MarkBarrett wrote: ↑
Sun Nov 15, 2020 12:05 am
floridagator wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 14, 2020 11:03 pm
Did John briefly have a run away before he bungled the 3rd Daily Double? I was just watching for something to happen. Either for John to turn it into a run away for good or for the third contestant to suddenly mess things up for the champ.
This feature makes it easy to follow lockville. http://www.j-archive.com/showscores.php?game_id=6866
John had a lock from J1 to DJ7. John did have a runaway at DJ28 and then lost his lock right back when he did not convert DD3.
Yup, he hit the sweet spot of the exact wrong bet.
With 25,800 vs 12,800, if he bets low (ie under 200), he's counting on Kate not getting the next clue no matter what he does to keep his runaway. That's reasonable - he's been the only one to get a clue in the category, so Kate may not be strong enough for the last clue. And he may not feel confident enough to get it right.
If he bets high enough - anything over 3,800 - he's protecting his lead from Kate getting the next clue. Still reasonable - but even a 3,800 bet could leave him as bad off as 22,000 vs 14,800. It's probably not a GOOD bet, but it's at least can be defended.
But he showed exactly why his middle-of-the-road bet was so wrong.
I have no idea how much "reasonable" time they give him. If there are still 20 clues to go in the game, you shouldn't need much time to decide, since it's mostly irrelevant how much gameplay is left. But with 1 clue on the board, having a 30 second (off camera) time-out where you get to do the math for the two different scenarios might help.
The problem is that the ideal low bet is so low that it's going to stick out like a sore thumb - it would have the be less than the value of any clue on the board. Frankly, I'd like to think I'd bet $5 even in a wheelhouse category. When I watched it live, I saw the numbers, did the quick 2:1 math, and said "screw it, just bet the minimum." Blinding lights have power, though, and I don't know if my math would hold up at the lectern.