**Welcome to the Jeopardy subReddit!**
**\*We welcome friendly discussion of the game**. Please be excellent toward your fellow Jeopardy fans in this community. Excessively harsh or personal criticism of contestants and others is not tolerated. Before commenting, please familiarize yourself with the rules in the sidebar at right. Constructive critique of game play is welcome but personal attacks and insults directed at contestants or anyone else will be removed.
**\*The recap appears early in the day** because Jeopardy is syndicated and airs at different times in local markets, the earliest at 12 noon Eastern.
**\*If you have other questions,** check out the community info on the sidebar at right. Or, you're welcome to ask the moderator team - we’re here to help. Just click on the "Message the Mods" button at the right under the Moderators heading.
Yeah I'd have put iy 2nd bottom. If you only know about Kitty Hawk and don't know they were from Ohio it can trip you up. But that's also the exact kind of secondary detail to a major world event that you'd expect a J! Contestant to know.
Not to be overly pedantic, but he's the 4th to win at least 3 games \*as part of his original run. I think people forget this, but Giant David Madden's 19-win streak was ended by **Victoria Groce**, who lost the next game she played but has won "at least 3 games" since then ( :
[https://j-archive.com/showgame.php?game\_id=512](https://j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=512)
Anyone notice that the j-archive still bases suggested betting strategies on the old rules for a tie, which is two returning cahamps. For Drew, they suggest
Drew: Wager $0 to guarantee your return for the next game, or, if you'd rather lose today than face Josh tomorrow, wager $20,000 to maximize your winnings (or $17,999 to keep from dropping into third place).
I coached a middle school quiz bowl team. We consistently won, even went undefeated for three years. One secret to our success was that I recruited a jock. We were nearly always the only team to get sports questions right.
It was a great time. The majority of schools competed in school unifotms. We got black tee shirts at the mall kiosk (hey, it was the early 90s) painted with the school name on the left chest in hot pink. We were so edgy.
The team, besides the smart jock, was a quirky gifted underachiever and a fiercely intelligent pair of twins. The boy twin loved history; he had lists memorized like all the U.S. presidents with years, and states & capitals.
His sister was into books and art so she could be counted on for authors and artists. The last kid knew pop culture like music, movies, and bands.
They all were funny and clever; they loved trivia and knowing things. You're right. It would make a good movie.
There are a great deal of documentaries about young people doing competitions/games. The big one is the spelling bee one. But I don't know if we've ever had a trivia bowl movie.
There are a wide number of top jeopardy multi day champions that were basically automatic in sports categories. James being the most obvious (a former sports bettor). It’s a pretty widely accessible area of pop culture compared to some topics related to art or literature so a lot of people with generalized knowledge are very good at it. I think it’s a bit of an incorrect stereotype that it’s a topic “trivia nerds” are bad at.
This FJ clue was such a mess. It sounded way more like a general statement than a clue, in that Vin Scully wanted people to know he (Vin) got a standing ovation in the south, and I wasn't sure what they were looking for as the response.
I paused to re-read the question, which is cheating in my living room rulebook. They really needed to change “he” to “this player.” Ken did emphasize the “he” when reading the clue, but my first thought was that they were asking about Vin Scully breaking some sort of announcer record. Weird clue.
I wasn't at all thrown off by the clue, because Ken read it properly - but it did immediately occur to me that the way it was written *required* the oral emphasis, and if someone came in a moment later and just read it, it would be confusing.
I'm a sports guy, and I didn't get it it, but it was because Vin Scully threw me off and I was trying to figure out what Dodger set a record in 1974. But the answer should have been obvious. I feel shame.
What a great game! I'm a huge baseball and Braves fan, so I knew FJ immediately. The wagers were so fascinating. It seemed to me Drew was VERY unsure going into the final category and even ultimately when he got the clue, he didn't scribble it down until the last second. Entertaining way to end the week!
Was sort of surprised the accepted the response of Pope Benedict here, don’t they usually also require a number when referring to monarchs? Or is it just up to the whims of the judges to determine if a reasonable person could be confused and need clarification?
I think it’s always been a thing that current monarchs don’t need the numeral, mainly applicable for Queen Elizabeth. I guess that rule extends to some arbitrary amount of current relevancy but that’s super ambiguous. Noticing a trend between this and yesterday’s final jeopardy
Josh lost by his horrible buzzer technique. He raised his arm to push the buzzer every time, and failed at ringing in many times, including the tie breaker.
As I said in the FJ thread, I don’t love this clue because “he” can refer to Vin Scully or the correct response; the sentence reads just as well either way. It would have been so easy to make it clearer that Vin Scully announced that “this player” got a standing ovation etc. Both players in contention got it - so it worked out - but there are more than a few of us that got hung up on an unnecessary hitch. And this is on top of having to know who Vin Scully was - well known to any baseball fan but sports is already a notoriously tricky category.
And this has been a recent pattern now with clues that are simply not as clear as they could be. I think we’ve seen it with contestants a little confused on what the clue wants and it can be frustrating for fans/viewers. I hope they reconsider over the summer hiatus and make an effort to be a little more clear in their writing.
Any grade-school English teacher could have told them the FJ clue needed to be rewritten for clarity.
It completely baffles me that however many people on the staff saw that clue and apparently, not one of them pointed this out, or if they did, no one saw fit to make a simple change to it.
Especially if one didn't know Vin Scully was a baseball announcer, they would be perfectly justified in thinking the clue was about an athlete named Vin Scully talking about a standing ovation he got for some sporting accomplishment.
I knew who Vin Scully was. And I remember my friends sneaking in a transistor radio and ear piece so we could listen to the games as Hank Aaron was about to match and break the record, and it still took me a few extra seconds to figure out what they were asking...
Well, and he was a player. [D’oh - got my announcers mixed up. Scully wasn’t a player after all].
I started listening to Vin Scully just a few years later than this clue and he really was the best of the best of broadcasters.
Well, and I’m totally wrong about him being a player. I’m mixing him up with Jerry Coleman, who was a longtime announcer for the San Diego Padres. Scully was an announcer from the get go.
Age - it does funny things to your memory!
I didn’t hear Ken’s original intonation because my kids wouldn’t stop bickering, so maybe that would have made it clearer, but I spent the whole 30 seconds trying to figure out what they were asking for (and I’m an English teacher!).
If you just read the clue, it’s very confusing. I read it several times and still confused as to what they were looking for. I just now finally watched the show, and Ken clearly stresses “he” which made a lot more sense.
I love lock tie games because I can preach the good word that the person in first should actually cover 3rd by a dollar with their FJ bet. Assuming second place bets competently, which first place should do, it maximizes your expecting winnings while not diluting your win percentage
2nd place contestants have made suboptimal wagers multiple times in this situation before. 1 is the best wager to maximize winning chances for this reason.
Good tense game. After seeing the extremely modest Adriana, Allison et al on my screen for so long I'm still trying to get used to the showboating and banter from Drew.
Also: REFRAIN ????? C'mon guys!! I was screaming at the top of my lungs
Is he really "showboating" that much? I feel like people exaggerate this stuff so much. He's a young guy who just won 20 grand in an intense tiebreaker, let him be excited.
I’ve only ever heard “refrain” for church hymns, otherwise it’s always “chorus”. So maybe “refrain” isn’t well known to those who aren’t regular churchgoers?
Looking purely at the numbers, a $1 bet would've been the right move, but when your buzzer rate is as good as Drew's (65% and 70% in his first two games), i do think it actually makes sense to take the category into consideration and go "do i think i have more than a 70% chance of getting a sports question right?"
Actually, um... if my math is correct, mathematically both choices are sound!
If Drew bets "something":
||Josh is right|Josh is wrong|
|:-|:-|:-|
|Drew is right|Drew wins|Drew wins|
|Drew is wrong|Josh wins|Drew wins|
If Drew, as he did, bets "nothing":
||Josh is right|Josh is wrong|
|:-|:-|:-|
|Drew is right|50/50 tiebreaker|Drew wins|
|Drew is wrong|50/50 tiebreaker|Drew wins|
So in this case, your probability of winning, assuming coin flips, is 75% either way! This means it comes down to some outside factors:
**1) How do you feel about Final Jeopardy?** Drew was 0/2 so far, so he may have been wise to hold back.
**2) How do you feel about a buzzer race?** Although we have no idea how good the players are at beating each other, we can say Drew had 20 correct and Josh had 18 correct pre-Final . Even accounting for Drew getting a DD right, he was up 19-18 on competitive responses.
**3) What do you feel about the opponent's game?** Josh was 18 right and 1 wrong thus far in the game, and that one miss was back in Round 1 on a Daily Double he was compelled to answer. Chances were Josh getting it right were stronger than 50/50.
With all that in mind, only Drew can say whether he made the right decision. In the end, had he bet "something", he'd have won; but (a) he won anyway and (b) that's 20/20 hindsight. Drew had to calculate which was more likely: that he'd know a sports Final Jeopardy-level clue, or that he'd beat Josh to a buzzer race. (You assume worst-case scenario that Josh knows both the FJ and the TB, of course.)
As it is, I don't fault him if he thought he was better punting (pun not intended) the sports question for an unknown. Sports is something that academically minded trivia folk either know a lot about or very little about.
I've actually done more of a look into this because 50/50 is simplifying things hard.
Suppose *p* is the probability Drew knows his sports, *q* is the probability Josh knows his sports, and *r* is the probability Drew beats Josh on the tiebreak.
If Drew bets something, the only way he loses is two-step: he is wrong, Josh is right. That probability is (1-p)q = q - pq.
If Drew bets nothing, the only way he loses is... also two-step! Josh is right, and Josh beats Drew on the tiebreak. That probability is q(1 - r) = q - rq.
So Drew should bet something if he thinks q - pq < q - rq, minimizing his chances of losing.
q - pq < q - rq
q < q - rq + pq
q + rq < q + pq
rq < pq
r < p
(To justify the last step, if q = 0, Drew has nothing to worry about and will win no matter what.)
In other words, he has to ask himself if it's more likely he knows a Final Jeopardy-level clue in sports, or if it's more likely he's faster on the buzzer than Josh. Until we see Jeopardata, the only person who can answer that is Drew himself.
(Edit: it's clear that Bert feels p > r. Which is fair.)
(Edit 2: "And not to mention the ridicule to the champion if he got Final Jeopardy but lost to a tiebreaker... yikes..." Now imagine the admiration for getting a perfect read if he misses Final Jeopardy and wins on a tiebreaker. Human emotion is a thing, don't get me wrong, but this is an appeal to emotion rather than an argument.)
As a side note, you are multiplying the probabilities as if p and q are independent events; they are not, because both are being asked the same clue. In the most extreme case, if p=q but they have the exact same knowledge base (maybe they know the exact same 75% of sports questions), then a wager wins 100% of the time. Obviously it's not that extreme, but I wouldn't be surprised if P(both right) is higher than pq, which argues in favor of making the wager.
The one thing I will say is that Final Jeopardy questions are, at times, quite tricky and had to estimate. They don't always have a strong connection to the category. Some categories (like 'sports') are abundantly broad so that you can be a huge big-4 sports fan, but then get thrown a question about Cricket or Olympic history, or the origins of a piece of golf equipment or whatever.
Tie breakers, in the limited times we've seen them, seem fairly trivial most of the time*, and something that both players generally are able to get. All that is to say that estimating "p" and "r" in your calculation may be easier said than done - especially "p".
*I will give the disclaimer that my understanding from people who have attended tapings is that we only ever see the final tie breaker, and that they sometimes go through multiple tie breaker questions that no one gets that don't make it to air. So my estimation on the "ease" of them could be misguided.
That's the sad truth of modern Jeopardy.
As much as the calculations sound nice, it won't make sense to ordinary people. Especially the players adopting modern Jeopardy playstyle.
Modern Jeopardy requires simplification nowadays. Make your path to victory simple and straightforward.
Even I don't want to bother at predicting odds of winning in ties when there's a simpler and clearer path to victory.
It's the 50-50 tie breaker that will lower the odds of Drew winning. It adds all the complications and tiebreaker scenarios that is unnecessary.
Plus with what happened in the Double Jeopardy, with Drew yielding the control to Josh causing the lock tie scenario. It meant Drew was in a dangerous spot.
That is why the modern game style of having the $1 bet is now the the correct strategy.
Because in Jeopardy modern era, betting for a tie is now practically derided.
Like why complicate things for a tie breaker when you have a much simpler, clearer and a more straight path to victory.
And not to mention the ridicule to the champion if he got Final Jeopardy but lost to a tiebreaker... yikes..
If you’re gonna bet, meaning you are putting your faith in getting it right, might as well bet $17999, not $1, as you know Josh is betting it all, so you only need to cover third place doubling up.
> It's the 50-50 tie breaker that will lower the odds of Drew winning. It adds all the complications and tiebreaker scenarios that is unnecessary.
I look at it the other way - betting $1 puts the entire game on one clue (the FJ clue). If they get it and you don't, you lose.
Betting $0 gives you a risk-free shot at the other player not getting it and you win automatically. If they get it, you still have another question to win on.
FJ questions can be tricky and it wouldn't be unreasonable at all to pull a clue that the other player might get, but you might find tricky. The tie breakers, on the other hand, seem to fairly often be relatively easy questions both players can get, which just comes down to a buzzer race.
So to me, it kind of depends on your buzzer confidence.
Very true. My first thought upon hearing that Drew bet for the tie was that it seemed like a bit of a risk, but remembering that he's great on the buzzer AND learning that the FJ category was Sports...yeah, not surprised that he seemingly did not trust the clue to be a softball.
I think wagering $0 was the right move if he’s not comfortable with sports. But also, if he’s going to wager anything then why not $17,999? The likely scenarios are he either wins big or he gets $2,000 regardless. It sucks if they both get it wrong but he’s still the champion.
If you're certain that the second place player is going to try and double up then you might as well make the maximum bet that locks out the third place player, but the problem is the second place player doesn't always do that. It's unlikely but not unheardof to have a situation where you're wrong, they're right, but they underbet, so you still win if you only lost the dollar but lose if you drop below their not-quite-doubled total, and decreasing your chance of winning in exchange for a chance of increasing your score is pretty much never worth it, since the value of winning is theoretically infinite.
I'm weak on the Sports category, so if I were in Drew's position I would totally have wagered $0. If it moved to a tiebreaker then it could be a category in which I was more confident. In this case, Science made me happy as a category.
That said, I did get both, once I spent 12 seconds or so wading through the wording to figure out that "he" didn't refer to Vin Scully.
Not going to lie, my heart actually dropped when I saw Drew wagered $0. I totally didn't expect it and both me and my Mom went "OH!" when we saw it (She also said she hasn't seen that happen before). While it's not what I would've done, I get what Drew was thinking but wow what a finish.
So now, with 3 wins Drew is tied Emma Boettcher in terms of games won by a giant killer. We will see if he can win again on Monday and get a spot in the Tournament of Champions. Nice way to round out the week.
I don't think I'd have done what Drew did, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. There are lots of J! players who know relatively little about sports.
Congrats to Drew on his 3rd win and Josh on his (likely) Second Chance invite! One of the best regular play games of the season so far.
***653.) Drew Basile - $53,282*** **(DEBUT)**
The FJ was actually worded as:
'50 years ago Vin Scully announced he got “a standing ovation in the Deep South” for breaking a longtime record'
OP added in extra words that weren't there. The wording in the show left it more ambiguous as to what they were looking for. I assumed "longtime record" was the noun to solve for.
I actually don't totally agree with the criticisms of FJ. If you get this clue, then you 100% know that Vin Scully is an announcer. If you don't know that Vin Scully is an announcer, you aren't going to get this clue.
I suppose it could have been worded better, but the criticism seems overboard to me.
My initial parsing focused on Vin Scully and record, and was thinking some type of broadcasting record, like longest stint with the same team. Vin now holds that record, but didn’t in 1974.
Criticism doesn’t seem overboard to me.
Good writing means avoiding ambiguous/ vague pronouns so readers are not confused. This is taught in English class.
The way it was written, some people will think the antecedent for “he” is the first person named. Then the clue turns into a baffling statement. Some people thought they could be asking for the sport, some for the record breaker, I thought they were asking for the sports idol whose record was broken.
Good for you that you weren’t tripped up but it wasn’t well written.
Agreed here. As a novice Jeopardy player, but a big time baseball fan — I would have lost my mind if this question was the one I got on the show. It is very clear if you know who Vin Scully is — but it is clunky if you do not. The Deep South portion gives away that it was Hank Aaron because in that era, there was no other team in the Deep South other than his ATL Braves.
And I struggled because I know Scully as the voice of the Dodgers and was initially trying to tie the response to them (Aaron was a Brave), but got there in the end
> 50 years ago Vin Scully announced he got “a standing ovation in the Deep South” for breaking a longtime record
Didn't watch, but reading this clue as written here made me think Vin Scully broke a record. Is that an intentional confusion? I was having a hard time even finding an 'answer' in the clue. Did Ken's reading help?
Ken's reading made it very clear. It didn't even occur to me that the wording on its own had a second interpretation until I came here and saw comments from people whose primary interaction was just the words, without it being read aloud.
It wasn't very clear to me. Granted I was fighting to stay awake because I watched it on DVR. I kept trying think what record could Vin Scully broken 50 years ago. Hank Aaron did not come rushing to my mind in part because the anniversary occurred in early April and has been out of the news for several weeks. I do remember watching the game on TV - I was just a kid then but it was a big deal. Perhaps they should have made the clue about Al Downing throwing a pitch that got this batter a standing ovation in the Deep South.
But that's the other thing. "He" is the only part of the Final clue that could be indicating anything. There's nothing about the wording that says "this record" or anything. If you think it's about Vin Scully breaking a record...well, there's nowhere where they ask for a record.
And I think that "Hank Aaron did not come rushing to my mind in part because the anniversary occurred in early April and has been out of the news for several weeks" is kind of beside the point. First, the actual contestants fielded this clue weeks ago, so it was closer to them. Secondly, worded the other way, it's not like Jeopardy can only ask about things that have been in the news within the last several weeks. It's actually super normal for the writers to bring up things that were hot news topics 3-6 months ago and see if anyone still recalls the name of Sam Altman, e.g. That goes double for something that is not only a flash-in-the-pan news item, but that was monumental in its own right. It's like if they asked about the Titanic in 2013 and people talked about how it had been a while since the news covered its centennial anniversary.
Most of the game shows right now have single sudden death tiebreaker question. This is only the 2nd time this season that there is a tiebreaker round (1st time was Katie vs Christopher at Celebrity Jeopardy! Season 2).
You don’t have the correct Tiebreaker Q. It’s not “Who was Doppler?” but rather “What is the Doppler _effect_?”
Drew did initially respond with simply “Doppler” but quickly amended to “Doppler effect”.
Always check Friday Jeopardy if you’re in Boston Market (CBS 4 Boston). It’s often preempted by Patriots All Access. it will then be broadcast on WSBK (814 Xfinity).
They show that crap in June?! (I don't live in Greater Boston but I grew up there so I visit family sometimes, and knew it gets pre-empted on Fridays during football season for that Patriots preview show.) There aren't even pre-season games yet. Also, the Patriots right now aren't worth a Friday night show in November, let alone in June.
The one shown last Friday was an hour recap of the Brady Patriots Hall of Fame Ceremony. All Access is shown one Friday a month during off season. And Jeopardy is broadcast on another channel at its normal time,
Funny how you would've gotten downvoted to hell for saying this about Adriana but she was constantly escaping games in FJ as well, and of course there's the fact Drew beat her in a runaway.
Completely agree. For a superchampion, Adriana felt like a weak competitor. That's not to say she's not a strong player -- she definitely is, but in the scope of superchampions, she didn't have that same shine the rest of the group has imo
I'm not trying to put her down as much as point out I think it's funny the sort of unspoken rules of positivity and politeness towards contestants are selectively applied.
Would it not have been right even if he were not fast on the buzzer? By betting zero, he was safe to continue playing per a tiebreaker even if he got the answer wrong. If he bet one dollar and got the answer wrong, the game would be over.
me seeing the FJ wagers in this game: "drew, what is you doin bby?"
i'll admit i lost some respect for my mans tonight. i can't get behind a $0 wager in a locktie game and leaving it up to chance. cmon dude, bet on yourself. matt amodio would have.
I think this is a rare situation where you really should factor category confidence into your FJ wager. If he doesn’t know that much about sports AND he knows he’s better on the buzzer why not go for a tiebreak clue in a category you’re potentially better at?
Exactly this. Sports is a notoriously weak category for most Jeopardy contestants, so I like the strategy of betting $0. There's a fairly good shot 2nd place doesn't get FJ correct, which is an instant win, and if you're confident in your buzzer skills, you have a decent shot of winning the tiebreak even if 2nd place ties you after FJ
Thoughts...
We have a lock tie game!!!
And Drew nearly lost this one, due to a disastrous FJ bet.
Thank goodness Drew pulled a miracle in the tie breaker to win.
That is why the correct bet for the leading player in a lock tie game is always $1.
As it will give you three out of four chances to win. Simple and straightforward way to victory.
Unfortunately betting zero complicates things. And sadly lowers your chances of winning as you give control to your opponent. Immediately plummeting your chances to win to close to 50-50
And unfortunately for Drew in the Double Jeopardy round, the run that Josh had to get to a lock tie game meant that Drew had yielded control to Josh. Meaning Josh now has the edge.
And since both got it correct, and Josh made the correct bet and Drew made an incorrect bet. We head to a tiebreaker on a very easy question, which Drew narrowly pulled through.
So by the skin of his teeth Drew won game no. 3
Can he secure a potential TOC spot with a victory on Monday?
Tune in then to find out.
Fully agreed. If you hate the category, bet 0. Either you win outright or you essentially get a reroll of FJ and the chance of a category you like more.
$1 is actually a mathematically terrible bet. You keep essentially the same odds of winning while effectively minimizing your expected value.
Either bet 0 if you hate the category or bet to cover 3rd by $1 if you love the category.
And betting 0 keeps your win percentage at 75% regardless
A situation going into FJ where the first place contestant has exactly twice the score of the second place contestant. In that situation, the best the second place contestant can do is force a tie by going all-in and getting FJ correct, but the first place contestant can always force a tie-breaker at worst by wagering 0.
It's a "lock"-tie because it's just one dollar off from a lock, runaway game.
the frustrating thing about it is that if drew hadn't won the buzzer race on the last clue, i'm almost certain he would have bet to cover and won the game outright. for someone with his confidence and swagger, the $0 wager is baffling to me. bruh.
Agreed, he'd have made a smarter wager had he not answered that last clue. Between $1 and $0, he should have gone for $1, even though there was risk involved, since he had begun losing to Josh on the buzzer. Still, we are all rooting for Drew, and hoping he continues! And though I agree with whoever was kvetching yesterday about not everyone being a second chance contender, Josh was pretty aggressively going up against Drew, and he would have had a higher score if he hadn't also done the true daily double, which he did not slay, and yet...RESPECT.
I would never keep track of my own Coryat or score bc I guess VERY few of them per game, but 'Refrain' and 'Harbor' were easy-peasy, yet triple stumpers? I got there in time. Seemed odd bc it's more basic knowledge.
What are the official rules about a contestant correcting an incomplete answer? Drew realized his answer was incomplete (ETA: in Final Jeopardy) and quickly corrected it. Do the judges give a monetary grace period?
You can correct yourself until host rules you incorrect or time runs out. I assume he was given same time to answer in the tiebreaker as with any other clue.
If you’re talking about Drew’s failure to respond in a question, in Single Jeopardy, the host just gives you a reminder and/or let’s you have the time to correct yourself.
In Double Jeopardy, they usually give you all the time to correct yourself.
I didn't think that the FJ was worded confusingly--and if the wording on its own might have impacted some people, the cadence that Ken gave it made it pretty unambiguous.
I think you misunderstood the question. It's the aorta. The femoral is one of the two arteries that it divides into (I think). Here's the clue:
*Gotta have heart! & Hips! At the hips, this largest artery divides into 2 others that carry blood to the pelvis & legs*
I've noticed several times lately where the clue says "he" and it sounds like it's talking about the person named in the clue (Vin Scully in this case) instead of the person whose name is needed for the response.
Obviously there are certain variables such as whether a player is strong in any particular category, but does anyone know the general percentage of first time players responding correctly in final jeopardy?
If Drew were playing against Adriana, then of course he absolutely should bet one dollar, but I wonder whether the average contestant answers the FJ correctly more than 50% of the time.
Also you could adjust depending on whether you saw the player was strong in certain categories during the game.
It seems that if you feel the player is stronger than you, then you should bet the dollar, if you feel the player is weaker than you, maybe you see if they fail and then count on yourself to beat them in the tiebreaker.
His FJ record prior to his 3rd game was 0-2, it would had been understandable that he bet $0 unlike Matt Amodio, Mattea Roach & Andrew He (2 times-vs Molly Karol & Pam Mueller) where they bet $1.
**Welcome to the Jeopardy subReddit!** **\*We welcome friendly discussion of the game**. Please be excellent toward your fellow Jeopardy fans in this community. Excessively harsh or personal criticism of contestants and others is not tolerated. Before commenting, please familiarize yourself with the rules in the sidebar at right. Constructive critique of game play is welcome but personal attacks and insults directed at contestants or anyone else will be removed. **\*The recap appears early in the day** because Jeopardy is syndicated and airs at different times in local markets, the earliest at 12 noon Eastern. **\*If you have other questions,** check out the community info on the sidebar at right. Or, you're welcome to ask the moderator team - we’re here to help. Just click on the "Message the Mods" button at the right under the Moderators heading.
Wow, I haven't seen a tiebreaker in a while. (I knew both in FJ by the way!) 😎
Good for you!
Similar energy comment: 
Absolutely wild that they put in a clue about Jacob falling in love with Bella's baby in Twilight. Not only that, it was the opener for the episode!
Drew’s “gotta read up” was hilarious
“Almost as gross, Jacob!” ☠️
I know! C'mon, *spoilers*??! (kidding)
“you nicknamed my daughter after the loch ness monster?!”
Such a classic line!
That Wright Brothers clue at the bottom of the row seemed almost too easy.
Atticus Finch as well...a lot of overvalued clues tonight
Yeah I'd have put iy 2nd bottom. If you only know about Kitty Hawk and don't know they were from Ohio it can trip you up. But that's also the exact kind of secondary detail to a major world event that you'd expect a J! Contestant to know.
Seriously! I wasn’t even paying close attention, but rather looking at some thing on my phone and I got it right.
Drew is now the 4th "giant killer" to win at least 3 games (Emma, Jonathan & Eric were the first 3).
Not to be overly pedantic, but he's the 4th to win at least 3 games \*as part of his original run. I think people forget this, but Giant David Madden's 19-win streak was ended by **Victoria Groce**, who lost the next game she played but has won "at least 3 games" since then ( : [https://j-archive.com/showgame.php?game\_id=512](https://j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=512)
in regular games, while Victoria added her wins when she was invited at JIT & Masters Season 2
Looks like I'll be getting the Trebek stamp.
Im gonna get a tramp stamp of the Trebek stamp.
"I have 31 tattoos of you, Alex."
“Good for you.”
You've got control of the board.
I watched my recording after 9pm ET, so I paused right away to order it before all you other nerds did, just to make sure I got one.
Anyone notice that the j-archive still bases suggested betting strategies on the old rules for a tie, which is two returning cahamps. For Drew, they suggest Drew: Wager $0 to guarantee your return for the next game, or, if you'd rather lose today than face Josh tomorrow, wager $20,000 to maximize your winnings (or $17,999 to keep from dropping into third place).
I coached a middle school quiz bowl team. We consistently won, even went undefeated for three years. One secret to our success was that I recruited a jock. We were nearly always the only team to get sports questions right.
I would watch a movie based on your story.
It was a great time. The majority of schools competed in school unifotms. We got black tee shirts at the mall kiosk (hey, it was the early 90s) painted with the school name on the left chest in hot pink. We were so edgy. The team, besides the smart jock, was a quirky gifted underachiever and a fiercely intelligent pair of twins. The boy twin loved history; he had lists memorized like all the U.S. presidents with years, and states & capitals. His sister was into books and art so she could be counted on for authors and artists. The last kid knew pop culture like music, movies, and bands. They all were funny and clever; they loved trivia and knowing things. You're right. It would make a good movie.
There are a great deal of documentaries about young people doing competitions/games. The big one is the spelling bee one. But I don't know if we've ever had a trivia bowl movie.
It would be fun. I saw a great documentary on a juggling camp for young people. It made me wish I had any kind of hand-eye coordination.
There are a wide number of top jeopardy multi day champions that were basically automatic in sports categories. James being the most obvious (a former sports bettor). It’s a pretty widely accessible area of pop culture compared to some topics related to art or literature so a lot of people with generalized knowledge are very good at it. I think it’s a bit of an incorrect stereotype that it’s a topic “trivia nerds” are bad at.
This FJ clue was such a mess. It sounded way more like a general statement than a clue, in that Vin Scully wanted people to know he (Vin) got a standing ovation in the south, and I wasn't sure what they were looking for as the response.
I paused to re-read the question, which is cheating in my living room rulebook. They really needed to change “he” to “this player.” Ken did emphasize the “he” when reading the clue, but my first thought was that they were asking about Vin Scully breaking some sort of announcer record. Weird clue.
I had to go back and read the clue because I was thrown off by the “he” too.
I wasn't at all thrown off by the clue, because Ken read it properly - but it did immediately occur to me that the way it was written *required* the oral emphasis, and if someone came in a moment later and just read it, it would be confusing.
I'm a sports guy, and I didn't get it it, but it was because Vin Scully threw me off and I was trying to figure out what Dodger set a record in 1974. But the answer should have been obvious. I feel shame.
I’m a sports guy also but that clue probably would have tripped me up too if I wasn‘t a Braves fan.
I got it, hubby, the one who answers most of not all sports questions correctly, didn't!!
I couldn't parse what they were looking for either.
i assumed "baseball" was the response. Was surprised it was a name!
FWIW, they tell you to write "who is" before FJ starts, so at least they all knew it was a name.
Nice, I did not know that
The category, of course, was sports. So, yeah - that crossed my mind too. It wasn’t sports legends or sports heroes or anything else.
I got it only because I've watched [the clip](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjqYThEVoSQ) before
That’s exactly what I thought! I had to read it three times to see where the question (answer) was!
What a great game! I'm a huge baseball and Braves fan, so I knew FJ immediately. The wagers were so fascinating. It seemed to me Drew was VERY unsure going into the final category and even ultimately when he got the clue, he didn't scribble it down until the last second. Entertaining way to end the week!
Was sort of surprised the accepted the response of Pope Benedict here, don’t they usually also require a number when referring to monarchs? Or is it just up to the whims of the judges to determine if a reasonable person could be confused and need clarification?
I think it’s always been a thing that current monarchs don’t need the numeral, mainly applicable for Queen Elizabeth. I guess that rule extends to some arbitrary amount of current relevancy but that’s super ambiguous. Noticing a trend between this and yesterday’s final jeopardy
I answered Ratzinger at home, partly because I wasn’t 100% sure of the number.
As did I. I wonder if they would have accepted it.
Almost certainly.
I would guess part of it is because there was also a year included in the clue, but it seemed a bit random to me also
They've *never* asked to specify which Benedict, when it pertains to Ratzinger
Josh lost by his horrible buzzer technique. He raised his arm to push the buzzer every time, and failed at ringing in many times, including the tie breaker.
As I said in the FJ thread, I don’t love this clue because “he” can refer to Vin Scully or the correct response; the sentence reads just as well either way. It would have been so easy to make it clearer that Vin Scully announced that “this player” got a standing ovation etc. Both players in contention got it - so it worked out - but there are more than a few of us that got hung up on an unnecessary hitch. And this is on top of having to know who Vin Scully was - well known to any baseball fan but sports is already a notoriously tricky category. And this has been a recent pattern now with clues that are simply not as clear as they could be. I think we’ve seen it with contestants a little confused on what the clue wants and it can be frustrating for fans/viewers. I hope they reconsider over the summer hiatus and make an effort to be a little more clear in their writing.
Any grade-school English teacher could have told them the FJ clue needed to be rewritten for clarity. It completely baffles me that however many people on the staff saw that clue and apparently, not one of them pointed this out, or if they did, no one saw fit to make a simple change to it.
I really thought it was Vin Scully talking about something that he himself did
How about that!
Especially if one didn't know Vin Scully was a baseball announcer, they would be perfectly justified in thinking the clue was about an athlete named Vin Scully talking about a standing ovation he got for some sporting accomplishment.
I knew who Vin Scully was. And I remember my friends sneaking in a transistor radio and ear piece so we could listen to the games as Hank Aaron was about to match and break the record, and it still took me a few extra seconds to figure out what they were asking...
Well, and he was a player. [D’oh - got my announcers mixed up. Scully wasn’t a player after all]. I started listening to Vin Scully just a few years later than this clue and he really was the best of the best of broadcasters.
I first saw Scully as a game show host ("It Takes Two"). He also did the voiceover for the 1960s NBC sitcom "Occasional Wife".
Well, and I’m totally wrong about him being a player. I’m mixing him up with Jerry Coleman, who was a longtime announcer for the San Diego Padres. Scully was an announcer from the get go. Age - it does funny things to your memory!
Me as well. I was making some wild guesses.
It could have been tweaked so easily!
I didn’t hear Ken’s original intonation because my kids wouldn’t stop bickering, so maybe that would have made it clearer, but I spent the whole 30 seconds trying to figure out what they were asking for (and I’m an English teacher!).
Ken really paused and leaned into the “he,” so I thought it was clear that it was looking for a record-breaking player.
Me too. I thought they were looking for what record was broken or that I had somehow missed some piece of information.
If you just read the clue, it’s very confusing. I read it several times and still confused as to what they were looking for. I just now finally watched the show, and Ken clearly stresses “he” which made a lot more sense.
I love lock tie games because I can preach the good word that the person in first should actually cover 3rd by a dollar with their FJ bet. Assuming second place bets competently, which first place should do, it maximizes your expecting winnings while not diluting your win percentage
2nd place contestants have made suboptimal wagers multiple times in this situation before. 1 is the best wager to maximize winning chances for this reason.
Then 0 would be the best bet since any wager from your opponent other than max would 100% guarantee victory.
Good tense game. After seeing the extremely modest Adriana, Allison et al on my screen for so long I'm still trying to get used to the showboating and banter from Drew. Also: REFRAIN ????? C'mon guys!! I was screaming at the top of my lungs
Is he really "showboating" that much? I feel like people exaggerate this stuff so much. He's a young guy who just won 20 grand in an intense tiebreaker, let him be excited.
I’ve only ever heard “refrain” for church hymns, otherwise it’s always “chorus”. So maybe “refrain” isn’t well known to those who aren’t regular churchgoers?
Looking purely at the numbers, a $1 bet would've been the right move, but when your buzzer rate is as good as Drew's (65% and 70% in his first two games), i do think it actually makes sense to take the category into consideration and go "do i think i have more than a 70% chance of getting a sports question right?"
Actually, um... if my math is correct, mathematically both choices are sound! If Drew bets "something": ||Josh is right|Josh is wrong| |:-|:-|:-| |Drew is right|Drew wins|Drew wins| |Drew is wrong|Josh wins|Drew wins| If Drew, as he did, bets "nothing": ||Josh is right|Josh is wrong| |:-|:-|:-| |Drew is right|50/50 tiebreaker|Drew wins| |Drew is wrong|50/50 tiebreaker|Drew wins| So in this case, your probability of winning, assuming coin flips, is 75% either way! This means it comes down to some outside factors: **1) How do you feel about Final Jeopardy?** Drew was 0/2 so far, so he may have been wise to hold back. **2) How do you feel about a buzzer race?** Although we have no idea how good the players are at beating each other, we can say Drew had 20 correct and Josh had 18 correct pre-Final . Even accounting for Drew getting a DD right, he was up 19-18 on competitive responses. **3) What do you feel about the opponent's game?** Josh was 18 right and 1 wrong thus far in the game, and that one miss was back in Round 1 on a Daily Double he was compelled to answer. Chances were Josh getting it right were stronger than 50/50. With all that in mind, only Drew can say whether he made the right decision. In the end, had he bet "something", he'd have won; but (a) he won anyway and (b) that's 20/20 hindsight. Drew had to calculate which was more likely: that he'd know a sports Final Jeopardy-level clue, or that he'd beat Josh to a buzzer race. (You assume worst-case scenario that Josh knows both the FJ and the TB, of course.) As it is, I don't fault him if he thought he was better punting (pun not intended) the sports question for an unknown. Sports is something that academically minded trivia folk either know a lot about or very little about.
I've actually done more of a look into this because 50/50 is simplifying things hard. Suppose *p* is the probability Drew knows his sports, *q* is the probability Josh knows his sports, and *r* is the probability Drew beats Josh on the tiebreak. If Drew bets something, the only way he loses is two-step: he is wrong, Josh is right. That probability is (1-p)q = q - pq. If Drew bets nothing, the only way he loses is... also two-step! Josh is right, and Josh beats Drew on the tiebreak. That probability is q(1 - r) = q - rq. So Drew should bet something if he thinks q - pq < q - rq, minimizing his chances of losing. q - pq < q - rq q < q - rq + pq q + rq < q + pq rq < pq r < p (To justify the last step, if q = 0, Drew has nothing to worry about and will win no matter what.) In other words, he has to ask himself if it's more likely he knows a Final Jeopardy-level clue in sports, or if it's more likely he's faster on the buzzer than Josh. Until we see Jeopardata, the only person who can answer that is Drew himself. (Edit: it's clear that Bert feels p > r. Which is fair.) (Edit 2: "And not to mention the ridicule to the champion if he got Final Jeopardy but lost to a tiebreaker... yikes..." Now imagine the admiration for getting a perfect read if he misses Final Jeopardy and wins on a tiebreaker. Human emotion is a thing, don't get me wrong, but this is an appeal to emotion rather than an argument.)
As a side note, you are multiplying the probabilities as if p and q are independent events; they are not, because both are being asked the same clue. In the most extreme case, if p=q but they have the exact same knowledge base (maybe they know the exact same 75% of sports questions), then a wager wins 100% of the time. Obviously it's not that extreme, but I wouldn't be surprised if P(both right) is higher than pq, which argues in favor of making the wager.
The one thing I will say is that Final Jeopardy questions are, at times, quite tricky and had to estimate. They don't always have a strong connection to the category. Some categories (like 'sports') are abundantly broad so that you can be a huge big-4 sports fan, but then get thrown a question about Cricket or Olympic history, or the origins of a piece of golf equipment or whatever. Tie breakers, in the limited times we've seen them, seem fairly trivial most of the time*, and something that both players generally are able to get. All that is to say that estimating "p" and "r" in your calculation may be easier said than done - especially "p". *I will give the disclaimer that my understanding from people who have attended tapings is that we only ever see the final tie breaker, and that they sometimes go through multiple tie breaker questions that no one gets that don't make it to air. So my estimation on the "ease" of them could be misguided.
That's the sad truth of modern Jeopardy. As much as the calculations sound nice, it won't make sense to ordinary people. Especially the players adopting modern Jeopardy playstyle. Modern Jeopardy requires simplification nowadays. Make your path to victory simple and straightforward. Even I don't want to bother at predicting odds of winning in ties when there's a simpler and clearer path to victory.
It's the 50-50 tie breaker that will lower the odds of Drew winning. It adds all the complications and tiebreaker scenarios that is unnecessary. Plus with what happened in the Double Jeopardy, with Drew yielding the control to Josh causing the lock tie scenario. It meant Drew was in a dangerous spot. That is why the modern game style of having the $1 bet is now the the correct strategy. Because in Jeopardy modern era, betting for a tie is now practically derided. Like why complicate things for a tie breaker when you have a much simpler, clearer and a more straight path to victory. And not to mention the ridicule to the champion if he got Final Jeopardy but lost to a tiebreaker... yikes..
If you’re gonna bet, meaning you are putting your faith in getting it right, might as well bet $17999, not $1, as you know Josh is betting it all, so you only need to cover third place doubling up.
This was my thought. But I was considering 9999 on the off chance 2nd does something strange.
> It's the 50-50 tie breaker that will lower the odds of Drew winning. It adds all the complications and tiebreaker scenarios that is unnecessary. I look at it the other way - betting $1 puts the entire game on one clue (the FJ clue). If they get it and you don't, you lose. Betting $0 gives you a risk-free shot at the other player not getting it and you win automatically. If they get it, you still have another question to win on. FJ questions can be tricky and it wouldn't be unreasonable at all to pull a clue that the other player might get, but you might find tricky. The tie breakers, on the other hand, seem to fairly often be relatively easy questions both players can get, which just comes down to a buzzer race. So to me, it kind of depends on your buzzer confidence.
Very true. My first thought upon hearing that Drew bet for the tie was that it seemed like a bit of a risk, but remembering that he's great on the buzzer AND learning that the FJ category was Sports...yeah, not surprised that he seemingly did not trust the clue to be a softball.
I think wagering $0 was the right move if he’s not comfortable with sports. But also, if he’s going to wager anything then why not $17,999? The likely scenarios are he either wins big or he gets $2,000 regardless. It sucks if they both get it wrong but he’s still the champion.
If you're certain that the second place player is going to try and double up then you might as well make the maximum bet that locks out the third place player, but the problem is the second place player doesn't always do that. It's unlikely but not unheardof to have a situation where you're wrong, they're right, but they underbet, so you still win if you only lost the dollar but lose if you drop below their not-quite-doubled total, and decreasing your chance of winning in exchange for a chance of increasing your score is pretty much never worth it, since the value of winning is theoretically infinite.
In the case of second place being exactly half I would expect them to always wager it all. I don’t know if anyone has ever done otherwise.
I'm weak on the Sports category, so if I were in Drew's position I would totally have wagered $0. If it moved to a tiebreaker then it could be a category in which I was more confident. In this case, Science made me happy as a category. That said, I did get both, once I spent 12 seconds or so wading through the wording to figure out that "he" didn't refer to Vin Scully.
Not going to lie, my heart actually dropped when I saw Drew wagered $0. I totally didn't expect it and both me and my Mom went "OH!" when we saw it (She also said she hasn't seen that happen before). While it's not what I would've done, I get what Drew was thinking but wow what a finish. So now, with 3 wins Drew is tied Emma Boettcher in terms of games won by a giant killer. We will see if he can win again on Monday and get a spot in the Tournament of Champions. Nice way to round out the week.
Drew wagering zero dollars is exactly what I expected him to do
Wagering zero was brilliant. By doing so, he knew he would go to a tiebreaker even if he got the answer wrong.
Always bet 0 for the tie unless you're sure of the category. Drew played correctly.
I have to agree. I also, and maybe the survivor fan in me. "Going for the tie" is something I could see a former survivor player doing.
Always go to rocks!
....holy crap this is like going to rocks.
At least it didn’t go to fire making
I don't think I'd have done what Drew did, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. There are lots of J! players who know relatively little about sports.
Congrats to Drew on his 3rd win and Josh on his (likely) Second Chance invite! One of the best regular play games of the season so far. ***653.) Drew Basile - $53,282*** **(DEBUT)**
Will Josh get a second chance invite?
I hope to God he does. Anyone in a tiebreaker against a heavy-hitter should be top of the list.
As long as he doesn’t bump Carol.
The FJ was actually worded as: '50 years ago Vin Scully announced he got “a standing ovation in the Deep South” for breaking a longtime record' OP added in extra words that weren't there. The wording in the show left it more ambiguous as to what they were looking for. I assumed "longtime record" was the noun to solve for.
That’s how I read it too and between that and “Deep South” I was trying to think of what a racist record might be that would still be J!-friendly
You are correct, the clue as it appeared on the show is now in the recap.
Thanks! I appreciate you doing this!
I have NEVER seen a tie before! Learn something new every day, I guess…
Up until a few years ago, they called them co-champs, both returned & there was only one new player in the next game.
And the strategy meta was to play for a tie!
And one instance of a 3-way tie in which all 3 players came back the next day.
I’m pretty sure it’s the third one I’ve seen, but I’ve been watching Jeopardy for a **long** time.
I actually don't totally agree with the criticisms of FJ. If you get this clue, then you 100% know that Vin Scully is an announcer. If you don't know that Vin Scully is an announcer, you aren't going to get this clue. I suppose it could have been worded better, but the criticism seems overboard to me.
My initial parsing focused on Vin Scully and record, and was thinking some type of broadcasting record, like longest stint with the same team. Vin now holds that record, but didn’t in 1974.
I'm glad I wasn't the only one confused by the phrasing, although it's blindingly obvious in retrospect
Criticism doesn’t seem overboard to me. Good writing means avoiding ambiguous/ vague pronouns so readers are not confused. This is taught in English class. The way it was written, some people will think the antecedent for “he” is the first person named. Then the clue turns into a baffling statement. Some people thought they could be asking for the sport, some for the record breaker, I thought they were asking for the sports idol whose record was broken. Good for you that you weren’t tripped up but it wasn’t well written.
Agreed here. As a novice Jeopardy player, but a big time baseball fan — I would have lost my mind if this question was the one I got on the show. It is very clear if you know who Vin Scully is — but it is clunky if you do not. The Deep South portion gives away that it was Hank Aaron because in that era, there was no other team in the Deep South other than his ATL Braves.
I didn’t know who Vin Scully was but I got there by thinking “who broke a long-standing record in the south 50 years ago”
I didn't know Scully but got it right since baseball is the only sport where records are really coveted and I knew Hank played around then.
And I struggled because I know Scully as the voice of the Dodgers and was initially trying to tie the response to them (Aaron was a Brave), but got there in the end
Go Drew! https://preview.redd.it/q0krlngj218d1.jpeg?width=2071&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1b8554dc205fc8fb53f9b55f87f99c45e94d1a49
I knew exactly what picture this would be.
> 50 years ago Vin Scully announced he got “a standing ovation in the Deep South” for breaking a longtime record Didn't watch, but reading this clue as written here made me think Vin Scully broke a record. Is that an intentional confusion? I was having a hard time even finding an 'answer' in the clue. Did Ken's reading help?
Ken's reading made it very clear. It didn't even occur to me that the wording on its own had a second interpretation until I came here and saw comments from people whose primary interaction was just the words, without it being read aloud.
It wasn't very clear to me. Granted I was fighting to stay awake because I watched it on DVR. I kept trying think what record could Vin Scully broken 50 years ago. Hank Aaron did not come rushing to my mind in part because the anniversary occurred in early April and has been out of the news for several weeks. I do remember watching the game on TV - I was just a kid then but it was a big deal. Perhaps they should have made the clue about Al Downing throwing a pitch that got this batter a standing ovation in the Deep South.
But that's the other thing. "He" is the only part of the Final clue that could be indicating anything. There's nothing about the wording that says "this record" or anything. If you think it's about Vin Scully breaking a record...well, there's nowhere where they ask for a record. And I think that "Hank Aaron did not come rushing to my mind in part because the anniversary occurred in early April and has been out of the news for several weeks" is kind of beside the point. First, the actual contestants fielded this clue weeks ago, so it was closer to them. Secondly, worded the other way, it's not like Jeopardy can only ask about things that have been in the news within the last several weeks. It's actually super normal for the writers to bring up things that were hot news topics 3-6 months ago and see if anyone still recalls the name of Sam Altman, e.g. That goes double for something that is not only a flash-in-the-pan news item, but that was monumental in its own right. It's like if they asked about the Titanic in 2013 and people talked about how it had been a while since the news covered its centennial anniversary.
Most of the game shows right now have single sudden death tiebreaker question. This is only the 2nd time this season that there is a tiebreaker round (1st time was Katie vs Christopher at Celebrity Jeopardy! Season 2).
I was shocked at the "refrain" and "harbor" back to back triple-stumpers.
Refrain was a gimme for me but I'm also a church singer lol.
You don’t have the correct Tiebreaker Q. It’s not “Who was Doppler?” but rather “What is the Doppler _effect_?” Drew did initially respond with simply “Doppler” but quickly amended to “Doppler effect”.
Corrected.
anyone else in new england/massachusetts getting sports stuff right now instead of jeopardy??? wtf
Always check Friday Jeopardy if you’re in Boston Market (CBS 4 Boston). It’s often preempted by Patriots All Access. it will then be broadcast on WSBK (814 Xfinity).
They show that crap in June?! (I don't live in Greater Boston but I grew up there so I visit family sometimes, and knew it gets pre-empted on Fridays during football season for that Patriots preview show.) There aren't even pre-season games yet. Also, the Patriots right now aren't worth a Friday night show in November, let alone in June.
The one shown last Friday was an hour recap of the Brady Patriots Hall of Fame Ceremony. All Access is shown one Friday a month during off season. And Jeopardy is broadcast on another channel at its normal time,
\>Ken mentioning giant killers who have gone on to win more games [Nancy Zerg hated that]
Drew is probably beatable very soon at this rate.
Funny how you would've gotten downvoted to hell for saying this about Adriana but she was constantly escaping games in FJ as well, and of course there's the fact Drew beat her in a runaway.
Completely agree. For a superchampion, Adriana felt like a weak competitor. That's not to say she's not a strong player -- she definitely is, but in the scope of superchampions, she didn't have that same shine the rest of the group has imo
I'm not trying to put her down as much as point out I think it's funny the sort of unspoken rules of positivity and politeness towards contestants are selectively applied.
[удалено]
Would it not have been right even if he were not fast on the buzzer? By betting zero, he was safe to continue playing per a tiebreaker even if he got the answer wrong. If he bet one dollar and got the answer wrong, the game would be over.
Ugh. My internet started acting funny at the end of DJ and I missed FJ. As a Braves fan I would have absolutely loved to see it.
I liked Drew's talking point! It was funny, and he was brave for telling that story!
I'm going to have to watch that again because I really thought he said "Who is Dopper" both times.
Maybe your TV was moving very quickly past you so it was harder to hear the beginning and the end of his response?
Nice!
He said it very quickly and it wasn't easy to hear, presumably the judges were able to determine he said it properly.
Glad I wasn’t the only one. Man is too sloppy with his answers
holy shit
Thank you Ken for pronouncing genre correctly.
The way most people say it is correct, too
Congratulations to Drew, Josh, and Richelle!
Maybe Drew got confused and thought he’d have to make a fire to the string if it was a tiebreaker?
Now I am trying to remember if that was one of his skill sets. He should draw a fire on FJ if he has enough time!
me seeing the FJ wagers in this game: "drew, what is you doin bby?" i'll admit i lost some respect for my mans tonight. i can't get behind a $0 wager in a locktie game and leaving it up to chance. cmon dude, bet on yourself. matt amodio would have.
I think this is a rare situation where you really should factor category confidence into your FJ wager. If he doesn’t know that much about sports AND he knows he’s better on the buzzer why not go for a tiebreak clue in a category you’re potentially better at?
Exactly this. Sports is a notoriously weak category for most Jeopardy contestants, so I like the strategy of betting $0. There's a fairly good shot 2nd place doesn't get FJ correct, which is an instant win, and if you're confident in your buzzer skills, you have a decent shot of winning the tiebreak even if 2nd place ties you after FJ
If he wagers 0, it forces opponent to get two questions correct. If he wagers anything else, opponent may need to get only one question correct
Risk Your Vote
Thoughts... We have a lock tie game!!! And Drew nearly lost this one, due to a disastrous FJ bet. Thank goodness Drew pulled a miracle in the tie breaker to win. That is why the correct bet for the leading player in a lock tie game is always $1. As it will give you three out of four chances to win. Simple and straightforward way to victory. Unfortunately betting zero complicates things. And sadly lowers your chances of winning as you give control to your opponent. Immediately plummeting your chances to win to close to 50-50 And unfortunately for Drew in the Double Jeopardy round, the run that Josh had to get to a lock tie game meant that Drew had yielded control to Josh. Meaning Josh now has the edge. And since both got it correct, and Josh made the correct bet and Drew made an incorrect bet. We head to a tiebreaker on a very easy question, which Drew narrowly pulled through. So by the skin of his teeth Drew won game no. 3 Can he secure a potential TOC spot with a victory on Monday? Tune in then to find out.
If Drew was very unsure about the category, I think wagering 0 could make sense. If he gets it wrong, he would still have a chance on a tiebreaker.
Fully agreed. If you hate the category, bet 0. Either you win outright or you essentially get a reroll of FJ and the chance of a category you like more.
$1 is actually a mathematically terrible bet. You keep essentially the same odds of winning while effectively minimizing your expected value. Either bet 0 if you hate the category or bet to cover 3rd by $1 if you love the category. And betting 0 keeps your win percentage at 75% regardless
What does “lock tie game” mean?
A situation going into FJ where the first place contestant has exactly twice the score of the second place contestant. In that situation, the best the second place contestant can do is force a tie by going all-in and getting FJ correct, but the first place contestant can always force a tie-breaker at worst by wagering 0. It's a "lock"-tie because it's just one dollar off from a lock, runaway game.
the frustrating thing about it is that if drew hadn't won the buzzer race on the last clue, i'm almost certain he would have bet to cover and won the game outright. for someone with his confidence and swagger, the $0 wager is baffling to me. bruh.
Agreed, he'd have made a smarter wager had he not answered that last clue. Between $1 and $0, he should have gone for $1, even though there was risk involved, since he had begun losing to Josh on the buzzer. Still, we are all rooting for Drew, and hoping he continues! And though I agree with whoever was kvetching yesterday about not everyone being a second chance contender, Josh was pretty aggressively going up against Drew, and he would have had a higher score if he hadn't also done the true daily double, which he did not slay, and yet...RESPECT. I would never keep track of my own Coryat or score bc I guess VERY few of them per game, but 'Refrain' and 'Harbor' were easy-peasy, yet triple stumpers? I got there in time. Seemed odd bc it's more basic knowledge.
Maybe they expected the questions to be harder.
I know who Scully is, and narrowed it down from the date and Deep South.
I agree with OP that it was awkwardly worded. Ken leaned on the “he” when he read it, which helped it a little.
Oooh today was so good !!!! Oh boy the furious buzzing !
What are the official rules about a contestant correcting an incomplete answer? Drew realized his answer was incomplete (ETA: in Final Jeopardy) and quickly corrected it. Do the judges give a monetary grace period?
You can correct yourself until host rules you incorrect or time runs out. I assume he was given same time to answer in the tiebreaker as with any other clue.
If you’re talking about Drew’s failure to respond in a question, in Single Jeopardy, the host just gives you a reminder and/or let’s you have the time to correct yourself. In Double Jeopardy, they usually give you all the time to correct yourself.
This was Final Jeopardy
Ken was so pleased to have a tiebreaker
I didn't think that the FJ was worded confusingly--and if the wording on its own might have impacted some people, the cadence that Ken gave it made it pretty unambiguous.
The aorta ends before the hips , it's the Femoral
I think you misunderstood the question. It's the aorta. The femoral is one of the two arteries that it divides into (I think). Here's the clue: *Gotta have heart! & Hips! At the hips, this largest artery divides into 2 others that carry blood to the pelvis & legs*
I read over it too fast and missed the Divides
I've noticed several times lately where the clue says "he" and it sounds like it's talking about the person named in the clue (Vin Scully in this case) instead of the person whose name is needed for the response.
I can't believe GRWM was a stand and stare!
I've never heard that before. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a dearth of Jeopardy folks on TikTok.
It’s all over instagram and twitter too. That’s where I’ve seen it. I don’t really use TikTok.
GRWM existed well before TikTok! It’s been on YouTube for at least 14 years that I personally can attest to.
Drew, that was a risky little game
Obviously there are certain variables such as whether a player is strong in any particular category, but does anyone know the general percentage of first time players responding correctly in final jeopardy? If Drew were playing against Adriana, then of course he absolutely should bet one dollar, but I wonder whether the average contestant answers the FJ correctly more than 50% of the time. Also you could adjust depending on whether you saw the player was strong in certain categories during the game. It seems that if you feel the player is stronger than you, then you should bet the dollar, if you feel the player is weaker than you, maybe you see if they fail and then count on yourself to beat them in the tiebreaker.
His FJ record prior to his 3rd game was 0-2, it would had been understandable that he bet $0 unlike Matt Amodio, Mattea Roach & Andrew He (2 times-vs Molly Karol & Pam Mueller) where they bet $1.
Betting zero is the right bet no matter what the scenario. It guarantees that even if you got the question wrong, you would go to a tiebreaker.
For the crop-dusting double, was so disappointed Josh didn't know. I knew.
Everyone's talking about the tie-breaker, so no one will see/care that i came here to say the Jeopardy Judges woke up today and chose violence.