Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall

User avatar
jeff6286
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 5228
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 7:34 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by jeff6286 »

Volante wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 11:14 am
Golf wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 10:44 am Very frustrating how flawed her logic was. After that DD she should have had a $14200 lead with 24 clues and a DD left. At that point she just has to maintain, (which she was doing so far that game) answer FJ correctly, and take home $250k.
Sure is easy to shoulda woulda when you know how easy the clue is once it's revealed!
In another universe she could've been trailing by 6000 with a DD still on the board. By that point there's already been 5 triple stumpers including the clue right before DD2.

I mean, if $50,000 means nothing to you, go right ahead...
Trailing by 6000? Confusing, you're talking about how far she trailed Sam when the whole point is she essentially conceded first place to Sam by not going big on the DD. The $50,000 you're talking about is what she was thus playing Veronica for, and if she did wipe out, she would have trailed Veronica by just $3200, still had control and another DD to play, and had an $8000+ advantage over Veronica from day 1.

The point isn't to second guess what she should have done because the clue turned out to be easy, it's that it was likely her only (or at least best) chance to win. She finished her J! career (at least for now) 18/19 on DDs and 12/13 on FJ, both incredible marks, and had she been willing to bet on herself and go all-in either in the FJ Thursday or DD2 Friday, she very likely would have been the champion. If she was happy to play for second place then that is certainly her right but kind of a bummer, as those DD and FJ numbers are simply phenomenal and she would have been quite the deserving champion.
yclept
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 509
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 3:43 am

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by yclept »

nserven wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 9:49 am

It sounds like Jennifer was already in the mindset of preserving 2nd place by the time she hit the DD.
I told my wife when it happened that it appears she wants to make sure that she can take second place, rather than going big for the win. Even her FJ wager on Day 1 seemed more geared to staying close with Veronica over trying to get closer to Sam (she could have been hoping that Sam bets small, but what would make one think he would?)
User avatar
Newhausen
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:02 pm

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Newhausen »

jeff6286 wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 1:06 pm The point isn't to second guess what she should have done because the clue turned out to be easy, it's that it was likely her only (or at least best) chance to win. She finished her J! career (at least for now) 18/19 on DDs and 12/13 on FJ, both incredible marks, and had she been willing to bet on herself and go all-in either in the FJ Thursday or DD2 Friday, she very likely would have been the champion. If she was happy to play for second place then that is certainly her right but kind of a bummer, as those DD and FJ numbers are simply phenomenal and she would have been quite the deserving champion.
That's a lot easier to say when it's not *your* $50,000 you have to put on the line to chase Sam.

And remember, Sam still has to miss Final Jeopardy!. Doubling up on the DD just means that Final isn't a lock, not that Jennifer is in the lead (unless she hits the other DD and doubles up again). She only wins on Finals that she gets and Sam misses, and Sam is a strong enough player that the odds of any given Final falling in that category are pretty slim.

Obviously lots of people would take the risk here - I'm almost positive that Sam would have if the roles were reversed - but this like the other 99.5% of Jeopardy games where the difference between 2nd and 3rd place is trivial.
seaborgium
Undefeated in Reruns
Posts: 8937
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by seaborgium »

Perhaps Buzzy should have mentioned that his comeback from $0 involved a successful TDD in the last game.

Against Sam's $20,400, Jennifer needed to have at least $21,950 to prevent the lock. If she had decided to bet exactly half of her $10,400 at the DD, that would have ultimately been just enough. (Her Twitter remarks, however, make me question whether she would have even wagered to win if she'd broken the lock by a threadbare margin.)

Good on Sam for not resting on his laurels after game 1, because he needed more than $17,450 against Jennifer's $19,000 to maintain his lock, and therefore needed to earn more than $5,050 above box value on his DDs. Also good on him for not resting on his laurels in the first FJ; he took advantage of his position of having outplayed Jennifer and preemptively protected himself from being outplayed by her in game 2.


I said Austria on FJ, thinking only of East Germany and Czechoslovakia, even though I know it borders Hungary (heck, they were one country a little over a century ago). It also borders Switzerland and Italy, so bad on me. Squandering a lead in the last FJ of the ToC was bad enough, but I'm glad I didn't do so in 2010 by missing Poland, as that's where my maternal grandparents came from. I think I dismissed it at the outset because I was reminded at first of this game's FJ, and then thought, "No, Poland was the country that didn't exist for a while in that one," and tossed it aside without considering its borders.
Last edited by seaborgium on Sat May 29, 2021 4:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ironhorse
Second Banana
Posts: 2044
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2017 7:21 pm

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Ironhorse »

The hypothetical difference between first and second may be more than $150,000 as winning the ToC vastly increases the odds of being invited back. She should have played to win.
User avatar
StevenH
Not J! Contestant Material
Posts: 2524
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:24 pm
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by StevenH »

alietr wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 8:51 am I was in Malaga two years ago, so I wasn't missing that.
I forgot: I was in Malaga three years ago, and couldn't pull Spain from the clue. Not getting that one hurt.
Caboom
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 718
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2014 9:49 am

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Caboom »

Newhausen wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 2:45 pm And remember, Sam still has to miss Final Jeopardy!. Doubling up on the DD just means that Final isn't a lock, not that Jennifer is in the lead (unless she hits the other DD and doubles up again). She only wins on Finals that she gets and Sam misses, and Sam is a strong enough player that the odds of any given Final falling in that category are pretty slim.
Nope. As Golf pointed out a few posts above you, had she doubled up, she would have lead by 14200. If she maintains that lead to the FJ, gets it and bets to win, it's irrelevant if Sam misses or not.
seaborgium
Undefeated in Reruns
Posts: 8937
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by seaborgium »

Caboom wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 6:46 pm
Newhausen wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 2:45 pm And remember, Sam still has to miss Final Jeopardy!. Doubling up on the DD just means that Final isn't a lock, not that Jennifer is in the lead (unless she hits the other DD and doubles up again). She only wins on Finals that she gets and Sam misses, and Sam is a strong enough player that the odds of any given Final falling in that category are pretty slim.
Nope. As Golf pointed out a few posts above you, had she doubled up, she would have lead by 14200. If she maintains that lead to the FJ, gets it and bets to win, it's irrelevant if Sam misses or not.
Newhausen is talking about pre-FJ scores, not post-DD2 scores. Jennifer can't be expected to maintain a $14,200 lead when Sam hits DD3 and doubles up $7,800. I think Golf's "maintain" just meant "not crash and burn." If she had also doubled up and all else played out the same, Sam's lead still would have been crush-equivalent (requiring Jennifer to get FJ and Sam to miss). And Golf's post didn't say that it was irrelevant whether Sam missed, just that Jennifer wins with a correct response if it's not a lock (because Sam missed).
cthulhu
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 477
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 1:29 am

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by cthulhu »

Robert K S wrote: Fri May 28, 2021 10:03 pm I was impressed by Sam's "Gauss" pull and wonder which part of the clue--the face, the unit, the Latin name, or its English translation--led him to the correct response. (I didn't like the unit part of the clue--"magnetism"?--but I feel like we've had enough of the SI this week.)
Seemed like a WECIB clue to me. The face was meaningless to me though.

Congratulations to Sam!
seaborgium
Undefeated in Reruns
Posts: 8937
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by seaborgium »

Jennifer got all 4 ToC FJs right, while Sam won despite missing the last one. I just found myself wondering who has won ToCs getting all correct FJ responses. Off the top of my head (I'll add researched info in brackets):
basically a lot of off-topic stuff
1985: Jerry Frankel was the last wild card after getting the QF FJ wrong.
1986: Chuck Forrest missed the QF FJ (but had a lock). [the first FJ of the finals was a TS]
1987: Bob Verini I think had a sole miss on the first game of the final. [yes, and he missed his semifinal FJ from a lock]
1988: Likewise for Mark Lowenthal. I think he also missed his QF but won anyway. [right about the finals, but he got his QF right]
1989: Tom Cubbage has had a long streak of correct FJs that includes his full ToC run.
1990: I can't remember whether Bob Blake missed any. [he missed his QF but won, missed the first of the finals]
1991: Jim Scott missed his semifinal FJ and the last FJ.
1992: I think the first game of the finals was a TS, so Leszek Pawlowicz was 3/4 at best. [I was correct, and he was 3/4 indeed]
1993: Tom Nosek missed his semifinal FJ (but had a lock). [he missed no other FJ]
1994: Rachael Schwartz missed her semifinal FJ (but wagered $0). [she was 3/4]
1995: I don't recall Fritz Holznagel missing any. I'm pretty sure he was 2/2 in the finals. [he was 4/4]
1996: I think Michael Dupée threw one of his FJs because he could (having wagered $0 from second place or a lock). [it was a close second in the semis, and he got all other three right]
1998: Dan Melia missed his quarterfinal FJ (his having made the semis as a wild card seems to get overlooked due to his finals domination). [he was 3/4]
1999: Dave Abbott was 4/4, after going 5/5 in his original run, a unique accomplishment.
2000: Robin Carroll was 1/4, only getting her semifinal FJ right (from a lock).
2001: Brad Rutter missed the first FJ of the finals. [he was 3/4]
2003: I suspect Mark Dawson was 4/4, but I can't specifically recall his semifinal. [he was 4/4]
2004: I don't know how Russ Schumacher did on FJs. [he was 3/4, only missing the first of the finals]
2006: Michael Falk feels like 4/4 to me, but I'm not sure. [3/4, missing the QF final on a $0 wager]
2007: Celeste DiNucci missed the last FJ. [and only that; 3/4]
2009: Dan Pawson was 2/4, getting both finals FJs right.
2010: Vijay Balse only got the last FJ right (to my chagrin).
2011: Roger Craig only got the first FJ of the finals right.
2013: Colby Burnett was 4/4.
2014: Ben Ingram only missed the last FJ.
2015: Alex Jacob went 0/4 (although there was a joke response among them).
2017: Buzzy Cohen missed both FJs of the finals. [he got the ones in the previous rounds]
2019: James Holzhauer missed his semifinal FJ only, I believe. [yes]
Maybe at some point I'll go after 4/4s that didn't win.
User avatar
Robert K S
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 5247
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:26 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Robert K S »

cthulhu wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 11:23 pm
Robert K S wrote: Fri May 28, 2021 10:03 pm I was impressed by Sam's "Gauss" pull and wonder which part of the clue--the face, the unit, the Latin name, or its English translation--led him to the correct response. (I didn't like the unit part of the clue--"magnetism"?--but I feel like we've had enough of the SI this week.)
Seemed like a WECIB
Who else could it be? Weber, for one, if you didn't know his buddy Gauss was a more highly regarded mathematician. Euler, if you didn't know a unit wasn't named after him and didn't know he was actually Swiss. Potentially any of the people on these lists. Leibniz was my guess halfway through the clue read and I never really recovered from it.
Caboom
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 718
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2014 9:49 am

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Caboom »

seaborgium wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 8:52 pm
Caboom wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 6:46 pm
Newhausen wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 2:45 pm And remember, Sam still has to miss Final Jeopardy!. Doubling up on the DD just means that Final isn't a lock, not that Jennifer is in the lead (unless she hits the other DD and doubles up again). She only wins on Finals that she gets and Sam misses, and Sam is a strong enough player that the odds of any given Final falling in that category are pretty slim.
Nope. As Golf pointed out a few posts above you, had she doubled up, she would have lead by 14200. If she maintains that lead to the FJ, gets it and bets to win, it's irrelevant if Sam misses or not.
Newhausen is talking about pre-FJ scores, not post-DD2 scores. Jennifer can't be expected to maintain a $14,200 lead when Sam hits DD3 and doubles up $7,800. I think Golf's "maintain" just meant "not crash and burn." If she had also doubled up and all else played out the same, Sam's lead still would have been crush-equivalent (requiring Jennifer to get FJ and Sam to miss). And Golf's post didn't say that it was irrelevant whether Sam missed, just that Jennifer wins with a correct response if it's not a lock (because Sam missed).
Choosing pre-FJ as the point of reference seems arbitrary to me. You can't pick and choose which future events you're gonna take into account and which you're gonna ignore. Either we assume everything would have played out the way it did (including Sam doubling up on DD3 and missing the FJ), or we only take into account the information she had at the time of DD2.

Either way, Newhausen said she would have needed to double up again on the last DD to have a lead, and that is false. Maintaining the lead would have been enough at that point. Sure, if we take into account the rest of the game, she wouldn't have had the two day lead going into FJ, but that's irrelevant, as she doesn't have that information when she makes her bet (or if we wanna judge her bet with perfect hindsight, not having the lead is again irrelevant, because Sam did in fact miss the FJ). Her not having the lead and not knowing whether Sam was going to get FJ would have been relevant only if we had had this discussion at the point of pre-FJ.
Golf wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 12:09 pm My point was that she played to win she could have done so even if Sam answered FJ correctly. She still had the ball in her hands when finding DD2.
If one wants to play for an extra $50k instead of an extra $150k go ahead, but at that point it had nothing to do with Sam making a mistake.
Based on the above, I'm fairly certain Golf's "maintain" meant exactly "maintain". Also, "she played to win she could have done so even if Sam answered FJ correctly" sounds to me the same as "it's irrelevant if Sam misses or not".
cthulhu
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 477
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 1:29 am

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by cthulhu »

Robert K S wrote: Sun May 30, 2021 10:21 am
cthulhu wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 11:23 pm
Robert K S wrote: Fri May 28, 2021 10:03 pm I was impressed by Sam's "Gauss" pull and wonder which part of the clue--the face, the unit, the Latin name, or its English translation--led him to the correct response. (I didn't like the unit part of the clue--"magnetism"?--but I feel like we've had enough of the SI this week.)
Seemed like a WECIB
Who else could it be? Weber, for one, if you didn't know his buddy Gauss was a more highly regarded mathematician. Euler, if you didn't know a unit wasn't named after him and didn't know he was actually Swiss. Potentially any of the people on these lists. Leibniz was my guess halfway through the clue read and I never really recovered from it.
The clue said 19th century, so I knew Leibniz was out, as was Euler and the Bernoullis (I knew they were Swiss as well). Riemann was a possibility, but no tie to a unit of magnetism. Gauss is a lot more famous as a mathematician than Weber. QED 8-)
seaborgium
Undefeated in Reruns
Posts: 8937
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by seaborgium »

Caboom wrote: Sun May 30, 2021 11:17 am
seaborgium wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 8:52 pm
Caboom wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 6:46 pm
Newhausen wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 2:45 pm And remember, Sam still has to miss Final Jeopardy!. Doubling up on the DD just means that Final isn't a lock, not that Jennifer is in the lead (unless she hits the other DD and doubles up again). She only wins on Finals that she gets and Sam misses, and Sam is a strong enough player that the odds of any given Final falling in that category are pretty slim.
Nope. As Golf pointed out a few posts above you, had she doubled up, she would have lead by 14200. If she maintains that lead to the FJ, gets it and bets to win, it's irrelevant if Sam misses or not.
Newhausen is talking about pre-FJ scores, not post-DD2 scores. Jennifer can't be expected to maintain a $14,200 lead when Sam hits DD3 and doubles up $7,800. I think Golf's "maintain" just meant "not crash and burn." If she had also doubled up and all else played out the same, Sam's lead still would have been crush-equivalent (requiring Jennifer to get FJ and Sam to miss). And Golf's post didn't say that it was irrelevant whether Sam missed, just that Jennifer wins with a correct response if it's not a lock (because Sam missed).
Choosing pre-FJ as the point of reference seems arbitrary to me. You can't pick and choose which future events you're gonna take into account and which you're gonna ignore. Either we assume everything would have played out the way it did (including Sam doubling up on DD3 and missing the FJ), or we only take into account the information she had at the time of DD2.

Either way, Newhausen said she would have needed to double up again on the last DD to have a lead, and that is false. Maintaining the lead would have been enough at that point. Sure, if we take into account the rest of the game, she wouldn't have had the two day lead going into FJ, but that's irrelevant, as she doesn't have that information when she makes her bet (or if we wanna judge her bet with perfect hindsight, not having the lead is again irrelevant, because Sam did in fact miss the FJ). Her not having the lead and not knowing whether Sam was going to get FJ would have been relevant only if we had had this discussion at the point of pre-FJ.
Golf wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 12:09 pm My point was that she played to win she could have done so even if Sam answered FJ correctly. She still had the ball in her hands when finding DD2.
If one wants to play for an extra $50k instead of an extra $150k go ahead, but at that point it had nothing to do with Sam making a mistake.
Based on the above, I'm fairly certain Golf's "maintain" meant exactly "maintain". Also, "she played to win she could have done so even if Sam answered FJ correctly" sounds to me the same as "it's irrelevant if Sam misses or not".
Agreed that Jennifer didn't need to double up a second time on the last DD; for an effective lead (ability to achieve the highest cumulative score in FJ, which doesn't necessarily amount to a cumulative lead before FJ), she needed to be $11,750 (half his day 1 lead) ahead of whatever Sam had. After her DD, she added $6,400 to her score, whereas outside DD3 Sam added $6,000 to his. So yes, just a double-up on DD2 could have sufficed to guarantee Jennifer FJ victory on a correct response, regardless of how Sam did on FJ, as long as she (or Veronica) could have kept DD3 out of Sam's hands.

But I disagree that Golf's "maintain" referred specifically to maintaining a $14,200 lead (or indeed, even an $11,750 one):
Golf wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 10:44 am After that DD she should have had a $14200 lead with 24 clues and a DD left. At that point she just has to maintain, (which she was doing so far that game) answer FJ correctly, and take home $250k.
I don't think a "maintain" qualified only by "just" entails neutralizing DD3. If Jennifer had gone TDD, at the point after she got it right, Sam would have needed to outscore Jennifer two to one plus make up $11,500 to re-achieve a lock, and given how things had gone to that point, Jennifer only needed more of the same (even as Sam hit the last DD) to prevent that from happening. A TDD from her meant "just maintaining" would have sufficed.
User avatar
skrambler
Sam Kavanaugh's Mustache
Posts: 41
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2016 11:42 am
Contact:

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by skrambler »

Robert K S wrote: Fri May 28, 2021 10:03 pm I was impressed by Sam's "Gauss" pull and wonder which part of the clue--the face, the unit, the Latin name, or its English translation--led him to the correct response. (I didn't like the unit part of the clue--"magnetism"?--but I feel like we've had enough of the SI this week.)
Thanks Robert. I surprised myself on getting this one primarily from the face (for some reason it stayed prominent in my mind after reading his Wikipedia page a few months prior). The unit was helpful in confirming it was correct, but there are so many people with units named after them that it wasn't fruitful for me to cross reference those with the other clues in just a couple of seconds. The Latin name was also helpful because he's (one of) the GOAT mathematicians, but again I wasn't sure enough just off of that to risk 2000 during a game where I was mostly playing defense.
Audacious! Loquacious! Voracious!
User avatar
alietr
Site Admin
Posts: 8978
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:20 pm
Location: Bethesda, MD

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by alietr »

skrambler wrote: Sun May 30, 2021 3:28 pm
Robert K S wrote: Fri May 28, 2021 10:03 pm I was impressed by Sam's "Gauss" pull and wonder which part of the clue--the face, the unit, the Latin name, or its English translation--led him to the correct response. (I didn't like the unit part of the clue--"magnetism"?--but I feel like we've had enough of the SI this week.)
Thanks Robert. I surprised myself on getting this one primarily from the face (for some reason it stayed prominent in my mind after reading his Wikipedia page a few months prior). The unit was helpful in confirming it was correct, but there are so many people with units named after them that it wasn't fruitful for me to cross reference those with the other clues in just a couple of seconds. The Latin name was also helpful because he's (one of) the GOAT mathematicians, but again I wasn't sure enough just off of that to risk 2000 during a game where I was mostly playing defense.
Welcome back, Kotter Sam, and a hearty congratulations! Pretty good take for a few days' work. I'll bet your classes have to pay attention to you now!
Bamaman
Also Receiving Votes
Posts: 12895
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Bamaman »

theFJguy wrote: Fri May 28, 2021 1:31 pm
Veronica Vichit-Vadakan: 9200-0=9200 (+6400) = 15600 = $50,000
Jennifer Quail: 19000+8500=27500 (14500) = 42000 = $100,000
Sam Kavanaugh: 20400-12=20388 (+38000) = 58388 = $250,000

Daily Doubles
Sam: 2000+2000
Jennifer: 10400+2200
Sam: 7800+7800
If Jennifer doubled up on the DD (and all else stays the same) she has $27,200 going into FJ. That makes her maximum possible score $68,900. So if Sam still misses FJ, she wins the tournament.
Golf
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 2723
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 pm

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by Golf »

When Jennifer found DD2 she led Sam $10.4k to $6.6k, through 34 clues she had outplayed him. No real reason to think she wouldn't be able to at least hold her own for the rest of the game, especially after the start she got off to in DJ. If she goes TDD she then leads $20.8k to $6.6k, a $14.2k difference with huge momentum on her side. As Sg said, all she needs is to be leading by more than $11.75k going into FJ to lock a win if she answers FJ correctly.

So if we had access to in game winning chances, would Jennifer had been a favorite to win the tournament after a successful TDD? If she "maintains" her current form this game, meaning her lead is over $11.75k going into FJ, she wins 100% of the time if answering FJ correctly. I'd say her chances of maintaining is a little over 50% taking everything into account. If she doesn't maintain, she can still win if Sam misses FJ in a modified 2/3rds situation. If things go in the tank she can win on a R/W scenario in FJ. So yeah, I'd say a successful TDD makes her a favorite to win.

Going into game 2 Jennifer definitely should have known two things. 1, the $11.75k number to put the ball in her court and do everything possible to achieve it. 2, the number to avoid a lock going into FJ. It would also be nice to know the modified 2/3rds number but that's probably asking too much for most contestants to consider in game. So did she know these numbers? Of course we don't know but I'd definitely bet against it.

After going over the numbers above, it should be clear it's not overly difficult to overcome a big lead on day 2 if you take advantage of DD's. And it's happened enough times during various tournaments.

Again, playing for 2nd and an additional $50k when all hopes are lost is one thing. But at the time anyway, she did not realize she could have been favored to win after DD2.
User avatar
OrangeSAM
(Unranked)
Posts: 2161
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 9:00 pm

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by OrangeSAM »

Robert K S wrote: Sun May 30, 2021 10:21 am
cthulhu wrote: Sat May 29, 2021 11:23 pm
Robert K S wrote: Fri May 28, 2021 10:03 pm I was impressed by Sam's "Gauss" pull and wonder which part of the clue--the face, the unit, the Latin name, or its English translation--led him to the correct response. (I didn't like the unit part of the clue--"magnetism"?--but I feel like we've had enough of the SI this week.)
Seemed like a WECIB
Who else could it be? Weber, for one, if you didn't know his buddy Gauss was a more highly regarded mathematician. Euler, if you didn't know a unit wasn't named after him and didn't know he was actually Swiss. Potentially any of the people on these lists. Leibniz was my guess halfway through the clue read and I never really recovered from it.
Some of us here go back to the CRT days when your monitor had a degauss button which would clear residual magnetism.

Also, in the shop where I worked, the parts were to be run through the degausser after Magnetic Particle Inspection (MPI). It didn't always work out. We'd occasionally parts in the final test lab sticking together, so back out they'd go.
OCSam
User avatar
LucarioSnooperVixey
Carrying Letters and Lemons
Posts: 3513
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 8:41 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Friday, May 28, 2021 Game Recap and Discussion (SPOILERS)

Post by LucarioSnooperVixey »

59 R (Missed Rick Baker.)
DD: 3/3
FJ: :mrgreen:
Douglas Squasoni
Post Reply