I think your'e video title is dreadfully Mocking because... the true fact is: (like daily doubles) the contestants write their wager BEFORE they know/see the question. It's done during the commercial break, they bet depending on their knowledge of the category. some know a category better than others.
@sundi712 please read the other comments in this topic or go to j-archive to view various wagering strategies. I don't want to explain the math again although you can figure out the odd scenarios for the first one on your own.
If your the leader the betting is simple. Bet $1 over the maximum the second place can get (assuming they can catch you). Both these leaders didn't do it! Very stupid. Second and third place betting is a little more involved but the 0$ bet by the third place guy (Bubba??) is correct considering the other contestants' totals.
AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWE NOT ENOUGH!!! LMAO that was the best part of the video. and that dumb bitch in the first one, well was dumb! first she answered the 2000 question and got it wrong and then bet 6000!!! What a fucking momo. how daft can you be?
For those of you wondering why this was a stupid bet... The most the guy could have got was 18,400. She had 14,200. The most she *needed* to bet was 4201. She gave the game away.
Second game she needed to bet 12,200 to tie 12,201 to win. She played it safe. Not necessarily "bad" wagering.
Also, it would have been better to cut out most of this stuff...
Agreed that this is poor wagering. The leader had 14,200 and needed to bet only 4,201 to ensure a victory with a correct answer. The fact that she went higher is pointless, but the fact that she went over 5,000 (the difference between her and 2nd place) for her final bet is a major error and opened the door to losing even though the 2nd place person also missed the question. I think Alex was a bit stunned there.
@slapshot2k2 The person who uploaded the video is listed above and below the video, i.e. duffrageous. Bad wagering would actually mean suboptimal wagering here, taking a liberal use of the word "bad." Read the other comments for more details.
Joanne SHOULD have wagered at least $12,201 to cover Srinivas' doubled score. I think watching Jennah lose earlier through excessive wagering had caused Joanne to be a bit more conservative.
Any wagering that results in a loss in Final Jeopardy that's irrelevant to whether the wagerer answers the question correctly is considered bad. Of course, there are exceptions. I don't see anything good here though.
@duffrageous you are completely wrong here on both videos. On the first, she could easily lose with only a $5000 lead. No one ever knows how confident their opponent is on the Final Jeopardy category and also has to bid based on their knowledge of the category.
The same thing for the 2nd video- they only had a $2000 difference. She just got outbid on that.
9200 * 2 = 18400. She should have bet 4201 for the win. Had she done so, she would have won. He bet for that scenario (should he get it right and her wrong), but it worked weirdly.
I realized something: these games were taped back to back (they usually film a whole week in one day). So Joanne would have seen the first game from the audience. Perhaps seeing Jennah lose because of an overly big wager scared her into making an overly small one.
if you tie in jeopardy, both players move on, so you should always aim for the tie if you feel you are facing an inferior 2nd and 3rd place player within striking distance and the monetary gain is only minimal. that way in the next round, you only have one new player who has a shot of being a skilled and intelligent player who is likely to become a repeat champion.
$4201 was the best wager she could have made. anything less and she risks the guy in 2nd catching her any more and she risks needlessly blowing it as seen here.
Babatope made a good wager the first time, he knew she would risk enough to cover twice his total, so she had to get it wrong if he had any chance of winning, and his wager made it so even if he got it wrong and she still got it wrong he would win. So it was a good wager.
When wagering in Final Jeopardy!, YOU HAVE TO KNOW HOW TO WAGER!!!! If you are in first, wager enough so that your current total plus your wager is one dollar higher than double what 2nd place has - this way you guarantee yourself the win if you respond correctly, even if second place wagers everything and gets it right. If you're not in first, just wager everything - you've got nothing to lose since only winners receive the money they win - second and third get fixed prizes.
Except for the fact that if the leader anticipates you risking everything and doesn't answer correctly, that drops them. Therefore a person in 2nd or 3rd can win by wagering very little, regardless of whether or not they are right. Didn't you realize that was exactly how the first one was won??
Actually the leader in the first one had no reason to wager more than $4,201, so both first and second made bad wagers - first place by wagering too much and second place by not even wagering enough to beat the leader if she had made the proper wager. Second place just got lucky.
No, $800 was the perfect bet. If he got it right and she wagered $4201 and missed, then she'd have $9999 and he'd have $10000. If she for some reason wagered more than $5800, which she did, he would win if she missed even if he didn't get the question correct.
2nd place made a good bet, 1st made an excessive one that cost her the game.
Actually, the contestants get pencil and paper to make their calculations with, whereas I was calculating in my head. Also, the contestants get the whole length of the final commercial break to make those calculations, plus if they need more time the producers will stop the tape to give them the time they need. All of this is according to "The Jeopardy! Book" by Alex Trebek, which is 19 years old, so some things might have changed.
If you are first place, you should bet the second place contestants score + the difference between your scores +1 (unless the catigory tells you that this is going to be a super easy, or super hard catigory for you)
Umm if you do this, you will be one dollar over what you can wager. if I am in first with $8000, and second place has $5000, according to you I would have to bet $8001. I.E., the second place contestants score, plus the difference ($3000) plus $1. apparently you cant add either.
Ha Ha, you are completly right, in my head I have the right idea, I explained it way wrong though, it should be 2 times the second place score, minus your score, +1
I agree, if you are in 2nd place, you should wager something small like maybe $1 or $2000 because it doesn't matter if you wager everything because if the 1st place person gets it right, they SHOULD win. However if you're in first place then you should bet the 2nd place person's score
You should bet enough so that you can finish with one dollar over DOUBLE the second person's score. If you already have over double the second place score, bet $0. If you're in third OR second, bet what you're comfortable with, it's your money.
there's a situation in wagering when you are more than 1.5x the 2nd player's score. at that point, you should bet as much money as you would need that if you lost, you would still be ahead of the 2nd player's pre-wagering score. that way the 2nd person would have to get it right to win unless you feel the category is challenging enough that all 3 of you would miss the answer. then you would just bet enough to cover the 2nd player's doubling.
First of all, the games were archived at the J! Archive.
Second of all: Jennah's wager was suboptimal because while it covers Babatope's doubled score, it doesn't take into account should Babatope wager "small". Because Jennah's situation was a "crush" situation, she had a 3/4th favorable payoff matrix assuming optimal wagers...
Third of all: Joanne's wager was a result of trying to outthink Srinivas. Joanne should have wagered $12,201, basically going on the fact that she'll win depending on if she gets Final or not.
Actually, when Babetope was champ he wagered $0 because he thought Srinivas and Joanna got their answers wrong. That would be why Joanna made a risky wager. xD
A better wager for Babatope is $3,501 should Srinivas wager $0 or get Final wrong with a cover wager over Babatope, and if Joanne makes a large wager and gets Final wrong.
I don't understand how Joanne was affected by Babatope's wager: the wagers are made in secret and before the Final clue is revealed. The only mind games on the set that are being played is entirely in one's head, not amongst each other, as the staff will not allow the contestants to talk with one another before Final.
What some people obviously don't get is that you bet before you see the question. You're supposed to bet based on what you know of the category because that's the only thing you know before you bet.
it's actually more effective to incorporate simple game theory because you can have an easy question in a hard category or a hard question in an easy category. for instance, you have $12,000 and your opponent has $6000. if you bet $1 and lose, you lose the match. your opponent will bet $6000, and by betting $0, you have a 50% chance of tying and 50% of winning outright. by betting $1, you have a 25% chance of losing and a 75% chance of winning.
I love the look on the first chick's face. Like she just picked 6000 out of a hat and was waiting to see if she won. Then she found out she lost...sad story.
Based on Babatope's wager I had a feeling that he wanted Jennah to lose by $1 if he were right and she were wrong. Jennah should have wagered $4,201 if that were to happen.
Joanne made a perfect cautious wager; she would have won with Babatope if everyone had gotten it wrong. So I can't fault her for that. But there is indeed no excuse for Jennah's wager (besides greed and/or overconfidence).
that's true, but from a psychological standpoint, not a practical one, she should have risked enough to answer the last question and be the winner. if there's a 50% chance that your opponent gets the right answer and a 50% chance you do too, you have to wager enough to cover double his/her score. if you think you will most likely get the question wrong to a higher extent than you think your opponent will get the question right, don't wager that much and hope your opponent gets it wrong.
That's just what she did. Instead of making a wager that counted on her getting it right, she made a wager that counted on Srinivas getting it wrong. It proved to be a bad choice, but hindsight is 20/20. (Dan Pawson, a nine-time champ, won at least once with the "bet small from first place, hope we all get it wrong" strategy.)
I noticed you asking about archives of games. j-archive [dot] com has every clue and response from many episodes of Jeopardy.
i made a long post that didn't get registered here. taking probability into account, assume your opponent will always risk enough to double his score, and you don't have a 1.5x lead over your opponent. also assume you have a 33% chance of getting the question right and your opponent has a 50% chance of getting the question right. that means you have a 66% chance of winning by betting enough to cover double your opponent's score.
Overlooking that those are HUGE assumptions to make, this scenario also ignores a third place player who has more than half the difference between the first place player's score and his/her wager to cover the second place player. No probability you pull out of the air is going to convince me that Joanne committed "bad wagering." She made an unfortunate choice, but it wasn't a bad wager.
(if this is a double post, I'm sorry; feel free to delete this or the other if it is)
i am ignoring the 3rd place player. you have to figure out how often a player in 2nd place bets it all or near that amount. that changes the whole scenario. i'm pretty sure it's at least 50% of the time. the daily double might clue you into how much your opponent will wager, but that's difficult to interpret. will your opponent only risk enough to surpass your current score, risk nothing hoping you make a high wager, or risk all of it?
If a first place player always made a "good" wager, the second place player would never risk everything (since their only hope of victory is first place getting it wrong, and no one would jeopardize that with a wager that would guarantee their loss with a wrong answer). Indeed, ignoring Babatope, Joanne would have won if Srinivas had made a wager based on what a "good" wager from first place would be.
But it's obvious we're not going to agree, so I'll stop now.
that's what srinivas did and he still won. knowing that the first place person is going to risk enough to cover double the second place person's score, the second place person would be foolish to risk anything. that occurs in less than 50% of the cases. the important factor is determining how much to risk to ensure your victory. joanne did not make a smart wager, not because she lost, but because she assumed she would get the question wrong and hoped srinivas would also get it wrong.
(You sucked me back in!) The assumption was bad, but because she would have won if it had been fulfilled, her wager was fine. I don't think I myself would ever risk making a small wager from first place, but I can't fault Joanne for hers.
Boyd's rule is a wagering "rule of thumb" that suggests that a player with a leading score going into Final Jeopardy! should wager to cover a doubled score by his or her closest trailing opponent.
Except that wages are made prior to seeing the question, you dunce. The "What is" at the top of the screen and the wager amount on the bottom are done during the commercial break preceding the question.
I think your'e video title is dreadfully Mocking because... the true fact is: (like daily doubles) the contestants write their wager BEFORE they know/see the question. It's done during the commercial break, they bet depending on their knowledge of the category. some know a category better than others.
ashcarl116 1 month ago
@sundi712 please read the other comments in this topic or go to j-archive to view various wagering strategies. I don't want to explain the math again although you can figure out the odd scenarios for the first one on your own.
duffrageous 6 months ago
Actually, this was Feb. 5-6, 2008.
nlafavore 11 months ago
Poster of this video is much more stupid than any of the contestants in this video.
jjcool777 1 year ago
If your the leader the betting is simple. Bet $1 over the maximum the second place can get (assuming they can catch you). Both these leaders didn't do it! Very stupid. Second and third place betting is a little more involved but the 0$ bet by the third place guy (Bubba??) is correct considering the other contestants' totals.
empire2011 1 year ago
skip to 5:55
Rbombsaway2 1 year ago
This happened before in 1994 but instead of Alex saying Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!, he just said "$2,000, not enough."
JeopardyandWheelFan 1 year ago
look how huge that first contestants boobs are. so awesome.
bucnomore11 1 year ago
i wonder how the black contestant delt with the first question.
quidnick 1 year ago
Wow, Alex totally pwned her w/ that reaction.
lookielouE1705 1 year ago
AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWE NOT ENOUGH!!! LMAO that was the best part of the video. and that dumb bitch in the first one, well was dumb! first she answered the 2000 question and got it wrong and then bet 6000!!! What a fucking momo. how daft can you be?
KnockOut22 1 year ago
For those of you wondering why this was a stupid bet... The most the guy could have got was 18,400. She had 14,200. The most she *needed* to bet was 4201. She gave the game away.
Second game she needed to bet 12,200 to tie 12,201 to win. She played it safe. Not necessarily "bad" wagering.
Also, it would have been better to cut out most of this stuff...
Kluender07 1 year ago
Agreed that this is poor wagering. The leader had 14,200 and needed to bet only 4,201 to ensure a victory with a correct answer. The fact that she went higher is pointless, but the fact that she went over 5,000 (the difference between her and 2nd place) for her final bet is a major error and opened the door to losing even though the 2nd place person also missed the question. I think Alex was a bit stunned there.
bigdenverguy 1 year ago
who ever uploaded this is an idiot... there was no bad wagering, what a waste of time
slapshot2k2 1 year ago
@slapshot2k2 The person who uploaded the video is listed above and below the video, i.e. duffrageous. Bad wagering would actually mean suboptimal wagering here, taking a liberal use of the word "bad." Read the other comments for more details.
DustyForever1 1 year ago
I've noticed a trend of $6801 recently.
Coastergeekperson04 1 year ago
Babatope should of won.
Boogiedowndisciple 2 years ago 2
Joanne SHOULD have wagered at least $12,201 to cover Srinivas' doubled score. I think watching Jennah lose earlier through excessive wagering had caused Joanne to be a bit more conservative.
bbbbbbbbbbbbb100 2 years ago
ummm explain the bad wagering?
zackman47 2 years ago 3
Any wagering that results in a loss in Final Jeopardy that's irrelevant to whether the wagerer answers the question correctly is considered bad. Of course, there are exceptions. I don't see anything good here though.
duffrageous 2 years ago
@duffrageous you are completely wrong here on both videos. On the first, she could easily lose with only a $5000 lead. No one ever knows how confident their opponent is on the Final Jeopardy category and also has to bid based on their knowledge of the category.
The same thing for the 2nd video- they only had a $2000 difference. She just got outbid on that.
sundi712 6 months ago
@zackman47 it is a véry bad wagéring lol shé would of won if shé bét 1$
derenkoff 1 year ago
@zackman47 did you watch the video?
teamguido555 11 months ago
9200 * 2 = 18400. She should have bet 4201 for the win. Had she done so, she would have won. He bet for that scenario (should he get it right and her wrong), but it worked weirdly.
wschmrdr 2 years ago
purple chick is hot
widemouthcannibal 2 years ago
what a couple dumbasses
zioz99 2 years ago
did Alex scare anyone else when he screamed like that?...
hellokittyrocksyodad 2 years ago
gay
elijahvandy 2 years ago
what a waste of time...
Ninofontane 2 years ago
i want those 6 minutes back
sedicenobufalo 2 years ago 4
Yeah, no shit. What a worthless video.
kennygomien 2 years ago 2
I realized something: these games were taped back to back (they usually film a whole week in one day). So Joanne would have seen the first game from the audience. Perhaps seeing Jennah lose because of an overly big wager scared her into making an overly small one.
unfasten 2 years ago
that was really all neccessary?
callmeskipper44 2 years ago
it's a site for videos.
duffrageous 2 years ago
if you tie in jeopardy, both players move on, so you should always aim for the tie if you feel you are facing an inferior 2nd and 3rd place player within striking distance and the monetary gain is only minimal. that way in the next round, you only have one new player who has a shot of being a skilled and intelligent player who is likely to become a repeat champion.
duffrageous 2 years ago
couldn't agree more. i've thought that to myself as well
grgfrg7 2 years ago
why is this video on youtube?
callmeskipper44 2 years ago
this is a site for videos.
duffrageous 2 years ago
I love how I knew the answers to 3 questions just by playing Call Of Duty...
Naster66 3 years ago 5
lol....you couldn't see the black guy....lol....shadows too dark.,...
BoboGumdrop 3 years ago
Comment removed
brucelee7525 3 years ago
Voltaire?! What the hell.
AsSomedayItMayHappen 3 years ago
i thought he was a philosopher, but anyways that was totally irrelevant to the question
sk8terboi8056 3 years ago
Yeah, but...Voltaire was born over a century earlier!
AsSomedayItMayHappen 3 years ago
$4201 was the best wager she could have made. anything less and she risks the guy in 2nd catching her any more and she risks needlessly blowing it as seen here.
Ranatoro 3 years ago 3
It also depends on how erudited one is of the broached category.
baxtercunningham 3 years ago
Babatope made a good wager the first time, he knew she would risk enough to cover twice his total, so she had to get it wrong if he had any chance of winning, and his wager made it so even if he got it wrong and she still got it wrong he would win. So it was a good wager.
thenamesgus 3 years ago
Who is Henry Clay?
Ahh! Damn, That was my guess. He was the great compromiser after all, Kansas Nebraska act.
Who is William Randolph Hearst?
OH! shit, I was way off on that one.
mortson978 3 years ago
When wagering in Final Jeopardy!, YOU HAVE TO KNOW HOW TO WAGER!!!! If you are in first, wager enough so that your current total plus your wager is one dollar higher than double what 2nd place has - this way you guarantee yourself the win if you respond correctly, even if second place wagers everything and gets it right. If you're not in first, just wager everything - you've got nothing to lose since only winners receive the money they win - second and third get fixed prizes.
jcgoble3 3 years ago
Except for the fact that if the leader anticipates you risking everything and doesn't answer correctly, that drops them. Therefore a person in 2nd or 3rd can win by wagering very little, regardless of whether or not they are right. Didn't you realize that was exactly how the first one was won??
charbach007 3 years ago
Actually the leader in the first one had no reason to wager more than $4,201, so both first and second made bad wagers - first place by wagering too much and second place by not even wagering enough to beat the leader if she had made the proper wager. Second place just got lucky.
jcgoble3 3 years ago
No, $800 was the perfect bet. If he got it right and she wagered $4201 and missed, then she'd have $9999 and he'd have $10000. If she for some reason wagered more than $5800, which she did, he would win if she missed even if he didn't get the question correct.
2nd place made a good bet, 1st made an excessive one that cost her the game.
charbach007 3 years ago 2
Oh yeah,...DUH! I guess I miscalculated. Sorry. You're right.
jcgoble3 3 years ago
=) Imagine trying to do these calculations in the short, pressure-laden period they get to bet! Hehe!
I'm sorta glad that I was horrible at my audition, because I probably would have ended up on one of these "stupid betting" videos.
charbach007 3 years ago
Actually, the contestants get pencil and paper to make their calculations with, whereas I was calculating in my head. Also, the contestants get the whole length of the final commercial break to make those calculations, plus if they need more time the producers will stop the tape to give them the time they need. All of this is according to "The Jeopardy! Book" by Alex Trebek, which is 19 years old, so some things might have changed.
jcgoble3 3 years ago
I stand corrected.
charbach007 3 years ago
if you are in the lead going into final jeopardy, you MUST wager enough so that you will win if you respond correctly
grgfrg7 3 years ago
Yes, lol. wow. well, i guess she just got caught up in the moment a little too much.
drogoth25 3 years ago
shoulda wagered 5001 bucks. holy shit, shes fucking dum as hell to be on yeopardy
drogoth25 3 years ago
she was a 4-day champion.
duffrageous 3 years ago
No she wasn't. Are you an idiot?
BootyLikeBeyonce 3 years ago
It irks me how Alex says "dullers" as opposed to "dollars". Might just be a Canadian thing.
ageguyera21 3 years ago
was 6:04 done by Alex or Srinivas? lol
BIGpoppasmurf220 3 years ago
If you are first place, you should bet the second place contestants score + the difference between your scores +1 (unless the catigory tells you that this is going to be a super easy, or super hard catigory for you)
burrheadjr 3 years ago
Umm if you do this, you will be one dollar over what you can wager. if I am in first with $8000, and second place has $5000, according to you I would have to bet $8001. I.E., the second place contestants score, plus the difference ($3000) plus $1. apparently you cant add either.
hades3185 3 years ago
Ha Ha, you are completly right, in my head I have the right idea, I explained it way wrong though, it should be 2 times the second place score, minus your score, +1
burrheadjr 3 years ago
yes, that works if you are at least 1.5x the 2nd player's score. that's what you should aim for when risking money in double jeopardy.
duffrageous 3 years ago
I agree, if you are in 2nd place, you should wager something small like maybe $1 or $2000 because it doesn't matter if you wager everything because if the 1st place person gets it right, they SHOULD win. However if you're in first place then you should bet the 2nd place person's score
danielzimmy69 3 years ago
You should bet enough so that you can finish with one dollar over DOUBLE the second person's score. If you already have over double the second place score, bet $0. If you're in third OR second, bet what you're comfortable with, it's your money.
ArtemissimetrA 3 years ago
u don't get the money if you lose
BikeForLife123454321 2 years ago
Looks like 2nd place gets $2000 and 3rd place gets $1000.
ArtemissimetrA 2 years ago
u get whatever money you won... but you don't play again
that's how it goes
randomusername20 2 years ago
Then why would people wager all their money on retarded answers?
krazy16dude 2 years ago
there's a situation in wagering when you are more than 1.5x the 2nd player's score. at that point, you should bet as much money as you would need that if you lost, you would still be ahead of the 2nd player's pre-wagering score. that way the 2nd person would have to get it right to win unless you feel the category is challenging enough that all 3 of you would miss the answer. then you would just bet enough to cover the 2nd player's doubling.
duffrageous 2 years ago
First of all, the games were archived at the J! Archive.
Second of all: Jennah's wager was suboptimal because while it covers Babatope's doubled score, it doesn't take into account should Babatope wager "small". Because Jennah's situation was a "crush" situation, she had a 3/4th favorable payoff matrix assuming optimal wagers...
chian052 3 years ago
Third of all: Joanne's wager was a result of trying to outthink Srinivas. Joanne should have wagered $12,201, basically going on the fact that she'll win depending on if she gets Final or not.
chian052 3 years ago
Actually, when Babetope was champ he wagered $0 because he thought Srinivas and Joanna got their answers wrong. That would be why Joanna made a risky wager. xD
Hawkwing4556 3 years ago
A better wager for Babatope is $3,501 should Srinivas wager $0 or get Final wrong with a cover wager over Babatope, and if Joanne makes a large wager and gets Final wrong.
I don't understand how Joanne was affected by Babatope's wager: the wagers are made in secret and before the Final clue is revealed. The only mind games on the set that are being played is entirely in one's head, not amongst each other, as the staff will not allow the contestants to talk with one another before Final.
chian052 3 years ago
What some people obviously don't get is that you bet before you see the question. You're supposed to bet based on what you know of the category because that's the only thing you know before you bet.
Axidage 3 years ago
it's actually more effective to incorporate simple game theory because you can have an easy question in a hard category or a hard question in an easy category. for instance, you have $12,000 and your opponent has $6000. if you bet $1 and lose, you lose the match. your opponent will bet $6000, and by betting $0, you have a 50% chance of tying and 50% of winning outright. by betting $1, you have a 25% chance of losing and a 75% chance of winning.
duffrageous 3 years ago
I love the look on the first chick's face. Like she just picked 6000 out of a hat and was waiting to see if she won. Then she found out she lost...sad story.
damienmetalwind 3 years ago
that mist of sucked first for chick
littlemissperfect166 3 years ago
fuck your dumb
crimsonmarch 3 years ago
It's fuck you're dumb...
Kerinannelee 3 years ago
fuck you suck my dick
crimsonmarch 3 years ago
Keri is right, but I was so amused by this exchange that I thumbed you both up
vysehrad 2 years ago
Based on Babatope's wager I had a feeling that he wanted Jennah to lose by $1 if he were right and she were wrong. Jennah should have wagered $4,201 if that were to happen.
animfan1 3 years ago
Joanne made a perfect cautious wager; she would have won with Babatope if everyone had gotten it wrong. So I can't fault her for that. But there is indeed no excuse for Jennah's wager (besides greed and/or overconfidence).
unfasten 3 years ago
yea, but to get final jeopardy right, be in the lead the whole game, and walk away with nothing means she should have risked a bit more.
duffrageous 3 years ago
she didn't know she was going to get it right when she wagered.
unfasten 3 years ago
that's true, but from a psychological standpoint, not a practical one, she should have risked enough to answer the last question and be the winner. if there's a 50% chance that your opponent gets the right answer and a 50% chance you do too, you have to wager enough to cover double his/her score. if you think you will most likely get the question wrong to a higher extent than you think your opponent will get the question right, don't wager that much and hope your opponent gets it wrong.
duffrageous 3 years ago
That's just what she did. Instead of making a wager that counted on her getting it right, she made a wager that counted on Srinivas getting it wrong. It proved to be a bad choice, but hindsight is 20/20. (Dan Pawson, a nine-time champ, won at least once with the "bet small from first place, hope we all get it wrong" strategy.)
I noticed you asking about archives of games. j-archive [dot] com has every clue and response from many episodes of Jeopardy.
unfasten 3 years ago
i made a long post that didn't get registered here. taking probability into account, assume your opponent will always risk enough to double his score, and you don't have a 1.5x lead over your opponent. also assume you have a 33% chance of getting the question right and your opponent has a 50% chance of getting the question right. that means you have a 66% chance of winning by betting enough to cover double your opponent's score.
duffrageous 3 years ago
Overlooking that those are HUGE assumptions to make, this scenario also ignores a third place player who has more than half the difference between the first place player's score and his/her wager to cover the second place player. No probability you pull out of the air is going to convince me that Joanne committed "bad wagering." She made an unfortunate choice, but it wasn't a bad wager.
(if this is a double post, I'm sorry; feel free to delete this or the other if it is)
unfasten 3 years ago
i am ignoring the 3rd place player. you have to figure out how often a player in 2nd place bets it all or near that amount. that changes the whole scenario. i'm pretty sure it's at least 50% of the time. the daily double might clue you into how much your opponent will wager, but that's difficult to interpret. will your opponent only risk enough to surpass your current score, risk nothing hoping you make a high wager, or risk all of it?
duffrageous 3 years ago
i still think $5000 is a bad wager in that scenario unless the evidence proves most trailing players don't risk all of it.
duffrageous 3 years ago
If a first place player always made a "good" wager, the second place player would never risk everything (since their only hope of victory is first place getting it wrong, and no one would jeopardize that with a wager that would guarantee their loss with a wrong answer). Indeed, ignoring Babatope, Joanne would have won if Srinivas had made a wager based on what a "good" wager from first place would be.
But it's obvious we're not going to agree, so I'll stop now.
unfasten 3 years ago
that's what srinivas did and he still won. knowing that the first place person is going to risk enough to cover double the second place person's score, the second place person would be foolish to risk anything. that occurs in less than 50% of the cases. the important factor is determining how much to risk to ensure your victory. joanne did not make a smart wager, not because she lost, but because she assumed she would get the question wrong and hoped srinivas would also get it wrong.
duffrageous 3 years ago
(You sucked me back in!) The assumption was bad, but because she would have won if it had been fulfilled, her wager was fine. I don't think I myself would ever risk making a small wager from first place, but I can't fault Joanne for hers.
unfasten 3 years ago
Joanne's response of "What is Nosferantu?" contained 10 letters not 9 letters of "What is Nosferatu?"
animfan1 3 years ago
you're allowed to be one consonant off, right?
duffrageous 3 years ago
If the letter is silent than yes, but otherwise no.
animfan1 3 years ago
I had a feeling based on Babatope's wager, he wanted Jennah to lose by $1 if he were right and Jennah were wrong.
animfan1 4 years ago
There was a player on January 30, 2008 who violated Boyd's rule and didn't wager enough money.
animfan1 4 years ago
what's boyd's rule?
duffrageous 3 years ago
Boyd's rule is a wagering "rule of thumb" that suggests that a player with a leading score going into Final Jeopardy! should wager to cover a doubled score by his or her closest trailing opponent.
animfan1 3 years ago
that's the rule i inferred by the video description. so in the spelling, you can be one consonant off if it's silent? how about in the pronunciation?
duffrageous 3 years ago
It depends on what you said.
animfan1 3 years ago
where can i get show archives? i wish they made the episodes on DVD.
duffrageous 3 years ago
Except that wages are made prior to seeing the question, you dunce. The "What is" at the top of the screen and the wager amount on the bottom are done during the commercial break preceding the question.
dspivak 4 years ago
i hope the pot isn't calling the kettle black. if you want to know how to wager in the final round, please ask politely.
duffrageous 4 years ago
? The point is that if she didn't think she would know the answer, wagering too much would make her lose. Still confused?
dspivak 4 years ago
What the hell is the point of this video :) ?
krisronold 4 years ago
did you read the title or description?
duffrageous 4 years ago