Second-chance tourney coming

[harrumph]

I think they should let 4th podium winners into the tournament.

[Xu Donym]

Wow, didn't expect so much negativity here lol.

Consider the audience here. Lots of folks who are competing to fill limited spaces on the show.

Maybe the J! production staff could soothe hurt feelings by announcing that the Tournament of Losers would replace two weeks of re-runs, such that nobody competing for a first-run spot would be losing any opportunity to become a contestant because of the new Tournament.

[Woof]

I think they should let 4th podium winners into the tournament.

Hear, hear!

[econgator]

Maybe the J! production staff could soothe hurt feelings by announcing that the Tournament of Losers would replace two weeks of re-runs, such that nobody competing for a first-run spot would be losing any opportunity to become a contestant because of the new Tournament.

That would be fine.

[cosmos]

Amy Schneider would have been an obvious choice for a second chance if she had lost her first game, and all it would have taken was a correct FJ response from Andrew He. Amy would have had more correct responses and a higher Coryat than Andrew, a 5x winner, with only one wrong for each.

[Volante]

Wow, didn't expect so much negativity here lol.

Consider the audience here. Lots of folks who are competing to fill limited spaces on the show.

Maybe the J! production staff could soothe hurt feelings by announcing that the Tournament of Losers would replace two weeks of re-runs, such that nobody competing for a first-run spot would be losing any opportunity to become a contestant because of the new Tournament.

Or that'd be a prime time special...cause they're doing that now...

[opusthepenguin]

They run 230 shows a year. New shows on Christmas and New Year's if they fall on a weekday. Veterans Day, MLK Day, Presidents' Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day. New show for each one. The only holiday that doesn't get a new show is Labor Day because they're taking their month and a half break. They could cut out all holidays and still be doing yeoman's work. They could shave 20 shows off the year and still be maintaining an impressive schedule.

Jeopardy! is doing way more than anyone has a right to expect or demand. Yes, if they run a new specialty show in the regular time slot, that will slightly reduce the already minuscule chances of getting the call for those in the pool.

[CailinGaoilge]

They run 230 shows a year. New shows on Christmas and New Year's if they fall on a weekday. Veterans Day, MLK Day, Presidents' Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day. New show for each one. The only holiday that doesn't get a new show is Labor Day because they're taking their month and a half break. They could cut out all holidays and still be doing yeoman's work. They could shave 20 shows off the year and still be maintaining an impressive schedule.

Jeopardy! is doing way more than anyone has a right to expect or demand. Yes, if they run a new specialty show in the regular time slot, that will slightly reduce the already minuscule chances of getting the call for those in the pool.

And they're already putting some tournaments into prime time - College would usually be in the normal schedule. There's another 20 slots freed up.

I'm another who's excited.

[earendel]

So I'm the only person who likes it?

Edit: I am not. Reddit overwhelmingly loves it. I think the sentiment here is in a distinct minority.

I've been suggesting a Tournament of Losers for years. I like the idea a lot. There are plenty of contestants who have run into buzz saw superchamps. Bring back the ones who made the strongest showing--e.g. the ones who would've won if KJ had missed FJ. Here's my original post from almost 9 years ago (complete with a vintage bonehead mistake in which I thought Julia Lazarus was the returning champ in KJ's first game):

viewtopic.php?p=62965#p62965

I remember this discussion - there was talk about a "Ken Jennings Losers" tournament.

[nserven]

I guess I’m skeptical over how much of a demand for this kind of tournament there really is. Sure, there were some challengers over the years who put up solid performances against the superchamps but still lost, and maybe a different draw would have resulted in a better fate. But that’s really true for any player. Doing it for the sake of “fairness,” kindness, being a good sport, whatever, does not make a compelling case, IMO, and honestly, does the general audience even remember these players? I’d need the archive to identify names, personally. This feels a bit like the show patting its own back.

Are they going to bring back Thomas Hurley (the ‘Emanciptation Proclamation’ kid), who is now an adult? Are those the kinds of situations--the ones that prompted all the internet outrage--that call for second chances?

[DBear]

I would have much more interest in this than a Professors tournament. Just sayin'

[alietr]

I wonder about this from a psychological standpoint. When I lost, I was pretty (OK, very) bummed, but at least there was closure. I knew I was never going on again. But if they have this dangling out there, I think I would have been absolutely tormented about whether I would be getting another try or not.

[squarekara]

Are they going to bring back Thomas Hurley (the ‘Emanciptation Proclamation’ kid), who is now an adult? Are those the kinds of situations--the ones that prompted all the internet outrage--that call for second chances?

Wilbur Farley

[Xu Donym]

I wonder about this from a psychological standpoint. When I lost, I was pretty (OK, very) bummed, but at least there was closure. I knew I was never going on again. But if they have this dangling out there, I think I would have been absolutely tormented about whether I would be getting another try or not.

What this Tournament of Losers does is make plain what has always been a barely-acknowledged feature of Jeopardy! casting. It's not about scoring 50/50 on the intake test. It's a balance between having a score good enough to hold your own during the game, and having that intangible individual charm/personality/quirkiness that will connect with viewers. It's a subjective measure, and no doubt frustrates the folks who get high scores on the test but wonder why they are not selected.

The Tournament of Losers merely adds one more layer of subjectivity. Some may make the cut simply because they had a memorable loss to a super-champ. For some contestants, their little on-screen "interview" may tip the scale, if they connected well with viewers and producers. Producers might factor in potential re-contestants' buzz percentages; an excellent buzzer might have been crushed by an exceptional one and be worth re-trying. Others may get the re-call because they lost on a controversial ruling that wasn't so blatant as to require a re-invite in the regular season. The possibilities are almost endless.

Which makes me wonder... now that there will be a Tournament of Losers, maybe they should stage a special tournament dedicated ONLY to contestants who finished in the red before Final Jeopardy. Let's see how Patrick Pearce does against Wolf Blitzer!

[Ironhorse]

Are they going to bring back Thomas Hurley (the ‘Emanciptation Proclamation’ kid), who is now an adult? Are those the kinds of situations--the ones that prompted all the internet outrage--that call for second chances?

Wilbur Farley

He was the Sgt. Pepper guy, right?

[squarekara]

Are they going to bring back Thomas Hurley (the ‘Emanciptation Proclamation’ kid), who is now an adult? Are those the kinds of situations--the ones that prompted all the internet outrage--that call for second chances?

Wilbur Farley

He was the Sgt. Pepper guy, right?

Yes. He had the highest score going into FJ and the highest Coryat.

[harrumph]

The reason why they are doing expanded tournaments in prime time is that Jeopardy! survived the ratings decline for almost all other shows, and the show becomes an asset to be used. I wouldn't be surprised if they hired more writers to handle the increased workload.

[AFRET CMS]

I wonder about this from a psychological standpoint. When I lost, I was pretty (OK, very) bummed, but at least there was closure. I knew I was never going on again. But if they have this dangling out there, I think I would have been absolutely tormented about whether I would be getting another try or not.

Hmm, so you're saying some of us should be happy we lost early enough not to have to worry about it? I'll think on that....

[triviawayne]

I wonder about this from a psychological standpoint. When I lost, I was pretty (OK, very) bummed, but at least there was closure. I knew I was never going on again. But if they have this dangling out there, I think I would have been absolutely tormented about whether I would be getting another try or not.

could be worse, you could be told there's going to be a 2nd chance week, and they want you on it, then don't invite you to come play (mentioning this for a friend)

[Ironhorse]

Was Davies around Millionaire when they hosted their "special chance" event when they invited back people who won nothing? I'm thinking in terms of Patrick Pearce, who set the record for lowest J! score last summer.