Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall

User avatar
econgator
Let's Go Mets!
Posts: 8328
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:32 am

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by econgator » Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:58 am

LucarioSnooperVixey wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:58 am
(Missed Borg.)
How is that even possible?

A Wray
Valued Contributor
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2014 9:54 am

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by A Wray » Sat Jan 11, 2020 2:25 am

econgator wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:52 pm
Volante wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:40 pm
Also, goalie -feels- more like a $200 clue response. Just sayin. :lol:
True, but 20 goals in a season for goalies?

In the history of the NHL, only 15 goals total have been scored by goalies.
Make that 16.

Predators' Pekka Rinne becomes 1st goaltender to score since 2013

User avatar
BigDaddyMatty
Save Me, Maggie!
Posts: 2927
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 11:05 am
Location: Wherever I May Roam
Contact:

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by BigDaddyMatty » Sat Jan 11, 2020 6:23 am

Coryat: 42,000
51 R/1 W
DD: 3/3
FJ: :oops:
LT: flux, fogy, paycheck, (penalty minutes), glockenspiel, William Carlos Williams-Sonoma, Agent 99, William Jennings Bryan, The Martian (DD)

Welp. I hope that's the easiest FJ! I'll miss all season. I blame the fact that the correct country hasn't been in the news much lately. I even approached the clue correctly, but "1979 + explicitly religious country" just got me nowhere. I have no explanation. Must've been The (Home) Lights.

The judges' ruling on the Bethlehem clue was stranger than strange. It's one thing to not anticipate Palestine as a possible correct response, but to just undo the neg without crediting Katie with a correct response didn't make any sense.
Sprinkles are for winners.

Bamaman
Also Receiving Votes
Posts: 9306
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Bamaman » Sat Jan 11, 2020 7:12 am

talkingaway wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:11 pm
Robert K S wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:30 pm
Ironhorse wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 2:28 pm
so I'm just guessing TPTB cut out the explanation because they didn't want to touch that issue with a ten foot pole.
You'da thunk it would have been foreseeable enough to just scrap the clue if the politics was going to be an issue. It's not like they don't consider alternate correct responses for all of these clues.
You'd think they'd have had Alex (or the judges or clue writers) tape an explanation/apology to post to Twitter. I'll admit, I'm no Middle East scholar, and figured it was Bethlehem unless they were trying to trick me, but I'll confess to not exactly knowing whether it was Palestine or Israel. However, I do know enough not to touch that issue with that proverbial ten-foot pole - certainly not on a light, generally nonpartisan, syndicated game show.
If FJ had been about China, that would have set off a Tweet storm as well.

Hugo Z
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2019 2:56 pm

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Hugo Z » Sat Jan 11, 2020 10:08 am

I went with "coot" for the four-letter word because I've always thought of "fogey" as five.

Golf
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1652
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 pm

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Golf » Sat Jan 11, 2020 10:28 am

A Wray wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 2:25 am
econgator wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:52 pm
Volante wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:40 pm
Also, goalie -feels- more like a $200 clue response. Just sayin. :lol:
True, but 20 goals in a season for goalies?

In the history of the NHL, only 15 goals total have been scored by goalies.
Make that 16.

Predators' Pekka Rinne becomes 1st goaltender to score since 2013
No, the linked happened the night before this clue aired. Econgator was accurate with 15 goals by 12 different goalies.

econgator wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:58 am
LucarioSnooperVixey wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:58 am
(Missed Borg.)
How is that even possible?
Between either Star Trek or Jeri Ryan in a skin tight "outfit", you'd think most all male Jeopardy viewers would be all over that. In more ways than one. I would have let her assimilate me without question.

hansenkd
Newbie
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 10:28 am

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by hansenkd » Sat Jan 11, 2020 11:04 am

A Wray wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:58 am
Robert K S wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:30 pm
Ironhorse wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 2:28 pm
so I'm just guessing TPTB cut out the explanation because they didn't want to touch that issue with a ten foot pole.
You'da thunk it would have been foreseeable enough to just scrap the clue if the politics was going to be an issue. It's not like they don't consider alternate correct responses for all of these clues.
Agreed completely. How on earth did that clue make it to air? You're effectively forcing the contestants to take sides on one of the most inflammatory issues in the world. I'm afraid they're going to have to address it eventually.
I don't see how they can't address it. It looks like Katie already did on Twitter. An account that appears to be her, but has been fairly inactive, tweeted an article about U.S. policy in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that was definitely pro-Palestinian. Further research shows that somebody named Katie Needle is a member of democratic socialist and feminist organizations in New York. You can also find video of her posing a question about Planned Parenthood at a CNN Town Hall with then HHS secretary Tom Price.

So by allowing that clue in and deeming that answer incorrect (and also deeming Israel correct), they have inadvertently stoked interest in, and essentially outed, their champion's political leanings. That clue in that category was just not OK, and I have to wonder if somebody in the writers room was trying to sneak in their own political views.

The fact is that had "Palestine" been ruled on air as correct, there would have been just as much Twitter outrage from the other side. And they surely weren't looking for a correct response such as "What is the disputed territory formerly known as the West Bank?" Bad, bad, inexcusable clue. Somebody from the show needs to make an explanation, and Katie deserves an apology for being placed in that position. On the other hand, she didn't have to ring in and expose her own politics either. She could have just sat on her buzzer as the $200 was unlikely to matter.

This was just a bad moment for the show. The whole category was problematic. Even though Barcelona is factually in Spain, the recent prominence of the Catalan independence movement makes even that clue politically fraught. Ultimately, they would have been better off asking for cities instead of countries. A response of "Bethlehem" would not have been controversial in the least.

heppm01
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:30 pm

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by heppm01 » Sat Jan 11, 2020 11:25 am

talkingaway wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 9:08 pm

I had "fog-e-y" for the four-letter F-word for an old person - and, looking it up, that's the more common spelling, no? Would have been nice to reference that in the clue. I'm half-kidding here, but my secondary answer was "fart". I mean, an "old fart" is a stodgy old gentleman, isn't it? You don't really talk about "young farts"....wonder what the judges would have done with my unexpected answer. Would have been a cool "ho/hoe" moment.
Likewise, I immediately rejected "fogey" as having too many letters and responded "fart" for the reasons you mention. Funny or not I don't see why it wouldn't be accepted (perhaps after a reversal).

I think we have three farts in the thread so a poll question may be in order.

Bamaman
Also Receiving Votes
Posts: 9306
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Bamaman » Sat Jan 11, 2020 11:34 am

I suspect she wanted to earn $200 rather than trumpet a political agenda.

I don’t think the writers were trying to push one, either. There have been plenty of examples of sloppy writing/research where an obviously alternative response had to be accepted retroactively.

I don’t know (or care) enough about the situation in Jerusalem to know which answer is the most correct. But given the political stickiness of the situation this clue probably should never have made the cut.

John Boy
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 2535
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:11 am

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by John Boy » Sat Jan 11, 2020 11:41 am

trainman wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:49 pm
DBear wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 9:55 pm
Fogey is spelled wrong by the writers.
Merriam-Webster approves of the "fogy" spelling. (In fact, they say "fogey" is a less common variant.)
Maybe. And I even got this one right. But I always thought the 5-letter spelling was preferred. At least that's the one my neighbors use when they leave insulting notes nailed to my front door.

John Boy
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 2535
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:11 am

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by John Boy » Sat Jan 11, 2020 11:43 am

Robert K S wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 12:44 pm
"1979" - done
True that. I thought (from reading the category name) it would be another toughie for me. But the year probably would have been enough, though the other two elements sealed the deal.

seaborgium
Undefeated in Reruns
Posts: 6466
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by seaborgium » Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:26 pm

Hugo Z wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 10:08 am
I went with "coot" for the four-letter word because I've always thought of "fogey" as five.
The category was "F"OUR-LETTER WORDS.

User avatar
Lefty
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 891
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 4:49 pm

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Lefty » Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:59 pm

trainman wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:49 pm
DBear wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 9:55 pm
Fogey is spelled wrong by the writers.
Merriam-Webster approves of the "fogy" spelling. (In fact, they say "fogey" is a less common variant.)
"Fogy" is far ahead in google matches (I'm not saying this is dispositive, but work with me here), but when paired with "old" (as it usually is), "fogey" takes the lead. It's also usually seen in the plural, and the shorter spelling is pluralized to "fogies", which makes it tougher still.

I find the reference to "gentleman" rather old-fashioned, at best. So what is the proper spelling of "fogeyess"?
I'm smart and I want respect.

Hugo Z
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2019 2:56 pm

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Hugo Z » Sat Jan 11, 2020 1:57 pm

seaborgium wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:26 pm
Hugo Z wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 10:08 am
I went with "coot" for the four-letter word because I've always thought of "fogey" as five.
The category was "F"OUR-LETTER WORDS.
And thus, I'm outed as someone who doesn't always pay attention when the categories are being announced.

talkingaway
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 281
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2019 11:59 am

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by talkingaway » Sat Jan 11, 2020 2:36 pm

Bamaman wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 11:34 am
I suspect she wanted to earn $200 rather than trumpet a political agenda.

I don’t think the writers were trying to push one, either. There have been plenty of examples of sloppy writing/research where an obviously alternative response had to be accepted retroactively.

I don’t know (or care) enough about the situation in Jerusalem to know which answer is the most correct. But given the political stickiness of the situation this clue probably should never have made the cut.
This reminds me of the old South Park episode where Randy Marsh gets on Wheel of Fortune. (Google it if you wish, but it's NSFW and a bit off-color for racism.)

But with a rapid-speed game like J!, I agree - I don't think she was trying to push any kind of political agenda. She was just trying to figure out what the writers wanted to hear. I'd be a little less generous with the writers, since they have the luxury of time and editing...someone should have caught it. But I also agree that I don't think a writer was trying to push their own agenda - they just research, probably found their supposed requirement for "two independent sources" for Israel, and went with it.
heppm01 wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 11:25 am
I think we have three farts in the thread so a poll question may be in order.
Or some Febreze.

User avatar
econgator
Let's Go Mets!
Posts: 8328
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:32 am

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by econgator » Sat Jan 11, 2020 2:38 pm

Lefty wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:59 pm
trainman wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:49 pm
DBear wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 9:55 pm
Fogey is spelled wrong by the writers.
Merriam-Webster approves of the "fogy" spelling. (In fact, they say "fogey" is a less common variant.)
"Fogy" is far ahead in google matches (I'm not saying this is dispositive, but work with me here), but when paired with "old" (as it usually is), "fogey" takes the lead. It's also usually seen in the plural, and the shorter spelling is pluralized to "fogies", which makes it tougher still.

I find the reference to "gentleman" rather old-fashioned, at best. So what is the proper spelling of "fogeyess"?
I was watching some DVD commentary last night, so I had the subtitles on. Sure enough, there is a line mentioning someone as "an old fogy".

A Wray
Valued Contributor
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2014 9:54 am

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by A Wray » Sat Jan 11, 2020 5:10 pm

Golf wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 10:28 am
A Wray wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 2:25 am
econgator wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:52 pm
In the history of the NHL, only 15 goals total have been scored by goalies.
Make that 16.

Predators' Pekka Rinne becomes 1st goaltender to score since 2013
No, the linked happened the night before this clue aired. Econgator was accurate with 15 goals by 12 different goalies.
My bad. I don't follow hockey, was excited to find something so timely, and didn't fact-check properly.

brick
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 810
Joined: Tue May 26, 2015 2:03 pm

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by brick » Sat Jan 11, 2020 5:21 pm

This Is Kirk! wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:13 pm
econgator wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:52 pm
Volante wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:40 pm
Also, goalie -feels- more like a $200 clue response. Just sayin. :lol:
True, but 20 goals in a season for goalies?

In the history of the NHL, only 15 goals total have been scored by goalies.
I actually called that someone would answer goalie on that clue. It seems like a knee-jerk a non-hockey fan would think of.
If it had been a DD and I HAD to answer... that's what I'd have been forced to say, for want of not knowing the name of another position! Would NEVER have rung in.

brick
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 810
Joined: Tue May 26, 2015 2:03 pm

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by brick » Sat Jan 11, 2020 5:33 pm

Bamaman wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 11:34 am
I suspect she wanted to earn $200 rather than trumpet a political agenda.

I don’t think the writers were trying to push one, either. There have been plenty of examples of sloppy writing/research where an obviously alternative response had to be accepted retroactively.

I don’t know (or care) enough about the situation in Jerusalem to know which answer is the most correct. But given the political stickiness of the situation this clue probably should never have made the cut.
I just keep thinking about that lovely documentary we all watched just last week. Many rather smart people look at each question rather closely before it hits the air. I'm left gobsmacked that somehow none of them said, "Hey... wait! The answer to this question is not as clear and incontrovertible as we generally prefer!" All politics aside... if there is an invention whose creator is the subject of debate, that's an intrinsically bad question. If there is a quote whose attribution is suspect... bad question. The additionally layer of politics just makes it an astonishingly bad question.

User avatar
econgator
Let's Go Mets!
Posts: 8328
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:32 am

Re: Friday, January 10, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by econgator » Sat Jan 11, 2020 5:37 pm

brick wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 5:21 pm
If it had been a DD and I HAD to answer... that's what I'd have been forced to say, for want of not knowing the name of another position! Would NEVER have rung in.
Not too many to remember: goalie, center, defenseman, wing (left and right).

Post Reply