Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Happy 40th Anniversary Jeopardy!  (Read 3939 times)

SplitSecond

  • Guest
Happy 40th Anniversary Jeopardy!
« Reply #15 on: March 31, 2004, 02:23:39 PM »
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Mar 31 2004, 09:27 AM\'] At no point did I EVER hear that they made the change to help "slower" players, which strikes me as being against anything Jeopardy would ever try to do. [/quote]
More to the point, not engaging the contestant lockout devices until after the question is read gives no advantage whatsoever to older players, who typically have slower reflexes in pressing the button regardless of whether they can come up with the right answer before the other two players.

I still like Sale of the Century's and Split Second's quiz formats better - no visual representation of the question, and jumping in early interrupts the question.  There's more jeopardy than Jeopardy! in jumping in early, practically preventing signaling before the question is read, and leading to a better payoff even in the "I don't know" situations.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2004, 02:24:13 PM by SplitSecond »

Matt Ottinger

  • Member
  • Posts: 12986
Happy 40th Anniversary Jeopardy!
« Reply #16 on: March 31, 2004, 03:26:29 PM »
[quote name=\'SplitSecond\' date=\'Mar 31 2004, 03:23 PM\'] I still like Sale of the Century's and Split Second's quiz formats better - no visual representation of the question, and jumping in early interrupts the question. [/quote]
 From a competitive standpoint, I completely agree.  Having played both (yeah, we'll get to that eventually...) I can tell you that it's much more interesting as a competitor to be able to interrupt as soon as you think you know.  That's the way most quiz bowl competitions work as well.

However, the subtle genius that is Jeopardy is that the extra time that it takes to see and hear the clue being read gives those nice people at home more time to figure out the correct responses before someone answers.  When someone good is playing $otC, the folks at home don't get nearly as much of a chance to play along.

Split Second, in its original format, was a perfect melding of the two styles, because the FIRST person could interrupt and score his points, but Tom Kennedy would then finish the question before the other two players responded.
This has been another installment of Matt Ottinger's Masters of the Obvious.
Stay tuned for all the obsessive-compulsive fun of Words Have Meanings.

uncamark

  • Guest
Happy 40th Anniversary Jeopardy!
« Reply #17 on: March 31, 2004, 04:22:11 PM »
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Mar 31 2004, 03:26 PM\']Split Second, in its original format, was a perfect melding of the two styles, because the FIRST person could interrupt and score his points, but Tom Kennedy would then finish the question before the other two players responded.[/quote]
And that got changed in the 80s revival, IMO, only because Monty wanted more camera time.  Or so it seems to me.

carlopanno

  • Guest
Happy 40th Anniversary Jeopardy!
« Reply #18 on: April 01, 2004, 09:37:43 AM »
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Mar 31 2004, 11:27 AM\'] I seem to recall reading in Harry Eisenberg's book that a reason for the change was because it reduced the number of wrong responses and the number of delays waiting for responses that never came.   Good players often would ring in right away, assuming they'd be able to come up with the correct response even before they'd seen the clue.  Great players like Chuck Forrest were able to make that gamble pay off.  Still, on those times when the gamble didn't pay off we'd be left with awkward "I don't know" moments, moments that were dramatically reduced when the players got to hear the entire clue before deciding whether to signal.

At no point did I EVER hear that they made the change to help "slower" players, which strikes me as being against anything Jeopardy would ever try to do. [/quote]
 Yes, that's right, it was also to minimize those premature ring-ins and embarrassed silences. As a bonus, it also minimized the subsequent score penalty for those contestants. Sorry, I had forgotten, but FWIW it has been almost 20 years (19, to be precise, later this month) since I was in that meeting where Alex told us about his new rule.

--C

ChuckNet

  • Member
  • Posts: 2193
Happy 40th Anniversary Jeopardy!
« Reply #19 on: April 01, 2004, 05:48:35 PM »
Quote
Yes, that's right, it was also to minimize those premature ring-ins and embarrassed silences.

It also worked to stop incredibly fast players from dominating the game...Eisenberg cited Michael Day, who managed to win 5 games thanks to his habit of buzzing in the instant a clue was revealed (it was also for this reason they changed buzzer system so that it required a coupla tenths of a seconds to reset itself.

Incidentally, when Day returned for the 1986 ToC, Eisenberg noted that he seemed surprised to first discover the buzzer worked differently than it used to.

Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby")