Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall

User avatar
Lefty
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1823
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 4:49 pm

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Lefty »

mas3cf wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:25 pm "Tiramisù was invented in this country."

"What is it?"

"Correct!"
That's awesome.

On further thought, I wouldn't really like to expand the list of acceptable two-letter abbreviations, mainly due to the scribble issue. State postal codes are troublesome enough; I can remember cases where I felt a contestant was very lucky to have his chicken scratchings accepted (of course, one may scribble a long answer just as well, but at least the judges then have more to work with in gauging intent).
I'm smart and I want respect.
davey
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 6030
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:55 pm

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by davey »

Volante wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:50 pm
talkingaway wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:00 pm As far as the "India" response, I think 1833 is a reasonable attempt to pin the clue away from India. That's the year the US and Thailand established diplomatic relations - I don't know if 1833 has any significance in US/India relations. Plus, the book about India is about economics more than diplomacy. They could have done a better job of pinning it, but it was decent.
As previously mentioned, there being no India in 1833 makes relations with it difficult to have.
The thing is, 1833 was a significant year in Indian history-


Features of the Charter Act of 1833
The [East India Company's] commercial activities were closed down. It was made into an administrative body for British Indian possessions.
Provisions of the Charter Act of 1833
India became a British colony

The Governor-General of Bengal was re-designated as the Governor-General of India. This made Lord William Bentinck the first Governor-General of India.
Thus, the country’s administration was unified under one control.

https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/ncert-n ... -act-1833/
User avatar
econgator
Let's Go Mets!
Posts: 10673
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:32 am

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by econgator »

davey wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:44 pm
Volante wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:50 pm
talkingaway wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:00 pm As far as the "India" response, I think 1833 is a reasonable attempt to pin the clue away from India. That's the year the US and Thailand established diplomatic relations - I don't know if 1833 has any significance in US/India relations. Plus, the book about India is about economics more than diplomacy. They could have done a better job of pinning it, but it was decent.
As previously mentioned, there being no India in 1833 makes relations with it difficult to have.
The thing is, 1833 was a significant year in Indian history-


Features of the Charter Act of 1833
The [East India Company's] commercial activities were closed down. It was made into an administrative body for British Indian possessions.
Provisions of the Charter Act of 1833
India became a British colony

The Governor-General of Bengal was re-designated as the Governor-General of India. This made Lord William Bentinck the first Governor-General of India.
Thus, the country’s administration was unified under one control.

https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/ncert-n ... -act-1833/
Sure, but you'd still be having relations with the UK, not India.
User avatar
Volante
Harbinger of the Doomed Lemur
Posts: 9254
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:42 pm

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Volante »

davey wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:44 pm
Volante wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:50 pm
talkingaway wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:00 pm As far as the "India" response, I think 1833 is a reasonable attempt to pin the clue away from India. That's the year the US and Thailand established diplomatic relations - I don't know if 1833 has any significance in US/India relations. Plus, the book about India is about economics more than diplomacy. They could have done a better job of pinning it, but it was decent.
As previously mentioned, there being no India in 1833 makes relations with it difficult to have.
The thing is, 1833 was a significant year in Indian history-


Features of the Charter Act of 1833
The [East India Company's] commercial activities were closed down. It was made into an administrative body for British Indian possessions.
Provisions of the Charter Act of 1833
India became a British colony

The Governor-General of Bengal was re-designated as the Governor-General of India. This made Lord William Bentinck the first Governor-General of India.
Thus, the country’s administration was unified under one control.

https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/ncert-n ... -act-1833/
You can have significant years in a country's history prior to said country's formal existence. The 1770s come to mind...
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)
davey
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 6030
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:55 pm

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by davey »

Volante wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:52 pm
davey wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:44 pm
Volante wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:50 pm
talkingaway wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:00 pm As far as the "India" response, I think 1833 is a reasonable attempt to pin the clue away from India. That's the year the US and Thailand established diplomatic relations - I don't know if 1833 has any significance in US/India relations. Plus, the book about India is about economics more than diplomacy. They could have done a better job of pinning it, but it was decent.
As previously mentioned, there being no India in 1833 makes relations with it difficult to have.
The thing is, 1833 was a significant year in Indian history-


Features of the Charter Act of 1833
The [East India Company's] commercial activities were closed down. It was made into an administrative body for British Indian possessions.
Provisions of the Charter Act of 1833
India became a British colony

The Governor-General of Bengal was re-designated as the Governor-General of India. This made Lord William Bentinck the first Governor-General of India.
Thus, the country’s administration was unified under one control.

https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/ncert-n ... -act-1833/
You can have significant years in a country's history prior to said country's formal existence. The 1770s come to mind...
Yes, and if you were writing a book about US-French relations, you'd start at least that far back. You might even go back to the 1750s.
User avatar
Volante
Harbinger of the Doomed Lemur
Posts: 9254
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:42 pm

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Volante »

davey wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 12:02 am
Volante wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:52 pm
davey wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:44 pm
Volante wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:50 pm
talkingaway wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:00 pm As far as the "India" response, I think 1833 is a reasonable attempt to pin the clue away from India. That's the year the US and Thailand established diplomatic relations - I don't know if 1833 has any significance in US/India relations. Plus, the book about India is about economics more than diplomacy. They could have done a better job of pinning it, but it was decent.
As previously mentioned, there being no India in 1833 makes relations with it difficult to have.
The thing is, 1833 was a significant year in Indian history-


Features of the Charter Act of 1833
The [East India Company's] commercial activities were closed down. It was made into an administrative body for British Indian possessions.
Provisions of the Charter Act of 1833
India became a British colony

The Governor-General of Bengal was re-designated as the Governor-General of India. This made Lord William Bentinck the first Governor-General of India.
Thus, the country’s administration was unified under one control.

https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/ncert-n ... -act-1833/
You can have significant years in a country's history prior to said country's formal existence. The 1770s come to mind...
Yes, and if you were writing a book about US-French relations, you'd start at least that far back. You might even go back to the 1750s.
How about the 1640s?
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)
davey
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 6030
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:55 pm

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by davey »

Volante wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 12:15 am
davey wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 12:02 am
Volante wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:52 pm
davey wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:44 pm
Volante wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:50 pm
As previously mentioned, there being no India in 1833 makes relations with it difficult to have.
The thing is, 1833 was a significant year in Indian history-


Features of the Charter Act of 1833
The [East India Company's] commercial activities were closed down. It was made into an administrative body for British Indian possessions.
Provisions of the Charter Act of 1833
India became a British colony

The Governor-General of Bengal was re-designated as the Governor-General of India. This made Lord William Bentinck the first Governor-General of India.
Thus, the country’s administration was unified under one control.

https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/ncert-n ... -act-1833/
You can have significant years in a country's history prior to said country's formal existence. The 1770s come to mind...
Yes, and if you were writing a book about US-French relations, you'd start at least that far back. You might even go back to the 1750s.
How about the 1640s?
As long as you have a point to make, I don't see why not.
TenPoundHammer

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by TenPoundHammer »

What was the TOM for "judo" on You Gotta Fight for $200? I almost WAGged "karate" because I felt it was "go for the obvious" enough, but nope.

Ran Language of Like, but was 0/5 in You Gotta Fight!

"Show trial" was my only miss in European History, surprisingly.

Blah blah Asia blah blah elephant = India, right? Nooooooooooo. DO YOU SEE WHY I NEVER GO FOR THE OBVIOUS?!?!?! Thanks for the absolutely monstrous negbait, you hack writers.

Lach Trash: burned at the stake, Vandals, also got the Fulton DD
seaborgium
Undefeated in Reruns
Posts: 8941
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by seaborgium »

TenPoundHammer wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 2:30 am What was the TOM for "judo" on You Gotta Fight for $200? I almost WAGged "karate" because I felt it was "go for the obvious" enough, but nope.
I wouldn't say there was TOM for any martial art, but judo and tae kwon do are the only martial arts (well, the only Asian ones) that have been Olympic sports thus far (karate was going to be added this year). Judo has the longer history in the games (over 50 years now), but tae kwon do was in the Olympics by the time Rousey medaled. This was mostly just a case of a clue asking about a fact that (some) people know.
User avatar
Mathew5000
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 624
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 4:46 am

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Mathew5000 »

econgator wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 7:39 pm
Lefty wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 2:58 pm That is a good question. What history has "th" for "Thailand" have, pre- internet codes? I think internet codes deserve as much respect as state postal codes, but has the show given it in the past?
The internet code for Thailand is .th, so even if she did mean the internet code, she forgot the dot. If we start allowing use of ISO codes to stand in for countries, then I think we're just getting ridiculous.
There's nothing ridiculous about it. The ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 codes have been used as country abbreviations since 1974; they are not just "internet codes".
opusthepenguin wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:18 pm - Th should not be accepted, any more than Se or Ca should work for Sweden and Canada.
Why? In what other context are Final Jeopardy responses case-sensitive? If the correct question were "What is Tennessee?", wouldn't "What is Tn?" (or for that matter, "What is tN?") be accepted?

In explaining her answer, Reshima said "I started to write Thailand" which could be why the judges ruled her wrong. If instead she had stated "It's the abbreviation for Thailand", the ruling might have gone in her favour.

I raised this issue in connection with the July 11, 2017 FJ:
http://j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_ ... ardy_round
viewtopic.php?p=252858#p252858

See also:
http://j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_ ... ardy_round
viewtopic.php?p=239203#p239203

There should not be a different rule for US state abbreviations than for international sovereign state abbreviations.
User avatar
nserven
At the Clam Shack
Posts: 1149
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 12:05 pm
Location: Greenfield, MA

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by nserven »

Mathew5000 wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 4:24 am
econgator wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 7:39 pm
Lefty wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 2:58 pm That is a good question. What history has "th" for "Thailand" have, pre- internet codes? I think internet codes deserve as much respect as state postal codes, but has the show given it in the past?
The internet code for Thailand is .th, so even if she did mean the internet code, she forgot the dot. If we start allowing use of ISO codes to stand in for countries, then I think we're just getting ridiculous.
There's nothing ridiculous about it. The ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 codes have been used as country abbreviations since 1974; they are not just "internet codes".
opusthepenguin wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:18 pm - Th should not be accepted, any more than Se or Ca should work for Sweden and Canada.
Why? In what other context are Final Jeopardy responses case-sensitive? If the correct question were "What is Tennessee?", wouldn't "What is Tn?" (or for that matter, "What is tN?") be accepted?

In explaining her answer, Reshima said "I started to write Thailand" which could be why the judges ruled her wrong. If instead she had stated "It's the abbreviation for Thailand", the ruling might have gone in her favour.

I raised this issue in connection with the July 11, 2017 FJ:
http://j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_ ... ardy_round
viewtopic.php?p=252858#p252858

See also:
http://j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_ ... ardy_round
viewtopic.php?p=239203#p239203

There should not be a different rule for US state abbreviations than for international sovereign state abbreviations.
I'm imagining a scenario in which Reshima enters FJ in second place, starts to write "The Philippines," getting only to the first H, and then having the third-place player's response of Thailand revealed as correct. Then Reshima says her Th was intended as an abbreviation for Thailand.

There's a problem with the game if we are simply left to judge responses based on contestants' stated intentions. And Th. is far from universally recognized as, say, UK for United Kingdom.
User avatar
opusthepenguin
The Best Darn Penguin on the Whole JBoard
Posts: 10319
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:33 pm
Location: Shawnee, KS
Contact:

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by opusthepenguin »

Mathew5000 wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 4:24 am
opusthepenguin wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:18 pm - Th should not be accepted, any more than Se or Ca should work for Sweden and Canada.
Why? In what other context are Final Jeopardy responses case-sensitive? If the correct question were "What is Tennessee?", wouldn't "What is Tn?" (or for that matter, "What is tN?") be accepted?
I'm not making a case sensitive argument, though I may have been using the case to accentuate my point. I agree that case doesn't matter here. I'm saying I'm not in favor of expanding J's list of accepted abbreviations to include abbreviations used by specialists when talking about something that isn't their specialty. (To wit, Internet specialists when talking about countries.) I think that just throws the gates wide open.

So here's where I think the boundary lines should be for accepting abbreviations. These lines, I should be clear, are the result of post hoc reasoning. I didn't start with these boundaries and apply them to this game's FJ. Rather, I started with my reaction to the idea of accepting Th for Thailand and tried to define and codify that reaction with the assumption that it's intuitively correct.

I believe J should accept abbreviations of the following two sorts:

1. Abbreviations commonly known and used by non-specialists. So CA is fine for California but not for Canada.

2. Abbreviations used by specialists when a) the abbreviations deal specifically with that specialty, and b) the abbreviations are commonly known or at least known of by non-specialists at the J level. So Th is fine for Thorium but not for Thailand.
User avatar
Robert K S
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 5249
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:26 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Robert K S »

What can I say but that I disagree? And that I would have accepted Se for Sweden and Ca for Canada.

If you would have accepted "U.S. and Ca." (and how could you not?), why not "US and Ca"?
User avatar
econgator
Let's Go Mets!
Posts: 10673
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:32 am

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by econgator »

Robert K S wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 1:58 pm What can I say but that I disagree? And that I would have accepted Se for Sweden and Ca for Canada.

If you would have accepted "U.S. and Ca." (and how could you not?), why not "US and Ca"?
I'm with Opus (actually, I guess I'm far stricter than Opus). Use of abbreviations is sloppy and lazy and should NEVER be permitted in FJ. You have 30 seconds to come up with -- and write down -- a correct response. If someone spoke out, "What is S-e?" as a response where Sweden was expected, I should hope they'd be ruled incorrect.
User avatar
opusthepenguin
The Best Darn Penguin on the Whole JBoard
Posts: 10319
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:33 pm
Location: Shawnee, KS
Contact:

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by opusthepenguin »

Robert K S wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 1:58 pm What can I say but that I disagree? And that I would have accepted Se for Sweden and Ca for Canada.

If you would have accepted "U.S. and Ca." (and how could you not?), why not "US and Ca"?
I'm not sure who the question is for or what distinction is being made. I would accept U.S. and US for the United States of America. I would accept Ca. and Ca for California and Calcium when the context specifies a state or an element respectively. I would not accept Ca. or Ca for Canada in any circumstances.

What we have here is a case that, judging by divided opinions here, could have gone either way. Now the precedent has been set and I think the show needs to abide by that (or issue a retraction and an apology). This isn't just because I happen to agree with the decision. If they had set the opposite precedent, I'd demand consistency going forward.
User avatar
opusthepenguin
The Best Darn Penguin on the Whole JBoard
Posts: 10319
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:33 pm
Location: Shawnee, KS
Contact:

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by opusthepenguin »

econgator wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 2:08 pm
Robert K S wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 1:58 pm What can I say but that I disagree? And that I would have accepted Se for Sweden and Ca for Canada.

If you would have accepted "U.S. and Ca." (and how could you not?), why not "US and Ca"?
I'm with Opus (actually, I guess I'm far stricter than Opus). Use of abbreviations is sloppy and lazy and should NEVER be permitted in FJ. You have 30 seconds to come up with -- and write down -- a correct response. If someone spoke out, "What is S-e?" as a response where Sweden was expected, I should hope they'd be ruled incorrect.
I'd be fine with that level of strictness. But I'm also fine with the line the show has drawn in accepting some sets of commonly known and widely used abbreviations that aren't generally pronounced or spelled out when spoken.
User avatar
Robert K S
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 5249
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:26 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Robert K S »

Obviously, "no abbreviations" is an arbitrary thing you just made up and is not the rule. It would make "Who is MLK?" and "Who is Martin Luther King Jr.?" both wrong, along with "What is the U.S.?" and "What is the USA?" A person wanting to write down "What is UPS?" would would be frustratedly ambivalent between putting down that or "What is United Parcel Service?" (Let's not even get started on "FedEx".) It's a path so pointlessly narrow and so patently ridiculous it's not worth considering.

If the clue asks for a country, there is no ambiguity between Canada and California and calcium. I can see that a response might be deemed unacceptable if an abbreviation was commonly used for two things of the same type, but that is rare, and not the case here. I mean, "US" stands for a plethora of things besides the country in various contexts, but I think we can all agree that the show has never, will never, and should never turn down a response that uses "US" for "United States". If you google "What is the abbreviation for Canada?", you get a resolute Ca. If you google "What is the abbreviation for Thailand?", the answer is that the two-letter country abbreviation for Thailand is TH, and the three-letter code is THA.

I don't understand under what consistency of rules you can accept "US" for United States but not "TH" for Thailand. I think the ad hoc rule you actually have in your head is "I don't see that very often myself, or have never seen it, and therefore I would not accept it." The rule isn't based on anything objective.
User avatar
opusthepenguin
The Best Darn Penguin on the Whole JBoard
Posts: 10319
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 2:33 pm
Location: Shawnee, KS
Contact:

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by opusthepenguin »

Robert K S wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 3:58 pm I don't understand under what consistency of rules you can accept "US" for United States but not "TH" for Thailand. I think the ad hoc rule you actually have in your head is "I don't see that very often myself, or have never seen it, and therefore I would not accept it." The rule isn't based on anything objective.
Neither is your rule. Unless you're saying we should accept any abbreviation that anyone uses in any capacity. I've explained that I draw the line at specialist abbreviations vs those used by everyone when talking about the subject. Surely you can understand that even if you disagree.
mahatma
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 973
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 6:52 pm

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by mahatma »

It's hard to write a logically consistent version of the Potter Stewart rule, but there is a sweet spot there involving common usage in US English.
User avatar
econgator
Let's Go Mets!
Posts: 10673
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:32 am

Re: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by econgator »

opusthepenguin wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 5:17 pm
Robert K S wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 3:58 pm I don't understand under what consistency of rules you can accept "US" for United States but not "TH" for Thailand. I think the ad hoc rule you actually have in your head is "I don't see that very often myself, or have never seen it, and therefore I would not accept it." The rule isn't based on anything objective.
Neither is your rule. Unless you're saying we should accept any abbreviation that anyone uses in any capacity. I've explained that I draw the line at specialist abbreviations vs those used by everyone when talking about the subject. Surely you can understand that even if you disagree.
If the clue were, "This company made the Bronco SUV", you'd be OK with a response of "What F?"
Post Reply