the third place contestant. Why not bid $1 less than she did, thereby avoiding any possible tiebreaker? I'll never understand how so many brilliant people are so poor at wagering on FJ!

User avatar
opusthepenguin
The Best Darn Penguin on the Whole JBoard
Posts: 7100
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:33 pm
Location: Shawnee, KS
Contact:

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by opusthepenguin » Wed Dec 11, 2019 12:10 pm

BigDaddyMatty wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:18 pm
I always thought people were just saying "disassociative" lazily. Thankful for the reversal there.
That reversal was puzzling. So what if the OED contains the word "disassociative"? The clue wasn't asking for any word with that meaning. It was asking for the word that gets used with "identity disorder". "Multiplicate" is in the OED as a synonym for "multiple". But that doesn't prove that the former term was Multiplicate Personality Disorder.

The thing to consult is whatever diagnostic manual specifies the term. If it says "dissociative", then that's the right response. If it allows for both, great. If there's significant discussion among the congnoscenti about which term is acceptable, maybe "disassociative" can sneak in that way. But showing that the word exists doesn't prove jack for the purposes of this clue.

davey
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 3702
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:55 pm

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by davey » Wed Dec 11, 2019 2:03 pm

opusthepenguin wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2019 12:10 pm
BigDaddyMatty wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:18 pm
I always thought people were just saying "disassociative" lazily. Thankful for the reversal there.
That reversal was puzzling. So what if the OED contains the word "disassociative"? The clue wasn't asking for any word with that meaning. It was asking for the word that gets used with "identity disorder". "Multiplicate" is in the OED as a synonym for "multiple". But that doesn't prove that the former term was Multiplicate Personality Disorder.

The thing to consult is whatever diagnostic manual specifies the term. If it says "dissociative", then that's the right response. If it allows for both, great. If there's significant discussion among the congnoscenti about which term is acceptable, maybe "disassociative" can sneak in that way. But showing that the word exists doesn't prove jack for the purposes of this clue.
It's an interesting question. Did the judges take it as an alternate pronunciation? If they asked for the full name of "Alcoa," and someone responded, "Aluminium Company of America," would they be ruled correct? Probably not...But perhaps a disorder was deemed less official than a company name.

seaborgium
Undefeated in Reruns
Posts: 6634
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by seaborgium » Wed Dec 11, 2019 2:33 pm

davey wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2019 2:03 pm
opusthepenguin wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2019 12:10 pm
BigDaddyMatty wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:18 pm
I always thought people were just saying "disassociative" lazily. Thankful for the reversal there.
That reversal was puzzling. So what if the OED contains the word "disassociative"? The clue wasn't asking for any word with that meaning. It was asking for the word that gets used with "identity disorder". "Multiplicate" is in the OED as a synonym for "multiple". But that doesn't prove that the former term was Multiplicate Personality Disorder.

The thing to consult is whatever diagnostic manual specifies the term. If it says "dissociative", then that's the right response. If it allows for both, great. If there's significant discussion among the congnoscenti about which term is acceptable, maybe "disassociative" can sneak in that way. But showing that the word exists doesn't prove jack for the purposes of this clue.
It's an interesting question. Did the judges take it as an alternate pronunciation? If they asked for the full name of "Alcoa," and someone responded, "Aluminium Company of America," would they be ruled correct? Probably not...But perhaps a disorder was deemed less official than a company name.
Mark Lowenthal did almost precisely this in his ToC-winning game: http://www.j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=182 (CORPORATE AMERICA, $300) The clue just asked for what the "Al" stood for, he gave the five-syllable name of the element, and it was accepted and later reversed. A company name has less wiggle room. Accepting "disassociative" reminds me of the time they accepted "not suitable for work" as what NSFW stood for (instead of "safe"). I think Alex intended to say that "disassociative" and "dissociative" were fully synonymous in the OED, but prematurely ended his sentence after merely saying that the former could be found in the OED.

User avatar
TenPoundHammer
Otters are meant to swim
Posts: 8176
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:59 pm
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by TenPoundHammer » Wed Dec 11, 2019 2:38 pm

seaborgium wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2019 2:33 pm
Mark Lowenthal did almost precisely this in his ToC-winning game: http://www.j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=182 (CORPORATE AMERICA, $300) The clue just asked for what the "Al" stood for, he gave the five-syllable name of the element, and it was accepted and later reversed. A company name has less wiggle room.
So by that rule...

Alex: Wilford Brimley advertises for Liberty Medical, which provides assistance for people afflicted with this disease.

Jeff: What is diabetes?

Alex: (looks offscreen) Uh... no, soary, we can't give that to you. Steve?

Steve: What is diabeetus?

Alex: Correct.
Ten Pound Hammer

This space for rent

User avatar
opusthepenguin
The Best Darn Penguin on the Whole JBoard
Posts: 7100
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:33 pm
Location: Shawnee, KS
Contact:

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by opusthepenguin » Wed Dec 11, 2019 3:41 pm

seaborgium wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2019 2:33 pm
Mark Lowenthal did almost precisely this in his ToC-winning game: http://www.j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=182 (CORPORATE AMERICA, $300) The clue just asked for what the "Al" stood for, he gave the five-syllable name of the element, and it was accepted and later reversed. A company name has less wiggle room. Accepting "disassociative" reminds me of the time they accepted "not suitable for work" as what NSFW stood for (instead of "safe"). I think Alex intended to say that "disassociative" and "dissociative" were fully synonymous in the OED, but prematurely ended his sentence after merely saying that the former could be found in the OED.
Aluminum and aluminium are fully synonymous as well, yeah? Unless the diagnostic title itself uses the words interchangeably, then one of them is in the title and the other isn't. There may be grounds for that reversal but as far as I can tell, the OED don't enter into it. Evidence that over in the UK, or on the west coast of the US, or whatever, they expand DID to Disassociative Identity Disorder would be on point. But I feel as though the closest I can get to agreeing with the decision is if I become convinced they made the right reversal for the wrong reason.

seaborgium
Undefeated in Reruns
Posts: 6634
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by seaborgium » Wed Dec 11, 2019 5:16 pm

opusthepenguin wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2019 3:41 pm
seaborgium wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2019 2:33 pm
Mark Lowenthal did almost precisely this in his ToC-winning game: http://www.j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=182 (CORPORATE AMERICA, $300) The clue just asked for what the "Al" stood for, he gave the five-syllable name of the element, and it was accepted and later reversed. A company name has less wiggle room. Accepting "disassociative" reminds me of the time they accepted "not suitable for work" as what NSFW stood for (instead of "safe"). I think Alex intended to say that "disassociative" and "dissociative" were fully synonymous in the OED, but prematurely ended his sentence after merely saying that the former could be found in the OED.
Aluminum and aluminium are fully synonymous as well, yeah? Unless the diagnostic title itself uses the words interchangeably, then one of them is in the title and the other isn't. There may be grounds for that reversal but as far as I can tell, the OED don't enter into it. Evidence that over in the UK, or on the west coast of the US, or whatever, they expand DID to Disassociative Identity Disorder would be on point. But I feel as though the closest I can get to agreeing with the decision is if I become convinced they made the right reversal for the wrong reason.
Aluminium is of course identical in meaning to aluminum, but company names and literary titles have less wiggle room for rephrasing. My feeling is, if any medical professional has ever used the phrase "dissasociative identity disorder," then it should be accepted, and since the words mean the same thing and you can't prove a negative, TPTB decided to err on the side of caution by accepting it.

User avatar
alietr
Site Admin
Posts: 6921
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:20 pm
Location: Bethesda, MD

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by alietr » Wed Dec 11, 2019 5:24 pm

So what would they have done if the contestant had a British English background? I can see them looking at the word 'aluminum' and pronouncing it like 'aluminium'. I'm not sure I agree with that reversal.

seaborgium
Undefeated in Reruns
Posts: 6634
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by seaborgium » Wed Dec 11, 2019 5:42 pm

alietr wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2019 5:24 pm
So what would they have done if the contestant had a British English background? I can see them looking at the word 'aluminum' and pronouncing it like 'aluminium'. I'm not sure I agree with that reversal.
It just comes down to the fact that Alcoa was a shortening of Aluminum Company of America. I'm sure TPTB didn't like it either, but he said a word that wasn't in the name.

User avatar
cheezguyty
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1067
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:19 am
Location: Louisville, KY

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by cheezguyty » Wed Dec 11, 2019 6:45 pm

merica wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2019 11:57 am
I didn't see any mention here about Jennifer's FJ! wager. Had she missed, she put herself at exactly 2x the third place contestant. [...]
MarkBarrett mentioned that in the very first post in this thread:
MarkBarrett wrote:
Mon Dec 09, 2019 9:59 am
I could smell the reversal coming and that padded Jennifer's total having to cover 30400 instead of 22400. Jennifer went for more and if she missed it could have been 10400 for her and 10400 if Jeff had doubled and got it.

merica
Valued Contributor
Posts: 98
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by merica » Thu Dec 12, 2019 3:59 pm

cheezguyty wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2019 6:45 pm
merica wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2019 11:57 am
I didn't see any mention here about Jennifer's FJ! wager. Had she missed, she put herself at exactly 2x the third place contestant. [...]
MarkBarrett mentioned that in the very first post in this thread:
MarkBarrett wrote:
Mon Dec 09, 2019 9:59 am
I could smell the reversal coming and that padded Jennifer's total having to cover 30400 instead of 22400. Jennifer went for more and if she missed it could have been 10400 for her and 10400 if Jeff had doubled and got it.
:oops:
Reading comprehension was never a strong suit, I suppose. Thanks for pointing that out!

User avatar
MarkBarrett
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 10262
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:37 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by MarkBarrett » Sun Dec 15, 2019 10:14 am

The missing clue: https://www.facebook.com/Jeopardy/video ... p_activity

If the players got to it my Coryat would have been $1000 higher.

Bamaman
Also Receiving Votes
Posts: 9482
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Bamaman » Tue Dec 31, 2019 10:54 am

I think just “get married” would have been accepted for the Cheney clue.

I seem to be the only one who just knew VB was elected as a sitting VP without doing math.

User avatar
opusthepenguin
The Best Darn Penguin on the Whole JBoard
Posts: 7100
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:33 pm
Location: Shawnee, KS
Contact:

Re: Monday, December 9, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by opusthepenguin » Tue Dec 31, 2019 12:59 pm

Bamaman wrote:
Tue Dec 31, 2019 10:54 am
I think just “get married” would have been accepted for the Cheney clue.

I seem to be the only one who just knew VB was elected as a sitting VP without doing math.
I knew it too. I just forgot to brag about it.

Post Reply