Jeopardy! to Eliminate Ties?

[MSTieScott]

However, the same source notes this no tie rule is done on Sports Jeopardy, which I thought was interesting.

Makes sense from a budget standpoint. This way, they know that their prize budget is exactly $8,000 per episode plus the prize money for the championship game. No sense in allowing one or more unexpected $3,000 overages on this untested internet program.

(How does "Sports Jeopardy!" pay out consolation money if there's a tie for second place? For that matter, how does "Jeopardy!"?)

[WilliamPorygon]

However, the same source notes this no tie rule is done on Sports Jeopardy, which I thought was interesting.

(How does "Sports Jeopardy!" pay out consolation money if there's a tie for second place? For that matter, how does "Jeopardy!"?)

On original recipe J!, whichever of the two was leading the other going into Final Jeopardy! gets the 2nd place prize.  (If they were tied then too, it's whichever one was ahead of the other most recently.)  I'd figure it's likely the same for Sports J!

[chad1m]

For those looking for more public proof, the spouse of an upcoming contestant confirmed it on JBoard.

[Kevin Prather]

I wonder if they'll discuss the rule change on the air, or just slip it in and see if anyone notices.

[clemon79]

I wonder if they'll discuss the rule change on the air, or just slip it in and see if anyone notices.

Seems to me they would be able to slip it in if they wanted to (Approves), because with the rule in place, FJ wagers that set up the possibility will be WAY fewer and further between.

[Kevin Prather]

I wonder if they'll discuss the rule change on the air, or just slip it in and see if anyone notices.

Seems to me they would be able to slip it in if they wanted to (Approves), because with the rule in place, FJ wagers that set up the possibility will be WAY fewer and further between.

Good point. No more charity ties. You'll only see a tie in certain stalemate situations.

And sadly, this eliminates one of my favorite strategies we've discussed but I've never seen. Getting the DD as the last clue in the DJ round, and purposely whiffing it to force a tie situation.

[clemon79]

And sadly, this eliminates one of my favorite strategies we've discussed but I've never seen. Getting the DD as the last clue in the DJ round, and purposely whiffing it to force a tie situation.

Which really illustrates perfectly why the tie is being killed: if you've got a situation where it *might* be beneficial to intentionally answer incorrectly, eliminate that situation.

[Kevin Prather]

And sadly, this eliminates one of my favorite strategies we've discussed but I've never seen. Getting the DD as the last clue in the DJ round, and purposely whiffing it to force a tie situation.

Which really illustrates perfectly why the tie is being killed: if you've got a situation where it *might* be beneficial to intentionally answer incorrectly, eliminate that situation.

Fair cop. I made a similar point regarding "Millionaire Hot Seat" on another message board. There's a point in the game where "strategy" dictates you should probably pass even if you know the answer. That flies in the face of the game.

[TLEberle]

I was trying to find a story I had read about Swarthmore college quiz bowl and the big reveal was that the student in question was Arthur Chu and didn't find that. What I did find was an interview where Arthur relates dueling stories about his "bet to leave a tie" thing that he did: one tweet back to him said that "your bet on Jeopardy! restored my faith in humanity," and the other one said "This is everything that's wrong with the Millenial generation; everyone gets a prize."

You really can't please everyone.

[rjaguar3]

I was trying to find a story I had read about Swarthmore college quiz bowl and the big reveal was that the student in question was Arthur Chu and didn't find that.

Here you go: http://www.hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=293796#p293796

[TLEberle]

Bless you sir. Pick up your hundred Eberle escudos at any open window.

[fthrmulcahy]

Feel free to think I am taking this too far....in the event of a tie you could pay both players out but neither comes back as champion...you would never have players purposely playing for a tie ever again.  Maybe it's draconian but in this age of game theory it might me necessary.  Just my two cents...

[PYLdude]

Feel free to think I am taking this too far....in the event of a tie you could pay both players out but neither comes back as champion...you would never have players purposely playing for a tie ever again.  Maybe it's draconian but in this age of game theory it might me necessary.  Just my two cents...

It is draconian. And asinine.

[BrandonFG]

But then you kill the reward of finishing first, even if as co-champions. And now you penalize two people who worked their butts off for 22 minutes. Sure they get their money, but they don't get to defend the crown. It would be like NFL two teams finishing 12-4 in the division, calling them both division champions, but not allowing them to go to the playoffs. Besides, I think viewers would scratch their heads if, on the next program, Alex says "Well...we had a thrilling tie for first place yesterday...but those two won't be back today."

I'm not the biggest fan of a sudden death, but sending both home is unfair IMO.

[TLEberle]

Feel free to think I am taking this too far....in the event of a tie you could pay both players out but neither comes back as champion...you would never have players purposely playing for a tie ever again.  Maybe it's draconian but in this age of game theory it might me necessary.  Just my two cents...

Or maybe they say "If I get FJ right I win thirty grand. Yes please."

Most people who get on the show don't win so it stands to reason that if you allow more people to win they will take you up on it. You also need to have more contestants in the green room, as opposed to the ten that you need now; and then you have the issue of having leftover players at the end of the week. (I'm sure the show has twelve or more people backstage because someone might get sick or scared, but I wouldn't want to go through the whole day only to find out that I have to come back tomorrow and do it again, with no assurance that I'll get to play.)

If pressed to come up with something new, I would have the winner of the tie-breaker clue keep the money, but the other player gets to come back. Or let them divide the prize money.