Author Topic: No Harm No Foul (Read 2882 times)

Don Howard · « **on:** April 18, 2009, 08:52:31 PM »

I would like Alex Trebek to stop using the above listed phrase.
I don't believe he truly knows what it means.

Robert Hutchinson · « **Reply #1 on:** April 18, 2009, 10:07:43 PM »

"Since you all missed that $2,000 clue, no harm, no foul."

*time's-up signal sounds*

"And, ooh, sorry, Mildred, with -$800, you won't be around for Final Jeopardy!"

TLEberle · « **Reply #2 on:** April 18, 2009, 10:42:55 PM »

[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'213475\' date=\'Apr 18 2009, 07:07 PM\']
"Since you all missed that $2,000 clue, no harm, no foul."

*time's-up signal sounds*

"And, ooh, sorry, Mildred, with -$800, you won't be around for Final Jeopardy!"[/quote]Not only the fact that a lock game might become unlocked, or t'other way around.

Jay Temple · « **Reply #3 on:** April 19, 2009, 04:26:38 PM »

I stopped watching a while back, but I did wish he'd pay attention and not use the phrase in the situations described here.

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think."

Robert Hutchinson · « **Reply #4 on:** April 20, 2009, 05:47:15 PM »

While we're at it, I wish he'd stop announcing whether a game is or isn't a lock. Yeah, the contestants ought to know anyway, but a few of them don't.

clemon79 · « **Reply #5 on:** April 20, 2009, 05:49:42 PM »

[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'213602\' date=\'Apr 20 2009, 02:47 PM\']
While we're at it, I wish he'd stop announcing whether a game is or isn't a lock. Yeah, the contestants ought to know anyway, but a few of them don't.[/quote]
Does he really do that? Wow. One would think that making any comments like that would be strictly verboten.

Gus · « **Reply #6 on:** April 20, 2009, 06:19:55 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'213603\' date=\'Apr 20 2009, 04:49 PM\']
[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'213602\' date=\'Apr 20 2009, 02:47 PM\']
While we're at it, I wish he'd stop announcing whether a game is or isn't a lock. Yeah, the contestants ought to know anyway, but a few of them don't.[/quote]
Does he really do that? Wow. One would think that making any comments like that would be strictly verboten.
[/quote]
I recall him saying it, but I don't recall him ever saying it before the FJ wagers are in. Afterwards, yeah.

clemon79 · « **Reply #7 on:** April 20, 2009, 06:21:50 PM »

[quote name=\'Gus\' post=\'213607\' date=\'Apr 20 2009, 03:19 PM\']
Afterwards, yeah.[/quote]
Well, yeah, as long as the wagers are already in and locked, the floodgates are open.

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #8 on:** April 20, 2009, 06:41:59 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'213609\' date=\'Apr 20 2009, 06:21 PM\']Well, yeah, as long as the wagers are already in and locked, the floodgates are open.[/quote]
Yeah, in the decades-long history of the show, he may have occasionally said something before the wagers, but only in a really, really obvious situation, and usually in language like "Today has belonged to..." or "A most impressive performance by..."

He's actually much more likely to specifically mention when a game with a wide spread is NOT a runaway, which really isn't much different on the giving-players-a-clue scale. Bottom line is that anybody who passed a Jeopardy test ought to be able to tell whether one score is more than twice another score.

Robert Hutchinson · « **Reply #9 on:** April 21, 2009, 09:25:31 PM »

I'm mostly thinking of what Matt is describing, but there was a show a few months ago where he made a pretty explicit "this is a lock" comment. "That last clue put things out of reach" or something like that.