Jeopardy

[InSpades]

Last night was the first time he wasn't out of reach at Final Jeopardy.

Pretty sure it was the 2nd non-runaway.

Brad Rutter is actually the all time Jeopardy champion. He was around when the limit was five wins a row, but has won all the Tournament of Champions he's been invited to including beating Jennings. He's never lost a game (except to IBM's computer Watson).

Brad and Ken were the clear 2 best players prior to James. They definitely need a Brad vs. Ken vs. James game (or if you ask me, a week full of games).

[-jk]

Pretty sure it was the 2nd non-runaway.



Brad and Ken were the clear 2 best players prior to James. They definitely need a Brad vs. Ken vs. James game (or if you ask me, a week full of games).

4-way with Watson?

-jk

[Ggallagher]

I'm puzzled by an article that appeared in the Tucson newspaper today. It mentioned a local school teacher who will be appearing on the show in the May 6-17 period when they're having a teachers' tournament.

There was no mention at all in the article as to whether this was a special programming break, or how it fit into what Holzhauer has been doing, or anything else to clarify why James might not be on the show.

Have they had special breaks in the past? When I first saw the headline it made me think "SPOILER ALERT" -- James is gone. But I have to believe if that was the case the leak would have spread all over the internet by now.

[PackMan97]

I'm puzzled by an article that appeared in the Tucson newspaper today. It mentioned a local school teacher who will be appearing on the show in the May 6-17 period when they're having a teachers' tournament.

There was no mention at all in the article as to whether this was a special programming break, or how it fit into what Holzhauer has been doing, or anything else to clarify why James might not be on the show.

Have they had special breaks in the past? When I first saw the headline it made me think "SPOILER ALERT" -- James is gone. But I have to believe if that was the case the leak would have spread all over the internet by now.

Yes, they regularly have all sorts of things. Teen Tournament. College Tournament. Tournament of Champions. etc.

[InSpades]

Yes, they regularly have all sorts of things. Teen Tournament. College Tournament. Tournament of Champions. etc.

At the conclusion of the special event(s) the prior champ returns to continue his or her run. So assuming James survives this week and next week begins the Teachers Tournament then James will get a few weeks off and come back when the tournament is over.

[Jeffrey]

I thought that when Jeopardy first started there was a limitation on wins by the champion. Obviously that has changed over the years given so many lengthy win streaks, but I thought when it started there was in fact a limitation. But then again, I go back to the Art Fleming days.

You're correct, Jeopardy limited the champion to 5 consecutive wins for almost 20 years. IIRC, it was only a couple years before Ken Jennings big run that the 5 consecutive win rule was changed. There may have been a number of great Jeopardy players in the 80's and 90's limited by the rule.

Edit... sorry, this was already completely addressed.

[rsvman]

I think they should re-initiate the limit rule, but with a vastly higher number, like, say 100. A player can play until he/she loses, but if he/she wins 100 straight games, he/she is finished.

I know they love having a guy like James around, but I think, at a certain point, that it's best to move on.


But, as Dennis Miller used to say, "That's just my opinion; I could be wrong."




Oh, and never bring Watson back. That's just freaking boring television, in my opinion.


One more post-script....Pretty much every episode I watch I know an answer than none of the contestants knows. That held true when Rutter, Jennings, and Watson played. I was surprised to find that I knew something that they all didn't know.


Did I say "one more" when I meant two? Sorry. This is the last bit of this post, though, I promise. That "Chamber of Commerce" final jeopardy question was WAY too easy for contestants of this magnitude. I mean, c'mon, man!

[Jeffrey]

That "Chamber of Commerce" final jeopardy question was WAY too easy for contestants of this magnitude. I mean, c'mon, man!

What exactly are you trying to say about Jasmine?

[Rich]

Brad Rutter is actually the all time Jeopardy champion. He was around when the limit was five wins a row, but has won all the Tournament of Champions he's been invited to including beating Jennings. He's never lost a game (except to IBM's computer Watson).

4-way with Watson?

-jk

So much has been made on the timing to push the buzzer as the key to winning. Doesn't Watson clearly have an unfair advantage there? Similar to robo-dialers?

[gus]

Pretty much every episode I watch I know an answer than none of the contestants knows. That held true when Rutter, Jennings, and Watson played. I was surprised to find that I knew something that they all didn't know.

[Bluedog]

So much has been made on the timing to push the buzzer as the key to winning. Doesn't Watson clearly have an unfair advantage there? Similar to robo-dialers?

Yes, Watson got an electronic feed of the "Answer" and then a signal when buzzing was open, so you'd think the reaction time of a machine is much better than a human and it'd never inadvertently go early. There was actually this concern brought up beforehand (as Watson was simply going to "electronically signal" it wanted to answer without pushing anything) and Jeopardy indicated they made them create a mechanism to do a physical buzz (not sure exactly what it was).

Another thing to note is that they accomodated Watson by not giving any video/picture/audio answers given Watson can't see or hear. Furthermore, the types of questions were people predicted Watson would do poorly (quirks of the English language where two unrelated things are combined, very short (one or two word) answers) weren't presented at all for some reason. Watson had an inherent advantage with long clues given it "Reads" it instantly and then can start processing to find the answer and then await when it opened up to "buzz" in. Whereas that advantage goes away largely for short clues...and nuances of the English language it didn't know as well. It was a fun experiment. I did like it when Watson gave an answer of "Toronto" in Final Jeopardy in a category of U.S. Airports (fortunately for the machine, it didn't risk much at that point.)

[rsvman]

James coming back tonight.


Tangentially, I've always thought that the answer/question format is kind of wonky. I mean, I'm used to it by now, but many of them are not really questions and answers.

For example, a Jeopardy clue might read:

In 1845, he patented the first lockstitch sewing machine

They want the contestant to ring in and say, "Who is Elias Howe?"



But if somebody asked the question "Who is Elias Howe?" the answer would be something like, "He's the guy that patented the first lockstitch sewing machine in 1845," which is similar to, but not exactly like the Jeopardy "answer."

Here's the fundamental problem. Given the answer "In 1845, he patented the first lockstitch sewing machine," wouldn't "What did he patent in 1845?" also be an acceptable question? But if you asked that question as an answer on Jeopardy, they would say it was incorrect, because they want you to know that Elias Howe is the guy that got the patent.



Wouldn't it just make more sense if they just asked "Who patented the first lockstitch sewing machine in 1845?" and the contestant just buzzed in and said "Elias Howe," without the "backwards" aspect of the show? I know, I know, it's iconic by now. But what makes Jeopardy Jeopardy is in the name: it's the possibility of actually LOSING money because of an incorrect answer.


That is all.

[gus]

James coming back tonight.


Tangentially, I've always thought that the answer/question format is kind of wonky. I mean, I'm used to it by now, but many of them are not really questions and answers.

For example, a Jeopardy clue might read:

In 1845, he patented the first lockstitch sewing machine

They want the contestant to ring in and say, "Who is Elias Howe?"



But if somebody asked the question "Who is Elias Howe?" the answer would be something like, "He's the guy that patented the first lockstitch sewing machine in 1845," which is similar to, but not exactly like the Jeopardy "answer."

Here's the fundamental problem. Given the answer "In 1845, he patented the first lockstitch sewing machine," wouldn't "What did he patent in 1845?" also be an acceptable question? But if you asked that question as an answer on Jeopardy, they would say it was incorrect, because they want you to know that Elias Howe is the guy that got the patent.



Wouldn't it just make more sense if they just asked "Who patented the first lockstitch sewing machine in 1845?" and the contestant just buzzed in and said "Elias Howe," without the "backwards" aspect of the show? I know, I know, it's iconic by now. But what makes Jeopardy Jeopardy is in the name: it's the possibility of actually LOSING money because of an incorrect answer.


That is all.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

James coming back tonight.


Tangentially, I've always thought that the answer/question format is kind of wonky. I mean, I'm used to it by now, but many of them are not really questions and answers.

For example, a Jeopardy clue might read:

In 1845, he patented the first lockstitch sewing machine

They want the contestant to ring in and say, "Who is Elias Howe?"



But if somebody asked the question "Who is Elias Howe?" the answer would be something like, "He's the guy that patented the first lockstitch sewing machine in 1845," which is similar to, but not exactly like the Jeopardy "answer."

Here's the fundamental problem. Given the answer "In 1845, he patented the first lockstitch sewing machine," wouldn't "What did he patent in 1845?" also be an acceptable question? But if you asked that question as an answer on Jeopardy, they would say it was incorrect, because they want you to know that Elias Howe is the guy that got the patent.



Wouldn't it just make more sense if they just asked "Who patented the first lockstitch sewing machine in 1845?" and the contestant just buzzed in and said "Elias Howe," without the "backwards" aspect of the show? I know, I know, it's iconic by now. But what makes Jeopardy Jeopardy is in the name: it's the possibility of actually LOSING money because of an incorrect answer.


That is all.

Your comment begs reference to the famous Cheers episode where Cliff was on Jeopardy! and in response to the answer "Archibald Leach, Bernard Schwartz and Lucille LeSueur" Cliff answers "Who are 3 people who've never been in my kitchen?" This is theoretically a correct answer (at least one would assume it is) but was not the answer they were looking for. I assume they try very hard to make questions that can't be answered this way but it is not fool proof.

[Neals384]

James coming back tonight.


Tangentially, I've always thought that the answer/question format is kind of wonky. I mean, I'm used to it by now, but many of them are not really questions and answers.

For example, a Jeopardy clue might read:

In 1845, he patented the first lockstitch sewing machine

They want the contestant to ring in and say, "Who is Elias Howe?"



But if somebody asked the question "Who is Elias Howe?" the answer would be something like, "He's the guy that patented the first lockstitch sewing machine in 1845," which is similar to, but not exactly like the Jeopardy "answer."

Here's the fundamental problem. Given the answer "In 1845, he patented the first lockstitch sewing machine," wouldn't "What did he patent in 1845?" also be an acceptable question? But if you asked that question as an answer on Jeopardy, they would say it was incorrect, because they want you to know that Elias Howe is the guy that got the patent.



Wouldn't it just make more sense if they just asked "Who patented the first lockstitch sewing machine in 1845?" and the contestant just buzzed in and said "Elias Howe," without the "backwards" aspect of the show? I know, I know, it's iconic by now. But what makes Jeopardy Jeopardy is in the name: it's the possibility of actually LOSING money because of an incorrect answer.


That is all.

The wonky format has the practical advantage that in many cases the number of words that must fit on the screen is reduced by 2. Take last night’s final J.


“I am making myself liable to articles 30 & 31 of the law of 29 July 1881 regarding the press, which make libel a punishable offense”


Would instead be


“who wrote I am making myself liable to articles 30 & 31 of the law of 29 July 1881 regarding the press, which make libel a punishable offense”


imagne Alex reading clue after clue the begin “Who was” “What is” and so on. Repetitive and boring!


so the Answer and Question format reduces the screen real estate needed for clues, shortens the time needed to read each clue, improves the pace of the game and keeps it from becoming repetitive and boring.

[weezie]

Sometimes ya just gotta not squish the life out of things. Sit back, enjoy that cool drink and enjoy the show.

[mph]

Sometimes ya just gotta not squish the life out of things. Sit back, enjoy that cool drink and enjoy the show.

What is something that doesn’t happen on an internet message board?

[Indoor66]

Over analysis and commentary tend to kill pleasure.

[rthomas]

Over analysis and commentary tend to kill pleasure.

Who is Dick Vitale?

[mr. synellinden]

Who is Dick Vitale?

When was the last time Dick Vitale analyzed anything relevant to the game he was covering?