Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall

Archivists
Fan-created archive of games and players
Posts: 6704
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 2:04 pm
Contact:

Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Archivists »

J! Round
Archivists
Fan-created archive of games and players
Posts: 6704
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 2:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Archivists »

DJ! Round
Archivists
Fan-created archive of games and players
Posts: 6704
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 2:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Archivists »

Box Score.png
Box Score.png (130.26 KiB) Viewed 684 times
Last edited by Archivists on Wed Feb 21, 2024 6:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
theFJguy
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 2094
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 2:21 pm

Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by theFJguy »

FINAL JEOPARDY! CATEGORY
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS

FINAL JEOPARDY! CLUE
He’s the most recent presidential candidate to have officially declared his opponent in that campaign the victor

Kat Jepson: 8400-8400=0
Alex Gordon: 10200-8601=1599
Jesse Matheny: 18800+1601=20401 (Finalist)

Correct response:
Spoiler
Al Gore (Kat – McCain) (Alex – Mitt Romney)

Daily Doubles
Jesse: 1600-1600
Jesse: 2000+2000
Jesse: 6800+6800

Coryats
Kat: 8400
Alex: 10200
Jesse: 14400

Combined: 33,000

Scores at the end of the Jeopardy! Round
Kat: 5600
Alex: 2600
Jesse: 2000
User avatar
MarkBarrett
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 16549
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:37 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by MarkBarrett »

Alex opened with a run in THE 13 COLONIES. Kat did the best over the remaining 25 clues of the J! Round to take the lead even if Jesse solved DD1.

Jesse maxed out DD2 & DD3 but did not have a runaway. It didn't matter as Jesse stormed through the front door with the sole solve of the FJ! clue.

Coryats of the finalists:
Mira 16000
Deb 14600
Jesse 14400

Aw, no one knew the Steve McQueen motorcycle movie. Cooler, 30 days.

The FJ! clue had me fail with the same name Alex wrote. In my head I was thinking concede and not grasping how "officially" the wording meant.
User avatar
MarkBarrett
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 16549
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:37 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by MarkBarrett »

We welcome "boobage" to the archive: https://j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=8827
Golf
Wet Paper Bag Charmer
Posts: 2738
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 pm

Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Golf »

Alex's wager once again underscores how contestants don't know how to adjust to these tournament games where nothing matters except winning.

The answer to Action Movies $800 is two words.

Mark Barrett, I thought you'd be...... bigger. :lol:
User avatar
MarkBarrett
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 16549
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:37 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by MarkBarrett »

Golf wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 2:59 pm Alex's wager once again underscores how contestants don't know how to adjust to these tournament games where nothing matters except winning.

The answer to Action Movies $800 is two words.

Mark Barrett, I thought you'd be...... bigger. :lol:
Thanks for the correction and the laugh. Fixed.
DCFan1911
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2023 10:30 am

Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by DCFan1911 »

MarkBarrett wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:41 pm The FJ! clue had me fail with the same name Alex wrote. In my head I was thinking concede and not grasping how "officially" the wording meant.
It was a very bad clue, you kind of had to read the minds of the writers to get this one. Colloquially most would consider delivering a concession speech to be one candidate officially declaring their opponent the winner, the legal aspect notwithstanding. Kudos to Jesse for reasoning this one out!
Leander
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 2195
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:18 am

Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Leander »

    DCFan1911 wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 8:22 pm
    MarkBarrett wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:41 pm The FJ! clue had me fail with the same name Alex wrote. In my head I was thinking concede and not grasping how "officially" the wording meant.
    It was a very bad clue, you kind of had to read the minds of the writers to get this one. Colloquially most would consider delivering a concession speech to be one candidate officially declaring their opponent the winner, the legal aspect notwithstanding. Kudos to Jesse for reasoning this one out!
    That’s the way I read it and came up with Romney too.
    Golf
    Wet Paper Bag Charmer
    Posts: 2738
    Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 pm

    Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

    Post by Golf »

    MarkBarrett wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:41 pm The FJ! clue had me fail with the same name Alex wrote. In my head I was thinking concede and not grasping how "officially" the wording meant.
    DCFan1911 wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 8:22 pm It was a very bad clue, you kind of had to read the minds of the writers to get this one. Colloquially most would consider delivering a concession speech to be one candidate officially declaring their opponent the winner, the legal aspect notwithstanding. Kudos to Jesse for reasoning this one out!
    I thought it to be a weak clue as well. On first reading I thought it was Hillary, but at last check Hillary is not a he. So then if it's not her then they're looking for Gore.

    But yeah, if you have to get inside what the writers are looking for then it's a bad clue.
    davey
    Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
    Posts: 6053
    Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:55 pm

    Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

    Post by davey »

    MarkBarrett wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 2:43 pm We welcome "boobage" to the archive: https://j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=8827
    I always like to note that Hedwig and the...refers to another part of the anatomy we don't expect to hear about on J!... :)
    davey
    Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
    Posts: 6053
    Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:55 pm

    Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

    Post by davey »

    Golf wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 8:37 pm
    MarkBarrett wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:41 pm The FJ! clue had me fail with the same name Alex wrote. In my head I was thinking concede and not grasping how "officially" the wording meant.
    DCFan1911 wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 8:22 pm It was a very bad clue, you kind of had to read the minds of the writers to get this one. Colloquially most would consider delivering a concession speech to be one candidate officially declaring their opponent the winner, the legal aspect notwithstanding. Kudos to Jesse for reasoning this one out!
    I thought it to be a weak clue as well. On first reading I thought it was Hillary, but at last check Hillary is not a he. So then if it's not her then they're looking for Gore.
    How do you figure? If you think Hillary is eligible at all and you've eliminated not-Trump, then the next response is Romney...
    DCFan1911
    Loyal Jeopardista
    Posts: 138
    Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2023 10:30 am

    Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

    Post by DCFan1911 »

    davey wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 9:08 pm
    Golf wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 8:37 pm
    MarkBarrett wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:41 pm The FJ! clue had me fail with the same name Alex wrote. In my head I was thinking concede and not grasping how "officially" the wording meant.
    I thought it to be a weak clue as well. On first reading I thought it was Hillary, but at last check Hillary is not a he. So then if it's not her then they're looking for Gore.
    How do you figure? If you think Hillary is eligible at all and you've eliminated not-Trump, then the next response is Romney...
    There's also another problem - the Electoral Count Act is the statute that directs the Vice President of the United States to preside over the counting of the electoral votes - but legal and constitutional experts are, to say the least, divided over whether or not the VP has any actual legal authority here. Many say he is merely presiding over a ceremony - and that the results of the ceremony are a mere formality and not binding. Thus it's not even certain that the VP ever makes a truly official declaration of the winner of the electoral vote. This was an argument Vice President Pence to President Trump three years ago - that he had no legal authority to interfere in the electoral vote counting as the election was already decided.

    Seriously, I think the writers really messed up here. If this were regular play I'd be pushing to have both of the runners up brought back, given that the clue as written either had no correct response, or multiple correct responses. It's similar - but worse than - the 2022 DD that Lawrence Long was wrongly negged on (Monroe/JQ Adams were both correct responses, but they counted Monroe wrong).
    Golf
    Wet Paper Bag Charmer
    Posts: 2738
    Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 pm

    Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

    Post by Golf »

    Golf wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 8:37 pm I thought it to be a weak clue as well. On first reading I thought it was Hillary, but at last check Hillary is not a he. So then if it's not her then they're looking for Gore.
    davey wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 9:08 pm How do you figure? If you think Hillary is eligible at all and you've eliminated not-Trump, then the next response is Romney...
    Because if we're looking at it as who is the last presidential candidate that conceded, we know it's not Trump. Next in line is Hillary and she did. But we know it's not her because of the pronoun. So if Hillary conceded and that's not the answer, then it's not Romney either because he conceded as well. In other words, there's nothing different between Hillary and Romney in this regard so now we've got to look at this differently. So it takes us all the way back to Gore and the more official decision and such that went on in 2000.

    These kinds of discussions and having to read between the lines is a pretty sure indication it's a crappy clue.
    davey
    Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
    Posts: 6053
    Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:55 pm

    Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

    Post by davey »

    DCFan1911 wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 9:21 pm
    davey wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 9:08 pm
    Golf wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 8:37 pm
    MarkBarrett wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:41 pm The FJ! clue had me fail with the same name Alex wrote. In my head I was thinking concede and not grasping how "officially" the wording meant.
    I thought it to be a weak clue as well. On first reading I thought it was Hillary, but at last check Hillary is not a he. So then if it's not her then they're looking for Gore.
    How do you figure? If you think Hillary is eligible at all and you've eliminated not-Trump, then the next response is Romney...
    There's also another problem - the Electoral Count Act is the statute that directs the Vice President of the United States to preside over the counting of the electoral votes - but legal and constitutional experts are, to say the least, divided over whether or not the VP has any actual legal authority here. Many say he is merely presiding over a ceremony - and that the results of the ceremony are a mere formality and not binding. Thus it's not even certain that the VP ever makes a truly official declaration of the winner of the electoral vote. This was an argument Vice President Pence to President Trump three years ago - that he had no legal authority to interfere in the electoral vote counting as the election was already decided.
    The ceremony consists of the President of the Senate officially declaring the winner of the electoral college vote. There's no controversy about that. Don't you think ceremonies by their nature are "official"?
    DCFan1911
    Loyal Jeopardista
    Posts: 138
    Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2023 10:30 am

    Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

    Post by DCFan1911 »

    davey wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 9:35 pm
    DCFan1911 wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 9:21 pm
    davey wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 9:08 pm
    Golf wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 8:37 pm
    MarkBarrett wrote: Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:41 pm The FJ! clue had me fail with the same name Alex wrote. In my head I was thinking concede and not grasping how "officially" the wording meant.
    I thought it to be a weak clue as well. On first reading I thought it was Hillary, but at last check Hillary is not a he. So then if it's not her then they're looking for Gore.
    How do you figure? If you think Hillary is eligible at all and you've eliminated not-Trump, then the next response is Romney...
    There's also another problem - the Electoral Count Act is the statute that directs the Vice President of the United States to preside over the counting of the electoral votes - but legal and constitutional experts are, to say the least, divided over whether or not the VP has any actual legal authority here. Many say he is merely presiding over a ceremony - and that the results of the ceremony are a mere formality and not binding. Thus it's not even certain that the VP ever makes a truly official declaration of the winner of the electoral vote. This was an argument Vice President Pence to President Trump three years ago - that he had no legal authority to interfere in the electoral vote counting as the election was already decided.
    The ceremony consists of the President of the Senate officially declaring the winner of the electoral college vote. There's no controversy about that. Don't you think ceremonies by their nature are "official"?
    The ceremony is official but it has no binding, legal result. Thus the VP "declaring" a winner is a formality - it is not a constitutional requirement and it's debatable at best as to whether or not it has any legal weight.

    Let's put it this way - when the VP is hustled over to the Hill for a tie-breaking vote in the Senate, that is not merely ceremonial, it is an official action on their part to cast that vote. If the vote is 50-50 and the VP votes yea, he has officially broken the tie, and the bill has officially passed the Senate. Until the VP cast that vote, the bill had not passed, and the legislation could not move forward. In the case of counting electoral votes, the VP is merely presiding over a ceremony - they have no legal authority to declare a winner. The winner has already been officially declared, at least as far as the public is concerned, and it's not clear how the courts would rule if the VP refused to declare the winner of an election or declared one at odds with the votes that were cast.
    jamie
    Loyal Jeopardista
    Posts: 105
    Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 12:19 am

    Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

    Post by jamie »

    The problem I have is that neither "officially" nor "declare" have ironclad definitions here. "Declare" can mean making an announcement that has consequence by the fact of its making, but it can also mean simply to assert or affirm. And "officially"? I can find it defined as "in a formal and public way" -- so how does a concession speech not count? As a fun experiment, try asking people the following two questions:

    1) Did Donald Trump officially declare his opponent, Joe Biden, to be the victor in the 2020 presidential election?

    2) Did Hillary Clinton officially declare her opponent, Donald Trump, to be the victor in the 2016 presidential election?

    According to the premise of the clue, the answer to both questions is no. But I'd bet that most people -- at least people who are aware of the relevant events -- would answer no to the first question and yes to the second.

    It's possible that if this clue had run several years ago, no one would be complaining. No one might have thought it referred to a non-concession, because non-concessions didn't happen then, and people's minds would have gone to the "official" declaration much more easily. But, we live in an era where these things do happen. I have no doubt that this was in the writers' minds, and so the whole thing smacks of communicating badly so as to induce a misunderstanding, and that leaves something of a bad taste in my mouth. (If they weren't hoping for that, it would have been easy enough to word the clue as, "He’s the most recent presidential candidate to be the person to officially declare his opponent in that campaign the victor.")

    (For the record, I went with Romney, thinking that maybe Clinton hadn't conceded as explicitly as I remembered she had.)
    User avatar
    billiej
    Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
    Posts: 799
    Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:56 pm
    Location: Maine

    Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

    Post by billiej »

    I immediately figured the clue was referring to a sitting VP, and my first thought was Gore. The thing that made me question that response was the SCOTUS involvement in that election, and whether or not that changed who made the "official declaration". Fortunately, I ran out of time before I could come up with an alternative, so I stuck with my initial response.

    Pretty messy all around, it seems.
    Bamaman
    Also Receiving Votes
    Posts: 12925
    Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm

    Re: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

    Post by Bamaman »

    Technically, we don’t know who won until they open the box and count the electoral vote. So while we are relatively certain of what is going to happen there is always the chance of a faithless elector gumming up the works. (As several did in 2016 and one going rogue in 2000 really would have been fun).

    So while it is a ceremonial declaration, the VP is in charge of the count and it is up to him (or her in 2025) to look at the final tally and say who won. Not until then do we know who is president-elect.

    That being said, I agree it isn’t the best FJ in the world. I got it but I think it would have been a better question in LL where you have a chance to sit down and think about what it is asking.

    I got it, but I’m a dork about stuff like this.
    Last edited by Bamaman on Wed Feb 21, 2024 11:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
    Post Reply