Are you joking? I fail to see how it can be called a serious overwager, since it did not allow to Sarah with a $0 wager or wrong answer and it did not resurrect third place.
Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall
-
- Valued Contributor
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:45 am
-
- Loyal Jeopardista
- Posts: 196
- Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 10:33 pm
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Martian, yes. Overwager? Nope. In fact there was still room for more with just as much safety.
--
Drowning in the pool
Drowning in the pool
- twelvefootboy
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 2702
- Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2016 11:18 pm
- Location: Tornado Alley / Southwest Missouri
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
I think it might be a strong category for him, although Tom Hanks is worse than my default guess of Meryl Streep for every Oscar question. It may be Gambler's fallacy where he saw all that big pile of winnings as house money, when it was very much his own. Now his extra $5K of mad money is no longer his'n. He's a good player, but I'm not expecting him to be quite so Martian tomorrow.
I didn't even bother with Streep for my FJ guess. I need a 21st century Pavlov actor .
Disclaimer - repeated exposure to author's musings may cause befuddlement.
- econgator
- Let's Go Mets!
- Posts: 10673
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:32 am
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
And I didn't.MarkBarrett wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2020 11:04 am It was definitely a case of "it's easy if you know it."
Heck, I've only seen 6 Best Picture nominees in the 10's (and only one winner -- The King's Speech), so I wasn't too high on my prospects.
- Category 13
- Wagering Viking
- Posts: 1912
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 1:43 pm
- Location: This side of paradise
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Furthermore, if anyone's wager was was less than optimal, it was Sarah's.ParrotRob wrote:Martian, yes. Overwager? Nope. In fact there was still room for more with just as much safety.BobF wrote: Serious FJ! overwager!
She needed to get a correct response to reach Joshua's fallback amount, so why stop at $22,801? That left open the possibility for him to win with an underwager. Sarah could have wagered enough (11,599) to force Joshua to be correct and still not fall below a Zero wager from Ryan on a triple stumper.
- xxaaaxx
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 9:29 pm
- Location: Brooklyn, NY
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Definitely. I was just curious if anyone was brave enough to try it anyway, had they gotten it right, but we'll never know. I probably would have, just to show off. A name like Mahershala(lhashbaz) is hard to forget.
-
- Undefeated in Reruns
- Posts: 8941
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:31 am
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
This FJ was more or less a question on HQ (it asked who received acting Oscars for both Best Pictures they appeared in) just a couple of weeks ago (in a game in which I won $18.52!), but I had to turn my gears before I remembered that. First I thought of Christoph Waltz's two wins, but I knew Inglourious Basterds didn't get Best Picture, and then I remembered the HQ quiz. But first I thought of Chiwetel Ejiofor, and had to recall that he was the correct answer to a question about not winning an Oscar before I got to Mahershala Ali (whose full first name I'd have been tempted to include).
(Incidentally, the HQ question's choices made it really easy, with the incorrect ones being Octavia Spencer and Ben Affleck, who have one and zero acting Oscars respectively.)
(Incidentally, the HQ question's choices made it really easy, with the incorrect ones being Octavia Spencer and Ben Affleck, who have one and zero acting Oscars respectively.)
-
- Also Receiving Votes
- Posts: 12897
- Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
While logic dictates that she bet big, she would not be the first person to ignore logic when wagering. Her personality also suggests she might not do things in a conventional manner.
If she bets $1,000 and gets it right, she wins the game.
- opusthepenguin
- The Best Darn Penguin on the Whole JBoard
- Posts: 10319
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:33 pm
- Location: Shawnee, KS
- Contact:
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Guessed Geoffrey Rush just to have something. My precall was a clue having to do with Daniel Day-Lewis becoming the only man to win a third best actor award.
-
- Wet Paper Bag Charmer
- Posts: 2727
- Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 pm
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
BobF wrote: Serious FJ! overwager!
ParrotRob wrote: Martian, yes. Overwager? Nope. In fact there was still room for more with just as much safety.
Making the minimum cover wager from the lead always shows the highest winning percentage. Anything more always lessens winning chances. That being said, Joshua's wager reduced his winning chances by a tiny amount.Category 13 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:21 am Furthermore, if anyone's wager was was less than optimal, it was Sarah's.
She needed to get a correct response to reach Joshua's fallback amount, so why stop at $22,801? That left open the possibility for him to win with an underwager. Sarah could have wagered enough (11,599) to force Joshua to be correct and still not fall below a Zero wager from Ryan on a triple stumper.
Sarah made a wager that would win the game while guaranteeing second. She wins more by wagering everything in the RW scenario but forfeits $1k on a wrong response. How often does the leader make a suicide wager where she would win on a WW? The GTO optimal play here is to wager everything, but like Joshua, her mistake was a small one.
- LucarioSnooperVixey
- Carrying Letters and Lemons
- Posts: 3513
- Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 8:41 pm
- Location: New Jersey
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
57 R (University of Virginia was my only miss.)
DD: 3/3
FJ:
LT: Grocery Stores, Blue, Black Beauty, Suicide
DD: 3/3
FJ:
LT: Grocery Stores, Blue, Black Beauty, Suicide
Douglas Squasoni
- floridagator
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 2192
- Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 3:39 am
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Didn't anybody notice how mad Sarah looked for the last part of the double jeopardy round? She kept violently tossing her hair whenever she missed a buzz. On the confetti clue, she was really seriously working that buzzer with her right hand. And then when the round ended she went overboard straightening her hair.
At least a woman like that you always know where you stand with her.
At least a woman like that you always know where you stand with her.
I'd rather cuddle then have sex. If you're into grammar, you'll understand.
-
- Loyal Jeopardista
- Posts: 196
- Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 10:33 pm
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Yes! When Joshua got that last DD I told my wife "Oh my God, I think Sarah's going to leap over the podium and beat the snot out of poor Joshua".floridagator wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 12:17 am Didn't anybody notice how mad Sarah looked for the last part of the double jeopardy round? She kept violently tossing her hair whenever she missed a buzz. On the confetti clue, she was really seriously working that buzzer with her right hand. And then when the round ended she went overboard straightening her hair.
At least a woman like that you always know where you stand with her.
--
Drowning in the pool
Drowning in the pool
-
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 485
- Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 4:22 pm
- Location: Mid-Missouri
-
- Loyal Jeopardista
- Posts: 196
- Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 10:33 pm
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
I've been waiting a long time to say this...
I may be in the minority in this crowd, but if I have the opportunity to maximize winnings while only risking $1k if I'm wrong, I'll do it every time. I don't like how J! makes the difference between finishing second and third essentially inconsequential. I wonder how contestants' wagering strategies would change if there was a serious gap between second and third place winnings such that second place was actually worth fighting for?
As it stands, the only way I'm going to bother fighting to preserve second place is if I'm on the wrong end of a lock. I didn't come all this way (and wait years) to win $2000.
Bottom line: if the ONLY possible scenario where I can win is a correct answer from second coupled with a wrong answer by the leader, $1000 is not enough of a disincentive for me to NOT push all-in.
Last edited by ParrotRob on Fri Jan 31, 2020 4:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
--
Drowning in the pool
Drowning in the pool
-
- Valued Contributor
- Posts: 68
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 6:23 pm
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
It all depends on how you approach the question. I started with "Green Book," for which Mahershala Ali won a Supporting Actor Oscar. Since he also won one for "Moonlight," which won Best Picture, that gave me the answer right away.
-
- Also Receiving Votes
- Posts: 12897
- Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Having never heard of Ali, this was a tough FJ.
-
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 6030
- Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:55 pm
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Yes, Recent Oscar Winners would have been a more helpful category than one encompassing 20 years. That much time kind of paralyzed me, if only I'd started with most recent I might have pulled this one out. But then again, I don't have the lists memorized in any order...VoluptuousLoser wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 4:18 pmIt all depends on how you approach the question. I started with "Green Book," for which Mahershala Ali won a Supporting Actor Oscar. Since he also won one for "Moonlight," which won Best Picture, that gave me the answer right away.
-
- Wet Paper Bag Charmer
- Posts: 2727
- Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 pm
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
If I'm not mistaken, in the original version of Jeopardy, all the contestants took home what they won. This led to plenty of people protecting their money and not trying to win the game.ParrotRob wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 9:12 am I've been waiting a long time to say this...
I may be in the minority in this crowd, but if I have the opportunity to maximize winnings while only risking $1k if I'm wrong, I'll do it every time. I don't like how J! makes the difference between finishing second and third essentially inconsequential. I wonder how contestants' wagering strategies would change if there was a serious gap between second and third place winnings such that second place was actually worth fighting for?
As it stands, the only way I'm going to bother fighting to preserve second place is if I'm on the wrong end of a lock. I didn't come all this way (and wait years) to win $2000.
Bottom line: if the ONLY possible scenario where I can win is a correct answer from second coupled with a wrong answer by the leader, $1000 is not enough of a disincentive for me to NOT push all-in.
Wagering strategies aren't going to change regardless of what is awarded for 2nd and 3rd because most contestants have no wagering strategy to begin with.
But the difference between 2nd and 3rd ($2k vs. $1k) is a big deal to some. It's not to you, it's not to me either, but in the end it is $1k. There's no reason to throw it away if there's no upside. There are quite a few people, including some on this board, that think the prizes for 2nd and 3rd should be upped dramatically. Some complain that the guarantee $1k doesn't even pay for making the trip. I don't agree with this thinking, TPTB are under no obligation to pay anything for 2nd and 3rd. It's their game their rules and contestants should be happy with whatever they get if they don't win.
In terms of pushing all in from 2nd when you need the leader to miss as well, there are times where it's GTO to do so, and there are times where it's not GTO. It's all about how much you gain from doing so and then comparing that to the possibility of falling into 3rd. So even though you say you'd always wager everything in this scenario, it's not always the proper thing to do.
In the end, there are player types that don't have confidence in their own abilities to wager everything. There are player types that do. And mostly there are player types that don't have a clue why they are wagering what they are. In this case, I don't consider protecting 2nd place a mistake. If it is a mistake, it's not a big one mathematically speaking.
- floridagator
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 2192
- Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 3:39 am
Re: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
The guaranteed 1000 and 2000 seem to have the effect of creating a more National contestant pool than was the case before. In the early years of the syndicated Jeopardy!, it was not at all unusual for all three contestants to be from the west side of LA, and they would get introduced as being originally from such and such. Now it's quite rare to have three contestants from LA. So people who are applying to be contestants have taken the hint of the thousand dollar minimum for being on the show.
I'd rather cuddle then have sex. If you're into grammar, you'll understand.