Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall

davey
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 6030
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:55 pm

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by davey »

Woppy T wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 7:49 pm I’m confused by the Y2K clue. How could the NYT publish an article on 12/31/99 saying that it wasn’t a problem? Didn’t they need to wait until after midnight to be sure? Or was the article a prediction?
Little Fallout From Y2K Glitch
By JERI CLAUSING
( December 31 ) The world Friday began rolling smoothly into the Year 2000, prompting cautious optimism that the transition would be made without any major catastrophes from the millennium computer problem, John Koskinen, the nation's Y2K adviser, said.

Though I'm not finding the full article. Maybe it was only on the web page? It seems provisional...
A Wray
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2014 9:54 am

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by A Wray »

davey wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:40 pm
Woppy T wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 7:49 pm I’m confused by the Y2K clue. How could the NYT publish an article on 12/31/99 saying that it wasn’t a problem? Didn’t they need to wait until after midnight to be sure? Or was the article a prediction?
Little Fallout From Y2K Glitch
By JERI CLAUSING
( December 31 ) The world Friday began rolling smoothly into the Year 2000, prompting cautious optimism that the transition would be made without any major catastrophes from the millennium computer problem, John Koskinen, the nation's Y2K adviser, said.

Though I'm not finding the full article. Maybe it was only on the web page? It seems provisional...
I scanned the whole print edition from that day and there was no such article. I agree with you that it must have been Web-only. To answer the original question, though, clearly they were reporting on what had happened in the eastern hemisphere, while it was still 12/31 in New York.

I also agree with everyone that "sprint" should have been accepted.
User avatar
BigDaddyMatty
Hoping not to get pruney this time
Posts: 3300
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 11:05 am
Location: Anderson, IN

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by BigDaddyMatty »

Coryat: $35,800
43 R/3 W
DD: 2/2
FJ: :mrgreen:
LT: Augusta (DD), flounder, League of Legends, Thomas Mann, strudel, Bildungsroman, Instant Pot, Nero, Innocence Project

Scott had the good fortune to more or less have a category all to himself, and that was the difference. He outscored Brian $7,000 to $400 in Bands of the 21st Century, which constituted more than 100% of his $5,800 pre-FJ! lead. Speaking of that lead, I found it interesting that Scott came up just $200 short of a crush. Brian's previous wagers suggested that he wouldn't be savvy enough to maximize his chances of winning, though.
MarkBarrett wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:00 pm Would not a sprint move you up in the standings in a marathon, but not for long?
I guess no one says "take a sprint," but the clue was pinned loosely enough that I'm surprised they didn't reverse the neg.
morbeedo wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:05 pm Bad Pavlovs: Ancient + Lives ==> Seutonius every time. Argh. I have a blind spot for Plutarch
I have a Parallel Lives historian = Plutarch card in my Leitner box, as part of my efforts to distinguish Plutarch and Petrarch. I've gotten lazy, though, and haven't reviewed them in several months, so I couldn't pick up the trash tonight.
Sprinkles are for winners.
talkingaway
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 970
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2019 11:59 am

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by talkingaway »

Checking the scores, at least the integrity of the game didn't really change because of the lack of reversal on "sprint". Brian was only due a net change of $400, and Scott would likely keep his $200 that he earned for no net change, if I'm familiar with how J! usually deals with reversals - they typically allow both correct answers IIRC.

With Scott only retaining control to pick two clues, and Brian getting it back quickly enough that board control is immaterial, the only thing to check is the one DD in the DJ round, which wasn't a true daily double, and was Scott's. No harm, no foul....but an odd lack of ruling, IMO.
User avatar
jeff6286
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 5228
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 7:34 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by jeff6286 »

BigDaddyMatty wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:39 am Speaking of that lead, I found it interesting that Scott came up just $200 short of a crush. Brian's previous wagers 36 years of 2nd place wagers suggested that he wouldn't be savvy enough to maximize his chances of winning, though.
reddpen
Thrice Unplucked from the Jeopardy! Pool
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:51 am
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by reddpen »

MarkBarrett wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:22 pm Es ist fertig: http://www.j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=6854
In both the J and DJ rounds, You --> Your in a category heading.
In and out of the pool four times
Bamaman
Also Receiving Votes
Posts: 12895
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Bamaman »

In S36 there were eight games out of 190 that had a two-player FJ. (Not counting a two-player game in the GOAT).

So far in S37, we have had five two FJ player games and one one-player game out of 28 total.
User avatar
Picked Off
Jeopardy! Contestant
Posts: 347
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 4:01 pm
Contact:

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Picked Off »

I also expected a reversal on "sprint." Key to getting Final was knowing the Pritzker's field, so it was a quick solve for me. We've had plenty of people finish DJ in the red this year, but it was still unusual seeing one player barely factor into the game. Bad break for Jennifer.
Season 27 player and lifelong fan
talkingaway
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 970
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2019 11:59 am

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by talkingaway »

Bamaman wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:12 am In S36 there were eight games out of 190 that had a two-player FJ. (Not counting a two-player game in the GOAT).

So far in S37, we have had five two FJ player games and one one-player game out of 28 total.
Thanks, I was curious about this. I was curious - I know I said it felt like more contestants had been eliminated this season so far than all of last season, but I would have probably added even and just one shy to hedge my bets.
User avatar
MarkBarrett
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 16467
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:37 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by MarkBarrett »

reddpen wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 3:03 am
MarkBarrett wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:22 pm Es ist fertig: http://www.j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=6854
In both the J and DJ rounds, You --> Your in a category heading.
Fixed, thanks. Once is bad enough. Twice? Strange error.
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: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by opusthepenguin »

Another two votes for sprint. The missus and I both thought it worked and expected a reversal. Then we totally forgot about it so we weren't surprised when none came.

Put me in the category of those who didn't know what the Pritzker prize was for but guessed right on FJ anyway.
User avatar
Newhausen
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:02 pm

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Newhausen »

I also didn't know expressly what the Pritzker award was for, but as a former resident of Illinois, I know that governor JB Pritzker's fortune came from owning hotels, and knowing that I was looking for a profession that Chinese students would be interested in, I was able to get from hotels to "it's probably something about buildings" to architecture.
BrigadierSolo13 wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:12 pmThis. I was getting excited at the prospects of fast talkers and quick pickers like Aimee and Colin last week. This week has been the opposite with slow stumpers and too much chit chat before pondering the next clue. Only 54 clues and 2 DD's just isn't fun (10% less fun technically) to watch no matter how close the scores.
I suppose that's a matter of personal taste, because I'm quite fine with only revealing 90% of the board if it means contestants get a chance to show some humanity on stage.

Still, though, find the damn Daily Double.
Golf
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 2723
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 pm

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Golf »

Regarding the "sprint" response, the clue starts with "Taking this.....". You take a shortcut, everybody has heard of this. I've never heard of taking a sprint. You run a sprint, you don't take a sprint.

But yes, the clue should have been pinned better.
User avatar
This Is Kirk!
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 6562
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:35 am
Location: Seattle

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by This Is Kirk! »

alietr wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:36 pm +1 for they should have taken 'sprint'. It fit the clue.
Totally expected a reversal on that.
User avatar
morbeedo
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 3065
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 12:58 pm

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by morbeedo »

talkingaway wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:24 pm I can't see how "sprint" is wrong for the marathon clue. Fits the category - S to T. Fits the clue perfectly - if you "take a sprint", then you will go up in the standings, but in all probability, it won't last for long due to exhaustion. Compare to "shortcut", where, if it's not discovered, you can stay high in the standings for as long as you want. The only quibble is that "take a sprint" is slightly awkward phrasing - awkward, but not non-grammatical, and not completely non-idiomatic. You could say "walk for 4 minutes, then take a sprint for 2, then walk for 2 more...", which sounds pretty natural. I'd probably just say "sprint for 2", but I'm sure someone's said it.
Sprint does not fit the clue IMO

The standings are determined only when the race is over. A sprint might put you into the leader position *during the race, but then you would likely bonk and fade away.

There's a guy who analyzes race results to find cheaters based on data anomalies and then have them expelled from the race results.
https://www.marathoninvestigation.com/category/marathon
Last edited by morbeedo on Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:15 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
This Is Kirk!
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 6562
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:35 am
Location: Seattle

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by This Is Kirk! »

morbeedo wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:04 pm The standings are determined only when the race is over.
Good point. At least it's a valid argument, but I still think "sprint" should have been accepted. If you go to NFL.com, for example, you can see the "standings" even though the season is still in progress.
User avatar
alietr
Site Admin
Posts: 8978
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:20 pm
Location: Bethesda, MD

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by alietr »

morbeedo wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:04 pm The standings are determined only when the race is over. A sprint might put you into the leader position *during the race, but then you would likely bonk and fade away.
So you've never heard of someone referring to "the current standings"? I don't think standings are reserved for the final outcome. I'd even say that when referring to the final outcome, most people would say "here are the final standings".

I would agree that you normally wouldn't use the phrase "take a sprint" but there's certainly nothing with putting it that way. Coach: "Go take a sprint down to the 50 yard line!" Works for me.

He should have been ruled correct.
User avatar
MarkBarrett
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 16467
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:37 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by MarkBarrett »

alietr wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:49 pm
morbeedo wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:04 pm The standings are determined only when the race is over. A sprint might put you into the leader position *during the race, but then you would likely bonk and fade away.
So you've never heard of someone referring to "the current standings"? I don't think standings are reserved for the final outcome. I'd even say that when referring to the final outcome, most people would say "here are the final standings".

I would agree that you normally wouldn't use the phrase "take a sprint" but there's certainly nothing with putting it that way. Coach: "Go take a sprint down to the 50 yard line!" Works for me.

He should have been ruled correct.
Have we seen a shot of judges row this season? Is there some kind of difference in all hands on deck, now? There have been many negs overruled in the past for shakier reasons when the clue's wording left it open for something not anticipated. I got short cut, but would have had no objection if sprint had been acceptable as well.

I suspect we might see more clues/responses where we question the final decisions.
User avatar
morbeedo
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 3065
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 12:58 pm

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by morbeedo »

alietr wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:49 pm
morbeedo wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:04 pm The standings are determined only when the race is over. A sprint might put you into the leader position *during the race, but then you would likely bonk and fade away.
So you've never heard of someone referring to "the current standings"? I don't think standings are reserved for the final outcome. I'd even say that when referring to the final outcome, most people would say "here are the final standings".

I would agree that you normally wouldn't use the phrase "take a sprint" but there's certainly nothing with putting it that way. Coach: "Go take a sprint down to the 50 yard line!" Works for me.

He should have been ruled correct.
I haven’t heard standings used that way in the marathon context. It’s a 2+ hour event. They track the leader pack and it’s a fluid situation until someone breaks away to cross the finish line. There’s no natural break in the middle of the event to check in on standings, as they do, say, in Olympic diving

Swapping “results” for “standings” would weaken the case for sprint

And I agree “take a sprint” is not an expression with any currency in American English
User avatar
AFRET CMS
JBOARDIE OF THE MONTH!
Posts: 1764
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 2:48 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by AFRET CMS »

MarkBarrett wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:00 pm In case anyone was curious about Jennifer's tattoos:
Spoiler
Image
Nope, with a sample size of 2 the last name Shrum is perfect for winning game 1. Scott has more work to do to match our Kevin here.
No relation, but now that there are TWO hits in the archive I have to be rooting for him. Hope he continues to do well.

And if we can make more invalid statistical inferences, we can note that it took 33 years for the first one, and less than four more years for the second. With an accelerating trend, that means we can probably expect another one next week.
Last edited by AFRET CMS on Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I'm not the defending Jeopardy! champion. But I have played one on TV.
Post Reply