Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall
- Robert K S
- Jeopardy! Champion
- Posts: 5251
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:26 pm
- Location: Cleveland, Ohio
- Contact:
Re: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
The Jeopardy! Facebook page provides official confirmation that Algonquin Hotel would've been accepted.
-
- Contributor
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 8:57 am
Re: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
You were actually only about a half of a block off!by This Is Kirk! » Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:46 am
Well for some oddball reason I put down "Iroquois Round Table" for FJ. I have no idea how my brain came up with that instead of Algonquin...
- Attachments
-
- Algonquin.JPG (217.5 KiB) Viewed 3657 times
-
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 509
- Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 3:43 am
Re: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Sitting with $800 in the Jeopardy round and wager $400 on a DD. I don’t care if you have 5% knowledge of a category, it just makes zero sense to not bet $1K there. As my wife could attest to, that made me so mad that I wasn’t happy when he grabbed the lead in DJ.
Alex likely needed two more wins to make the TOC (or a James-like performance yesterday). After hitting on a solid DD wager in Game 2, her performance started going down. Categories? Timing mechanism went astray? Who knows. But she goes home with over $30K for playing a game so I bet she isn’t too upset about that.
Alex likely needed two more wins to make the TOC (or a James-like performance yesterday). After hitting on a solid DD wager in Game 2, her performance started going down. Categories? Timing mechanism went astray? Who knows. But she goes home with over $30K for playing a game so I bet she isn’t too upset about that.
- This Is Kirk!
- Jeopardy! Champion
- Posts: 6562
- Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:35 am
- Location: Seattle
Re: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
The Iroquois Round Table members must have been the B-listers.
-
- Thrice Unplucked from the Jeopardy! Pool
- Posts: 844
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:51 am
- Location: Seattle
- Contact:
Re: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Larger hint if far more dated was that for years beginning in the '70s, Kawasaki's TV ads used a jingle that went "Kawasaki lets the good times roll."CasketRomance wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 6:43 amthe tom there is ninja...they are known for producing the ninja motorcycleTenPoundHammer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 7:28 pmNHO Triumph, Ducati, or "ultimate driving machine" for BMW, and didn't see the TOM for Kawasaki. That was an oddly tough Motorcycle category.
In and out of the pool four times
-
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 2981
- Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:11 am
Re: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
I respectfully disagree.OntarioQuizzer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:41 pmJust because you happen to know enough to win a game from the fourth podium doesn't mean the contestants are terrible. These boards have felt tougher post-ToC and I think your comments are disrespectful.
If the contestants miss few or no clues, my thought is "high-quality contestants."
If the contestants miss few or no clues, and they answer a bunch of stuff that stumps me, my thought is "tough boards AND high-quality contestants."
If the contestants miss a whole bunch of clues and I miss many of the same clues, my thought is "tough boards."
If the contestants miss a whole bunch of clues and I by myself outscore them just on the TSs they leave, my thought is "un, not high-quality contestants."
Really, what else are we to think?
- AndyTheQuizzer
- Lots and Lots of Interviews
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:01 am
- Location: St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
- Contact:
Re: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
OK, Boomer.John Boy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:25 pmI respectfully disagree.OntarioQuizzer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:41 pmJust because you happen to know enough to win a game from the fourth podium doesn't mean the contestants are terrible. These boards have felt tougher post-ToC and I think your comments are disrespectful.
If the contestants miss few or no clues, my thought is "high-quality contestants."
If the contestants miss few or no clues, and they answer a bunch of stuff that stumps me, my thought is "tough boards AND high-quality contestants."
If the contestants miss a whole bunch of clues and I miss many of the same clues, my thought is "tough boards."
If the contestants miss a whole bunch of clues and I by myself outscore them just on the TSs they leave, my thought is "un, not high-quality contestants."
Really, what else are we to think?
Seriously, though: Just because a clue plays well to your demographic and knowledge base doesn't make another contestant of lesser quality just because they don't happen to know that specific piece of information.
- Volante
- Harbinger of the Doomed Lemur
- Posts: 9254
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:42 pm
Re: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
A clue, yes. 14 clues across three contestants, though? I mean, it could just be bad luck, but I don't like those odds.OntarioQuizzer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:44 pmOK, Boomer.John Boy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:25 pmI respectfully disagree.OntarioQuizzer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:41 pmJust because you happen to know enough to win a game from the fourth podium doesn't mean the contestants are terrible. These boards have felt tougher post-ToC and I think your comments are disrespectful.
If the contestants miss few or no clues, my thought is "high-quality contestants."
If the contestants miss few or no clues, and they answer a bunch of stuff that stumps me, my thought is "tough boards AND high-quality contestants."
If the contestants miss a whole bunch of clues and I miss many of the same clues, my thought is "tough boards."
If the contestants miss a whole bunch of clues and I by myself outscore them just on the TSs they leave, my thought is "un, not high-quality contestants."
Really, what else are we to think?
Seriously, though: Just because a clue plays well to your demographic and knowledge base doesn't make another contestant of lesser quality just because they don't happen to know that specific piece of information.
The best thing that Neil Armstrong ever did, was to let us all imagine we were him.
Latest movies (1-10): Everything Everywhere All at Once (10), Ruby Gillman: Teenage Kraken (6), Black Sunday /1960/ (6), Marcel the Shell with Shoes On (7)
Latest movies (1-10): Everything Everywhere All at Once (10), Ruby Gillman: Teenage Kraken (6), Black Sunday /1960/ (6), Marcel the Shell with Shoes On (7)
-
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 2981
- Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:11 am
Re: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
John Boy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:25 pmI respectfully disagree.OntarioQuizzer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:41 pmJust because you happen to know enough to win a game from the fourth podium doesn't mean the contestants are terrible. These boards have felt tougher post-ToC and I think your comments are disrespectful.
If the contestants miss few or no clues, my thought is "high-quality contestants."
If the contestants miss few or no clues, and they answer a bunch of stuff that stumps me, my thought is "tough boards AND high-quality contestants."
If the contestants miss a whole bunch of clues and I miss many of the same clues, my thought is "tough boards."
If the contestants miss a whole bunch of clues and I by myself outscore them just on the TSs they leave, my thought is "um, not high-quality contestants."
Really, what else are we to think?
-
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 970
- Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2019 11:59 am
Re: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Tough game for me tonight, too - makes me feel better when folks here say this is a ToC-level board. I did worse here than on some ToCs - and with none of my dreaded geography categories, that's saying something!
When I saw the picture of "old woman with sort of goofy hair", I thought Phyllis Diller, too, but quickly corrected myself to Carol Channing. It's NOT that bad of a guess:
1) Both in "Hello, Dolly!" as Dolly Levi.
2) Both appeared in an episode of I've Got a Secret - Phyllis as a panelist, Carol as a guest
For some reason, I thought Carol Channing might have also been a celebrity in one of those "70s celebs help Scooby Doo" (like the Harlem Globetrotters), but nope, she wasn't. Phyllis Diller was, though. Okay, the year of death was way off, but still...I don't know why always I think those two look like, but to me, they do.
I also had to pause to remember if it was MI 5 or MI 6, but I did get it right. Laughed that two of my "wrong thoughts corrected to the right one" were also picked by contestants.
Canadian bacon as a BMS? I mean, I guess you have to do it, but let's face it - there's no way that Stephanie was thinking of a round slab of meat when she said "bacon". Lucky that she got a free second chance, and good on her for quickly converting it. And good on Alex and/or the writers for having both "ham" and "canadian bacon" at the ready as answers, so that a correction didn't have to be made later.
I took "literary" too literally and was thinking of Harlem Renaissance writers/novels. Nope. But, given that my brain was stuck in Harlem, I went to the Apollo, too, and got booed off the stage and escorted by the Sandman.
When I saw the picture of "old woman with sort of goofy hair", I thought Phyllis Diller, too, but quickly corrected myself to Carol Channing. It's NOT that bad of a guess:
1) Both in "Hello, Dolly!" as Dolly Levi.
2) Both appeared in an episode of I've Got a Secret - Phyllis as a panelist, Carol as a guest
For some reason, I thought Carol Channing might have also been a celebrity in one of those "70s celebs help Scooby Doo" (like the Harlem Globetrotters), but nope, she wasn't. Phyllis Diller was, though. Okay, the year of death was way off, but still...I don't know why always I think those two look like, but to me, they do.
I also had to pause to remember if it was MI 5 or MI 6, but I did get it right. Laughed that two of my "wrong thoughts corrected to the right one" were also picked by contestants.
Canadian bacon as a BMS? I mean, I guess you have to do it, but let's face it - there's no way that Stephanie was thinking of a round slab of meat when she said "bacon". Lucky that she got a free second chance, and good on her for quickly converting it. And good on Alex and/or the writers for having both "ham" and "canadian bacon" at the ready as answers, so that a correction didn't have to be made later.
I took "literary" too literally and was thinking of Harlem Renaissance writers/novels. Nope. But, given that my brain was stuck in Harlem, I went to the Apollo, too, and got booed off the stage and escorted by the Sandman.
- twelvefootboy
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 2702
- Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2016 11:18 pm
- Location: Tornado Alley / Southwest Missouri
Re: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Think nice things. Develop empathy, or at least fake it . Post informative, amusing, or insightful things to share with the board. Share your highs and lows and toot your horn when you can, this board is a guilty pleasure for many of us and a resource for many others.
Your question was rhetorical of course and you aren't a regular contestant basher. I reason that all three players passed the test, with a better score than me probably, and would probably destroy the clues with the 15 (?) second test clock. They aren't dummies. Some days you get the bear, and some days the bear gets you.
Disclaimer - repeated exposure to author's musings may cause befuddlement.
-
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 6030
- Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:55 pm
Re: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Saturday Night Live and The Apollo would be valiant responses if the category wasn't Literary New York...Gatsby's parties were on Long Island. The NYPL isn't known for loudmouths, poetry slams aren't known for gags, and I don't know what the hell Bedlam has to do with New York...twelvefootboy wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:59 pm FINAL JEOPARDY! CLUE
An insider described the scene there: “Just…loudmouths showing off, saving their gags for days, waiting to spring them”
My rank for the quality of answers:
1) Saturday Night Live
2) Party at Gatsby
3) Apollo The
4) a lot of other crap like New York Public Library, Poetry Slams, other fictional descriptions of Glam Balls and Bedlam, stuff already posted here.
.....
99) Algonquin Round Table
I am so hoping they get rid of the fake answer/question gimmick (they won't). At least stop encrypting the puzzle with tangled syntax. What the hell is a "literary New York City" category? This is a one and done category since they used the only answer.
-
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 2981
- Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:11 am
-
- Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
- Posts: 2981
- Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:11 am
Re: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Volante wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 8:02 pmA clue, yes. 14 clues across three contestants, though? I mean, it could just be bad luck, but I don't like those odds.OntarioQuizzer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:44 pmOK, Boomer.John Boy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:25 pmI respectfully disagree.OntarioQuizzer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:41 pmJust because you happen to know enough to win a game from the fourth podium doesn't mean the contestants are terrible. These boards have felt tougher post-ToC and I think your comments are disrespectful.
If the contestants miss few or no clues, my thought is "high-quality contestants."
If the contestants miss few or no clues, and they answer a bunch of stuff that stumps me, my thought is "tough boards AND high-quality contestants."
If the contestants miss a whole bunch of clues and I miss many of the same clues, my thought is "tough boards."
If the contestants miss a whole bunch of clues and I by myself outscore them just on the TSs they leave, my thought is "un, not high-quality contestants."
Really, what else are we to think?
Seriously, though: Just because a clue plays well to your demographic and knowledge base doesn't make another contestant of lesser quality just because they don't happen to know that specific piece of information.
Thank you. This is what I mean. Anyone can miss a clue or two or more. But over two days all three missed a ton of stuff that was easily answered by many of us here. I'm certainly not saying any of these three are "terrible" or "dummies" or unworthy of being on the show. Just that their performances over these two days was not up to the standard we expect and usually see on this show.
- BigDaddyMatty
- Hoping not to get pruney this time
- Posts: 3300
- Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 11:05 am
- Location: Anderson, IN
Re: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Coryat: 27,000
39 R/0 W
DD: 2/3
FJ:
LT: The Bell Jar (DD), Carol Channing, Kentucky, meter, seer, Hillary Clinton, mitre
This was a very "inside baseball" FJ! If you watch J! regularly, you know that they loves them some Algonquin Round Table. If not, you may have never heard of it.
NHO Mitochondrial Eve. That's going into the study pile. As is the Fauvist/Matisse connection. I have heard that one, but it apparently hasn't stuck.
I think the "7-letter J-word" clue was poorly written. Yes, "joking" and "joshing" are both synonyms of "jocular" when the former are used as adjectives, but words ending in -ing are generally thought of primarily as verbs. I came up with the correct response immediately but rejected it because it seemed like they were looking for a verb.
Interesting that this game had two clues about female Channings.
39 R/0 W
DD: 2/3
FJ:
LT: The Bell Jar (DD), Carol Channing, Kentucky, meter, seer, Hillary Clinton, mitre
This was a very "inside baseball" FJ! If you watch J! regularly, you know that they loves them some Algonquin Round Table. If not, you may have never heard of it.
NHO Mitochondrial Eve. That's going into the study pile. As is the Fauvist/Matisse connection. I have heard that one, but it apparently hasn't stuck.
I think the "7-letter J-word" clue was poorly written. Yes, "joking" and "joshing" are both synonyms of "jocular" when the former are used as adjectives, but words ending in -ing are generally thought of primarily as verbs. I came up with the correct response immediately but rejected it because it seemed like they were looking for a verb.
Interesting that this game had two clues about female Channings.
Sprinkles are for winners.
- morbeedo
- Loyal Jeopardista
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 12:58 pm
Re: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
Got "meter", missed "seer", then hit pause, wrote IN EXTREMIS at the top of my notebook page, got "merit" and "mitre" but missed "smite"
+1 for 'What the Merv Griffin?'
I gasped on the Phyllis Diller response. I love a good "OH NO!" slap from Alex
I remember getting The Algonquin Hotel right on another FJ a few seasons ago, but I had nothing better than Times Square today
- morbeedo
- Loyal Jeopardista
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 12:58 pm
Re: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)
twelvefootboy wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:59 pm
I am so hoping they get rid of the fake answer/question gimmick (they won't).