The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: jmangin on April 01, 2009, 03:39:03 PM
-
Taking all matters with a grain of salt, the Wikipedia article on Jeopardy (http://\"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeopardy!#Finishing_Double_Jeopardy.21_with_.240_or_less\") says that on one Fleming episode of the show all three contestants finished in the red at the end of Double Jeopardy. Does anyone have this episode in their collection or possibly a clip, or any recollection of the incident?
-
While I can't say for sure whether this did or did not happen, I'm wary of what I read on wikipedia. An example: I read a bit of the Dating Game page on there today, and in the "episode status" section, it states that only 25 daytime episodes exist and have been run by GSN. That's baloney. Most of the daytime run exists and GSN ran several years of it. Odd thing is, last time I looked at that page I don't recall seeing that.
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'211727\' date=\'Apr 1 2009, 04:05 PM\']
While I can't say for sure whether this did or did not happen, I'm wary of what I read on wikipedia. [/quote]
Same...Knockout's article claims that every episode still exists (http://\"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knockout_(game_show)\"), with not a shred of proof to back it up.
-
I also wonder how they figure out airdates, when there's no direct mention of them or no original commercials that could give clues. The color Eye Guess that exists the site claims is from Nov 8, 1967. If it is, all the power to whomever posted it, I'd just be curious as to how they figured it out.
Some shows it's easy to figure out airdates - if it has celebrities and they happen to mention the day of the week, a check of old TVGuides can confirm those ones.
-
[quote name=\'jmangin\' post=\'211724\' date=\'Apr 1 2009, 03:39 PM\']Taking all matters with a grain of salt, the Wikipedia article on Jeopardy (http://\"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeopardy!#Finishing_Double_Jeopardy.21_with_.240_or_less\") says that on one Fleming episode of the show all three contestants finished in the red at the end of Double Jeopardy. Does anyone have this episode in their collection or possibly a clip, or any recollection of the incident?[/quote]
While the kneejerk Wikibashing is unsurprising, one of you might have noticed that this particular claim was attributed. The reference is to Maxine Fabe's original work TV Game Shows and sure enough, on page 241, she writes: "Contestants with negative scores were not permitted to play Final Jeopardy, and more than once, that was the case for all three contestants."
The problem here, of course, is that while Fabe's book is a landmark work for our genre's library, it was written in the days before GSN, before the internet, even before widespread use of VCRs, before anything that would help her actually be able to watch old shows again. She might have remembered such an event, or somebody might have told her it happened, or she might have made it up because it sounded cool and she wasn't thinking in 1979 that thirty years later, she'd be quoted by a reference work with its own reliability issues. The Fabe book, while a fun read, is riddled with inaccuracies and typos. I'd have a hard time accepting an offhand comment in it as definite truth.
Regardless, I'm sure that if someone had such a bizarre oddity among the tiny handful of surviving episodes, it would have surfaced by now.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'211760\' date=\'Apr 1 2009, 06:19 PM\']
[quote name=\'jmangin\' post=\'211724\' date=\'Apr 1 2009, 03:39 PM\']Taking all matters with a grain of salt, the Wikipedia article on Jeopardy (http://\"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeopardy!#Finishing_Double_Jeopardy.21_with_.240_or_less\") says that on one Fleming episode of the show all three contestants finished in the red at the end of Double Jeopardy. Does anyone have this episode in their collection or possibly a clip, or any recollection of the incident?[/quote]
While the kneejerk Wikibashing is unsurprising
[/quote]
I certainly wouldn't classify my query as "wikibashing," I was just curious if anyone else here (being game show fans) recalled such an incident.
-
Don Pardo might know. :) The Fabe book was a pioneer, no doubt, but how it got to print with "The Newsletter Rollers" in there...
-
[quote name=\'jmangin\' post=\'211767\' date=\'Apr 1 2009, 07:19 PM\']I certainly wouldn't classify my query as "wikibashing," I was just curious if anyone else here (being game show fans) recalled such an incident.
[/quote]
I'm sorry, no, not your question. "Grain of salt" I've got no problem with, and you had a genuine question. My problem is that people who don't know the answer to your question simply take these opportunities to make unrelated comments about Wikipedia's other errors, and again, this time without even bothering to notice that the thing you asked about was sourced. It gets old.
-
FWIW, if memory serves, Final J!'s cancellation because there were no eligible contestants happened more than once.
-
As this ever happened on Trebek's? If so, what was done to fill the remaining time?
-
[quote name=\'GrandGame1440\' post=\'211824\' date=\'Apr 1 2009, 11:16 PM\']
As this ever happened on Trebek's? If so, what was done to fill the remaining time?
[/quote]
If I recall an episode back in, oh, October of '69, Art closed the show with a musical number. He announced he was appearing in "Show Boat" out on Long Island, then sang "Can't Help Lovin' Dat Man," kind of an odd choice actually.
-
[quote name=\'GrandGame1440\' post=\'211824\' date=\'Apr 2 2009, 12:16 AM\']
As this ever happened on Trebek's? If so, what was done to fill the remaining time?
[/quote]
They played a round of Big Numbers and Alex shouted, "Many moon come, that's a niner".
No, seriously, I haven't been able to find any proof of it happening by scanning the J! archive. Considering how surprised fans were when only ONE contestant got to play Final J! a couple years ago, I would say that a no-final Trebek J! never happened.
-
The Mental Floss website (http://\"http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/29533\") confirms that a J! episode ended with nobody eligible for Final J!
-
[quote name=\'alfonzos\' post=\'221347\' date=\'Jul 28 2009, 08:22 PM\']The Mental Floss website (http://\"http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/29533\") confirms that a J! episode ended with nobody eligible for Final J![/quote]
Unless there's some independent reporting going on for that little factoid (which seems unlikely), it appears to just be a regurgitation of the Wikipedia/Maxine Fabe reference.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'221354\' date=\'Jul 28 2009, 10:03 PM\'][quote name=\'alfonzos\' post=\'221347\' date=\'Jul 28 2009, 08:22 PM\']The Mental Floss website (http://\"http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/29533\") confirms that a J! episode ended with nobody eligible for Final J![/quote]
Unless there's some independent reporting going on for that little factoid (which seems unlikely), it appears to just be a regurgitation of the Wikipedia/Maxine Fabe reference.
[/quote]
From what I've seen in the past, Mental Floss is not exactly big on the research and fact checking.
--Mike
-
[quote name=\'mmb5\' post=\'221363\' date=\'Jul 28 2009, 11:16 PM\']From what I've seen in the past, Mental Floss is not exactly big on the research and fact checking.[/quote]
Sounds about right...I noticed they also have that bizarre "1 in 25 million odds" thing about a three-way tie.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'221373\' date=\'Jul 29 2009, 08:26 AM\']I noticed they also have that bizarre "1 in 25 million odds" thing about a three-way tie.[/quote]Well, heck, you can't blame them there. That quote came from the show itself. (http://\"http://www.jeopardy.com/announcement_20070314_3wt.php\")
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'221374\' date=\'Jul 29 2009, 08:37 AM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'221373\' date=\'Jul 29 2009, 08:26 AM\']I noticed they also have that bizarre "1 in 25 million odds" thing about a three-way tie.[/quote]Well, heck, you can't blame them there. That quote came from the show itself. (http://\"http://www.jeopardy.com/announcement_20070314_3wt.php\")[/quote]
...which doesn't make it right, as you'd think a site that refers to itself as "Mental Floss" might realize.
-
There's a comment (http://\"http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/15382#comment-76417\") on a different article from the site about a year ago that discusses how that particular professor came up with his caluclations and what other calculations others experienced in the field came up with.
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'221376\' date=\'Jul 29 2009, 08:42 AM\']There's a comment (http://\"http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/15382#comment-76417\") on a different article from the site about a year ago that discusses how that particular professor came up with his caluclations and what other calculations others experienced in the field came up with.[/quote]
More specifically, the difference between the odds calculated by a person familiar with Jeopardy and a person unfamiliar with Jeopardy. The guy who's familiar with the show came up with a much more rational-sounding 1 in 20,000. Still, there are so many variables, some of which are human (how often will the person in the lead like that deliberately play for a tie?) that any odds calculated for an event like that are a little suspect.
To the larger point, yeah, I wanted to get it out there fairly quickly that Mental Floss doesn't do a lot of independent reporting, so a reference that appears to merely repeat something we're already disputing hardly "confirms" anything.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'221377\' date=\'Jul 29 2009, 08:24 AM\']Still, there are so many variables, some of which are human (how often will the person in the lead like that deliberately play for a tie?)[/quote]
For your typical non-game-theorist (or at least Final-Jeopardy!-theorist) contestant, 1 in 25 million sounds about right.
-
[quote name=\'Mr. Armadillo\' post=\'221379\' date=\'Jul 29 2009, 10:00 AM\']For your typical non-game-theorist (or at least Final-Jeopardy!-theorist) contestant, 1 in 25 million sounds about right.[/quote]
I'm not sure what you're saying here, but if you're saying that someone unfamiliar with the game would accept the 1 in 25 million number, you're probably right. Such a person would probably just as easily accept one in 10 million, or one in 50 million or any other incomprehensibly large, lottery-sized number. They'd probably be even more likely to accept something like one in 23.473 million, because it sounds like the math guys worked harder to come up with it. Still, none of that makes the "one in 25 million" claim any more correct.
On the other hand, those of us very familiar with the game know that it should have happened twice already. Several years ago, they had a situation going into Final Jeopardy where the leader had exactly twice as much as the two other tied players. The only reason that game didn't end in a three-way tie was because one of the trailing players irrationally held back one dollar.
So that's twice it should have happened, if not for the impossible-to-predict human factor, in less than six thousand shows. That's why the much lower number makes a lot more sense to anybody who actually understands the program.
-
I was saying that nobody ever goes for the tie. That was a direct answer to 'how often does the leader deliberately go for the tie?'
Slightly exaggerating my point to get it across, but that's all I was saying.
-
[quote name=\'Mr. Armadillo\' post=\'221398\' date=\'Jul 29 2009, 02:19 PM\']I was saying that nobody ever goes for the tie. That was a direct answer to 'how often does the leader deliberately go for the tie?'
Slightly exaggerating my point to get it across, but that's all I was saying.[/quote]
Oh, of course. Negative score for me for not recognizing that.
And yeah, you're probably right there too. The most likely scenario for a tie game is probably the other example I mentioned, with two players tied at half the leader's total.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'221400\' date=\'Jul 29 2009, 02:59 PM\'][quote name=\'Mr. Armadillo\' post=\'221398\' date=\'Jul 29 2009, 02:19 PM\']I was saying that nobody ever goes for the tie. That was a direct answer to 'how often does the leader deliberately go for the tie?'
Slightly exaggerating my point to get it across, but that's all I was saying.[/quote]
Oh, of course. Negative score for me for not recognizing that.
And yeah, you're probably right there too. The most likely scenario for a tie game is probably the other example I mentioned, with two players tied at half the leader's total.
[/quote]
Having seen the situation being discussed, Matt, it was an unusual move by the champion. Earlier in the episode, Alex had mentioned getting a question asking if there had ever been a three-way tie. So, because the scenario occurred, the champ intentionally played for a three-way tie so if the question ever came up again, Alex could say "Yes it's happened".
As for the wager, it sounds irrational, and maybe was, but it was a deliberate wager.
-
[quote name=\'Mr. Bill\' post=\'221411\' date=\'Jul 29 2009, 02:17 PM\']As for the wager, it sounds irrational, and maybe was, but it was a deliberate wager.[/quote]
It's been discussed here many times before, with great arguments both for and against going for the tie. On the one hand, you have to face off against two experienced players instead of two new players on the next show. On the other hand, you know these players now, and you've essentially beaten them, so why not play them again?
-
[quote name=\'Kevin Prather\' post=\'221429\' date=\'Jul 29 2009, 05:50 PM\']It's been discussed here many times before, with great arguments both for and against going for the tie. On the one hand, you have to face off against two experienced players instead of two new players on the next show. On the other hand, you know these players now, and you've essentially beaten them, so why not play them again?[/quote]If the scores are all three players on $x, then the question becomes "will I be right?" If yes, then you bet the wad, because you're guaranteed to return. If not, then you bet zero, because if anyone else is right, they win and you don't.
If the scores are $2x, $x and $x (as they were in the case of the woman who held back the dollar) there's no reason to bet X-1, because the person in the lead isn't going to bet anything. You've consigned yourself to a loss no matter what.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'221439\' date=\'Jul 29 2009, 10:35 PM\']If the scores are all three players on $x, then the question becomes "will I be right?" If yes, then you bet the wad, because you're guaranteed to return. If not, then you bet zero, because if anyone else is right, they win and you don't.[/quote]
Of course, it's so hard to gauge that just by the category. If you really, truly don't think you'll have a clue, I guess betting zero isn't completely inexcusable, but I'd sure hate to go home a loser totally because I didn't trust myself.
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'221439\' date=\'Jul 29 2009, 10:35 PM\']If the scores are $2x, $x and $x (as they were in the case of the woman who held back the dollar) there's no reason to bet X-1, because the person in the lead isn't going to bet anything. You've consigned yourself to a loss no matter what.[/quote]
Yet after a little more research, it turns out that pretty much has happened not once but twice. Here's the example (http://\"http://www.j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=2617\") I was talking about earlier, where one player held back a dollar and prevented a three-way tie (and as you say, consigned herself to a loss). Now here's a similar example (http://\"http://www.j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=911\"), but this time all three players had the same amount going into FJ, all three players got the clue right, and one player just didn't bet enough.
So really, if not for some pretty sorry wagering, a three-way tie should have happened three times already.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'221441\' date=\'Jul 29 2009, 08:01 PM\']Of course, it's so hard to gauge that just by the category. If you really, truly don't think you'll have a clue, I guess betting zero isn't completely inexcusable, but I'd sure hate to go home a loser totally because I didn't trust myself.[/quote] But at least you have something to go on. If I see "The Solar System", I will be more likely to back myself than if I see "12th Century Italy." I could be totally wrong and see an Astronomy clue that has me bewildered, or the Ancient History question could be something I read just last night. You never know, and that's what makes it so interesting.
Like you said, it is rarely so simple, and it's those 998 times in the middle that you have to worry about.
-
Not to mention, with categories like those two, there's a half-decent chance you could conceivably get the exact same clue behind either.
-
[quote name=\'Twentington\' post=\'212208\' date=\'Apr 5 2009, 01:47 PM\'][quote name=\'GrandGame1440\' post=\'211824\' date=\'Apr 2 2009, 12:16 AM\']
what was done to fill the remaining time?[/quote]
They played a round of Big Numbers and Alex shouted, "Many moon come, that's a niner".[/quote]
Ha! I laughed out loud at this and got a strange look from my co-workers.
-
[quote name=\'knagl\' post=\'221515\' date=\'Jul 30 2009, 07:25 PM\'][quote name=\'Twentington\' post=\'212208\' date=\'Apr 5 2009, 01:47 PM\'][quote name=\'GrandGame1440\' post=\'211824\' date=\'Apr 2 2009, 12:16 AM\']
what was done to fill the remaining time?[/quote]
They played a round of Big Numbers and Alex shouted, "Many moon come, that's a niner".[/quote]
Ha! I laughed out loud at this and got a strange look from my co-workers.
[/quote]
I would give an obligatory "I'm here all week" but I just came back, and had forgotten I even posted that to begin with.