Thursday, October 8, 2015 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

[dlbookman]

Waitwaitwait, fivethirtyeight is analyzing Jeopardy! too??

Back in May:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ken ... t-of-time/

[opusthepenguin]

Loved the Peabody & Sherman category, as I loved them as a kid (combining history with bad puns? Two of my favourite things! But I have two bones to pick with it. Firstly, much has been made of Chris Parnell voicing Mr. Peabody, while it's nice to see buzz, that was *not* the voice of Mr. Peabody, not at all. Bill Scott had a certain quality to the voice, a certain air that is unmistakable. I would easily have forgiven Chris Parnell if he had tried to imitate Bill Scott's take on the character, but that's nowhere near what I feel it should be. Second bone to pick: Did no one catch Peabody's bad pun at the end of the Napoleon one: "Of Corsican", and it being captioned "Of course he can"?

Of course I did. Agree on the voicing. Sherman's way off too. For me it wrecked the whole bit. I don't know about the actor playing Sherman, but Chris Parnell is a skilled voice artist. I love his work on Archer. But either he made a bad choice for voicing Peabody or this just isn't a good fit for him. Maybe the producers wanted to cast a "name" for the part when auditions would have been a better way to go. Maybe the director had a vision for how Peabody & Sherman would be so much funnier if they didn't have funny voices.

[opusthepenguin]

I absolutely loved Erik's "zero". It didn't come across as mocking to me--I interpreted it as good-natured and self-effacing.

This. Absolutely this.

Here's a screenshot of the moment when Matt uncovered the last available DD.



Erik and Sameer are great sports who can find the humor in being steamrolled WHILE IT'S HAPPENING. My hat is off to them both.

[gnash]

I answered "Russian and Greek" for FJ. Think they would have given it to me? I know "Russian" is probably not as accurate as "Cyrillic," but reading up on the history, Peter the Great seems to be largely responsible for the modern Cyrillic alphabet and the Soviet Union mandated and standardized usage in most or all the countries that use it today.

No way. "Russian alphabet" is like "English alphabet". It cannot be an answer to one of three official EU alphabets. Furthermore, even if one were lax on that principle and accepted "Bulgarian", "Russian" would still be unacceptable as there is no Russian-speaking country in the EU. (Although Latvia has a large Russian minority, only Latvian is its official language.)

[dhkendall]

I answered "Russian and Greek" for FJ. Think they would have given it to me? I know "Russian" is probably not as accurate as "Cyrillic," but reading up on the history, Peter the Great seems to be largely responsible for the modern Cyrillic alphabet and the Soviet Union mandated and standardized usage in most or all the countries that use it today.

No way. "Russian alphabet" is like "English alphabet". It cannot be an answer to one of three official EU alphabets. Furthermore, even if one were lax on that principle and accepted "Bulgarian", "Russian" would still be unacceptable as there is no Russian-speaking country in the EU. (Although Latvia has a large Russian minority, only Latvian is its official language.)

Seconded. "Russian alphabet" is like referring to the language you speak as "American". I know that sets several boardies' teeth on edge, this should too.

(That's the second time recently I've completely agreed with gnash. Either he or I need to go to the doctor's for a checkup right away!)

[This Is Kirk!]

Chill, people. He's still only halfway to Julia territory.

While Julia's 20 wins are impressive, she was never this dominant. I never had the feeling that her opponents were on suicide missions.

I feel like this, too, but I wonder if it's more of a perception that isn't born out by stats. Julia's personality being completely different than Matt's has at least something to do with it.

[Woppy T]

Erik and Sameer are great sports who can find the humor in being steamrolled WHILE IT'S HAPPENING. My hat is off to them both.

Agreed, plus Erik had a great look with that hair. I'm trying to think whom he reminded me of. Bob Eubanks?

[molly427]

Chill, people. He's still only halfway to Julia territory.

While Julia's 20 wins are impressive, she was never this dominant. I never had the feeling that her opponents were on suicide missions.

I feel like this, too, but I wonder if it's more of a perception that isn't born out by stats. Julia's personality being completely different than Matt's has at least something to do with it.

I was thinking the same thing. They have different demeanors and Julia's seeming laid-back affability, and the perception of her as less of a threat (which, realistically, is probably for some based simply on her being a woman) if anything probably helped her get to where she did. Anything could happen and regardless of how anyone "felt" during her games the outcome is clear, so while I have my own gut feelings about how Matt will do overall, I really don't know. Which is fun!

[molly427]

Please, don't ever change MTGcollegestudent.

*Don't ever outchange

[hbomb1947]

Chill, people. He's still only halfway to Julia territory.

While Julia's 20 wins are impressive, she was never this dominant. I never had the feeling that her opponents were on suicide missions.

I remember feeling that way when I watched her, but yesterday stumbled across an analysis on the FiveThirtyEight blog that showed 57% of her wins were runaways. That's only marginally less than Arthur Chu's (58%), a bit more than David Madden's (50%), and significantly less than Ken Jennings's (87%). Matt, currently at 80% runaway wins is definitely in elite territory, by this metric.

When I talk about Matt's dominance vis a vis Julia, it's not just the runaways -- it's the Coryats, and the scores. Having a lock game with $30K or $40K-plus going into FJ is more impressive than having a lock game with, say, $17,800.

[Vanya]

I answered "Russian and Greek" for FJ. Think they would have given it to me? I know "Russian" is probably not as accurate as "Cyrillic," but reading up on the history, Peter the Great seems to be largely responsible for the modern Cyrillic alphabet and the Soviet Union mandated and standardized usage in most or all the countries that use it today.

No way. "Russian alphabet" is like "English alphabet". It cannot be an answer to one of three official EU alphabets. Furthermore, even if one were lax on that principle and accepted "Bulgarian", "Russian" would still be unacceptable as there is no Russian-speaking country in the EU. (Although Latvia has a large Russian minority, only Latvian is its official language.)

Not only that, there are different versions of Cyrillic. There is Russian Cyrillic, Bulgarian Cyrillic, Ukrainian Cyrillic, etc. And there is Old Church Slavonic, dating from the 14th century, still used by Orthodox churches. So unless the EU specifies one or more of those alphabets, it is imprecise for them to say Cyrillic is an official alphabet.

[hbomb1947]

Chill, people. He's still only halfway to Julia territory.

While Julia's 20 wins are impressive, she was never this dominant. I never had the feeling that her opponents were on suicide missions.

I feel like this, too, but I wonder if it's more of a perception that isn't born out by stats. Julia's personality being completely different than Matt's has at least something to do with it.

It has nothing to do with Julia's personality, although I think Matt's "game" personality is an asset in intimidating his opponents. Julia's average Coryat in regular-play games was $19,400, which was pretty good. Matt's has been $25,000, which is phenomenal. (Granted, he's done it over just under half as many games, but I think his sample size is large enough for the difference to be meaningful.) And as mentioned above, Matt has had runaways in 80% of his games, compared to 57% for Julia. Those are objective metrics. Also, much has been made of Matt's relative underperformance on FJ (it's at 60% now, I think), but Julia herself had an FJ percentage of 62%. If the two faced each other, Matt would face a tougher challenge than he has from most of his opponents, but he would have to be favored.

[This Is Kirk!]

Chill, people. He's still only halfway to Julia territory.

While Julia's 20 wins are impressive, she was never this dominant. I never had the feeling that her opponents were on suicide missions.

I feel like this, too, but I wonder if it's more of a perception that isn't born out by stats. Julia's personality being completely different than Matt's has at least something to do with it.

It has nothing to do with Julia's personality. Her average Coryat in regular-play games was $19,400, which was pretty good. Matt's has been $25,000, which is phenomenal. And as mentioned above, Matt has had runaways in 80% of his games, compared to 57% for Julia. Those are objective metrics. If the two faced each other, Matt would face a tougher challenge than he has from most of his opponents, but he would have to be favored.

OK, so the stats do show Matt is the stronger player, but I still feel like their personalities are a factor. Matt comes across as a bit of an automaton. Julia did not.

[brick]

Chill, people. He's still only halfway to Julia territory.

While Julia's 20 wins are impressive, she was never this dominant. I never had the feeling that her opponents were on suicide missions.

I feel like this, too, but I wonder if it's more of a perception that isn't born out by stats. Julia's personality being completely different than Matt's has at least something to do with it.

It has nothing to do with Julia's personality, although I think Matt's "game" personality is an asset in intimidating his opponents. Julia's average Coryat in regular-play games was $19,400, which was pretty good. Matt's has been $25,000, which is phenomenal. (Granted, he's done it over just under half as many games, but I think his sample size is large enough for the difference to be meaningful.) And as mentioned above, Matt has had runaways in 80% of his games, compared to 57% for Julia. Those are objective metrics. Also, much has been made of Matt's relative underperformance on FJ (it's at 60% now, I think), but Julia herself had an FJ percentage of 62%. If the two faced each other, Matt would face a tougher challenge than he has from most of his opponents, but he would have to be favored.

It might be interesting to compare Julia's stats over her first 10 games.

[opusthepenguin]

My heart is breaking for everybody else who's shared the stage with Matt so far, though.

Me too. MJL's are the new KJL's.

So let me trot out a longstanding suggestion for all the J! officials who read this board (and probably have my name on their DNA list).[1] Please oh please put together a Tournament of Losers. I'd love to see 45 (or at least 15) contestants brought back for another bite at the apple. This could include contestants who were still in contention going into FJ against KJ or MJ. Add in contestants who lost due to various quirks of fate but were obviously strong. I know there have been some who almost had a lock game but couldn't quite tie it down and lost in FJ. That kind of thing.

Right after MJ concludes his run would be a great time to announce this.

Alternatively, or maybe additionally, bring some of these contestants back for regular play. Put them in a regular game and see if they can win THIS time and go on a streak from there. That would allow for a lot more losers to get a second chance. Then the TOL could be among those who made the best showing.

I know, I know. Some of us haven't been on J! even once. Why should we lower our chances? I get that perspective, but I don't share it. Bringing back a few losers would be exciting. And it wouldn't affect chances by that much. Just like the tie rule. I'm sad it's gone, even if I'm infinitesimally more likely to get on the show because of it.


[1] Well guess what, suckers? "Opus the Penguin" is NOT my real name! Bazinga!

[hbomb1947]

Chill, people. He's still only halfway to Julia territory.

While Julia's 20 wins are impressive, she was never this dominant. I never had the feeling that her opponents were on suicide missions.

I feel like this, too, but I wonder if it's more of a perception that isn't born out by stats. Julia's personality being completely different than Matt's has at least something to do with it.

It has nothing to do with Julia's personality, although I think Matt's "game" personality is an asset in intimidating his opponents. Julia's average Coryat in regular-play games was $19,400, which was pretty good. Matt's has been $25,000, which is phenomenal. (Granted, he's done it over just under half as many games, but I think his sample size is large enough for the difference to be meaningful.) And as mentioned above, Matt has had runaways in 80% of his games, compared to 57% for Julia. Those are objective metrics. Also, much has been made of Matt's relative underperformance on FJ (it's at 60% now, I think), but Julia herself had an FJ percentage of 62%. If the two faced each other, Matt would face a tougher challenge than he has from most of his opponents, but he would have to be favored.

It might be interesting to compare Julia's stats over her first 10 games.

Through her first 10 games, Julia's average Coryat was $17,720.

http://www.j-archive.com/showplayerstat ... er_id=9037

[opusthepenguin]

Chill, people. He's still only halfway to Julia territory.

While Julia's 20 wins are impressive, she was never this dominant. I never had the feeling that her opponents were on suicide missions.

I feel like this, too, but I wonder if it's more of a perception that isn't born out by stats. Julia's personality being completely different than Matt's has at least something to do with it.

I'm sure that's true. But I also remember a large number of triple stumpers in Julia's games. That suggests either that clues in her games were tougher or opposition was weaker and couldn't pick up the trash. Since I was able to pick up a lot of the trash, I leaned toward the second possibility. I started a series of polls, one per game, to see if boardies were also able to get a lot of those triple stumpers correct. This resulted in a huge backlach from people who felt I would never have done this with a male contestant's games. (Completely untrue. I was already planning on going back and doing Arthur Chu when I finished up with Julia. It's only white male contestants that I would never do this to.) Demoralized, I shut the project down after the second poll.

[Volante]

[1] Well guess what, suckers? "Opus the Penguin" is NOT my real name! Bazinga!

Well of course the sobriquet isn't part of your name.

[tiwonge]

Comparing Julia's 1st 10 games to her 2nd 10 games, it looks like she got stronger in the second half of her run (excluding her last game) in almost every aspect of her game except for Final Jeopardy!.

Her J! average increase from $5,900.00 to $7,663.64. Her DJ! average increased from $18,040.00 to $21,545.45. Her Coryat increased from $17,720.00 to $21,309.09. The number of correct questions increased from 22.3 to 25.8. Her number of incorrect questions also increased from 1.7 to 2.1, suggesting she was more aggressive. The amount she won on her DD wagers increased from $1,580.00 to $1,927.27. Her BA increased from 0.389 to 0.439.

The only things that decreased were related to Final Jeopardy--her overall winnings, from $22,061.00 to $20,853.64; her conversion of FJ questions went from 80% to 50% (which might be why the rest of the FJ-related scores dropped), and her FJ wagers went from $4,021.00 to -$691.82.

5 of Julia's first 10 games were lock games. 7 of Julia's second 10 games were lock games.

[Budphrey]

"Opus the Penguin" is NOT my real name! Bazinga!

Jimmy? Jimmy Parsons from out Spring ways?? Dang, bubba, always wondered where yew went!

Not only that, there are different versions of Cyrillic. There is Russian Cyrillic, Bulgarian Cyrillic, Ukrainian Cyrillic, etc. And there is Old Church Slavonic, dating from the 14th century, still used by Orthodox churches. So unless the EU specifies one or more of those alphabets, it is imprecise for them to say Cyrillic is an official alphabet.

The clue itself set the stage for at least that degree of imprecision when it referred to "our" Latin alphabet. There really is no single Latin alphabet unless you stick strictly with the one used for classical Latin, which no living language does these days. English, Spanish, Polish, Czech, Turkish et al. all use variants of the Latin alphabet that can be fairly easily distinguished through their varying usages of diacritics alone.

By the way, count me as thinking of Cyrillic first because of the mention of Bulgaria in the clue, then taking about 10 seconds to think of Greek.