Jeopardy 2/23 - Stupid bet???

[cmosdes]

I caught just the very end of Jeopardy tonight and it seemed like the returning champion made a completely nonsensical bet.

She had $10800 going into final jeopardy and one of the other contestants had $21600. He of course was guaranteed to at least tie and return tomorrow if he bet $0. For some reason, she bet less than $10800! Why??? Clearly he wouldn't bet anything so in order to return, she would *have* to bet it all and hope to get it right.

Do contestants get to keep their money if they don't win? I assume not, so I don't get why she bet the way she did.

[Snarky_Kong]

It was a stupid bet.

[Robot Arm]

I was puzzling over that a bit, too.

Did anybody else get it right? I did.

[notfrommensa]

The defending champ appeared spacey during this episode. She gave at least two different 'questions' at least twice during the episode. It was an odd wager, and it appeared that she realized she screwed up as soon Alex revealed her total after she got the question right.

FTR, I answered the FJ correctly, but it was a guess.

[K364]

I was trembling with anticipation because I thought this might be a debacle for the "I gotta win by a dollar" crowd. But the leader at $21, 600 did the right thing and bet zero. And then, amazingly, number 2 had a brain cramp.

[notfrommensa]

I went a little further and tried to guess the 4 capitals, I only got two out of 4. I picked the what I thought were the obvious four.

The category was World Rivers and the answer is:

With 4, more national capitals are located on this river than any other river in the world

SPOILER:

What is the Danube?

The four capitals are:

SPOILER:

Vienna, Bratislava, Budapest, and Belgrade
I would have guessed Budapest, Vienna, Bucharest and Sofia

[Wile E]

Yeah, I pointed it out to the boyfriend that the guy was guaranteed at least a tie, if not the win as long as he bet nothing. We were both shocked that the defending champ didn't go all out and bet everything for a possible tie. She did seem to be a little off all night.

[RickJay]

Dumb bets are surprisingly common, given how smart the contestants usually are. It's continually amazing to me how, late in the game, a person getting a Daily Double will often make a bet that doesn't benefit them in any way.

[cmosdes]

One other really puzzling bet I saw recently was near the end of double jeopardy where the second place person found the second daily double of the round and didn't bet enough to take the lead if they got it right. There was essentially no time left after the daily double so what was the point of not betting enough to take the lead? For example, if the leader had $14,000 and you have $12,000, why not bet $3,000? If you get it right you can guarantee you'll win the game if you get final jeopardy right. If you get it wrong you are no worse off being down $5,000 in this situation than being down $1.

[panache45]

It was a dumb bet . . . and it's amazing how often this happens.

And yeah, I got it right. My brain went "The Danube . . . no wait, the Nile . . . no wait, the Danube."

[Freudian Slit]

Don't they have people to help you figure it out, though? I always see them talking over things with other people before Final Jeopardy anyway.

[Hippy Hollow]

Originally Posted by Freudian Slit

Don't they have people to help you figure it out, though? I always see them talking over things with other people before Final Jeopardy anyway.

Not in my experience. They come out to futz with your makeup, but the math is all you. Which is a bother if you aren't great with mental arithmetic. One of my buddies gave me grief for losing a little more than I should have in FJ. I was sweating bullets and worrying about getting the damn question right...

[zagloba]

She also surprised me with her extremely conservative Daily Double wagers.

Another oddity about her was her habit of saying the complete name of categories and giving giving full names as questions where just the surname would do. This slowed the pace of the game, but I think it was driven by lifelong bureaucrat/prescriptivist English teacher tendencies. The complete names thing isn't very good tactics. The surname is almost always sufficient. Alex will prompt for disambiguation if it's needed, but if you get the rest of the name wrong, you lose.

[Munch]

Originally Posted by notfrommensa

The four capitals are:

SPOILER:

Vienna, Bratislava, Budapest, and Belgrade
I would have guessed Budapest, Vienna, Bucharest and Sofia

Yikes.

I got the river right, but man is my eastern Europe geography total crap! (I wasn't even aware that Sophia was a city...) Wow... I need to read more.

[borschevsky]

Originally Posted by cmosdes

For example, if the leader had $14,000 and you have $12,000, why not bet $3,000? If you get it right you can guarantee you'll win the game if you get final jeopardy right. If you get it wrong you are no worse off being down $5,000 in this situation than being down $1.

You are worse off being down $5,000 in that situation. The leader would only have to bet $4,000 to guarantee a victory with a correct answer, so the only way to win is for them to be wrong and you to be right. If you were closer, then the leader would need to bet more, and you can win if they give a wrong answer, regardless of your own.

[jacquilynne]

Originally Posted by Munch

Yikes.

I got the river right, but man is my eastern Europe geography total crap! (I wasn't even aware that Sophia was a city...) Wow... I need to read more.

I will remember forever that Sophia is the capital city of Bulgaria. Because it was one of the questions on the Jeopardy audition test that I took that I didn't know the answer to.

[Freudian Slit]

Originally Posted by Hippy Hollow

Not in my experience. They come out to futz with your makeup, but the math is all you. Which is a bother if you aren't great with mental arithmetic. One of my buddies gave me grief for losing a little more than I should have in FJ. I was sweating bullets and worrying about getting the damn question right...

Really? I definitely remember seeing people (back when I used to watch) come out and sort of help them when they were given the final category. Hmmm.

[Munch]

Originally Posted by jacquilynne

I will remember forever that Sophia is the capital city of Bulgaria. Because it was one of the questions on the Jeopardy audition test that I took that I didn't know the answer to.

Ouch. I mean, it sounds like a beatiful city. I know nothing about it, but a city named "Sophia" seems to me to be the most beautiful and elaborately architectured city in the history of civilization.

And after a brief stop on Wiki, it appears I'm on track.

[notfrommensa]

I think it is "Sofia" FTR. I have never seen it spelled "Sophia"

Sofia Bulgaria wiki

[VarlosZ]

Originally Posted by RickJay

Dumb bets are surprisingly common, given how smart the contestants usually are. It's continually amazing to me how, late in the game, a person getting a Daily Double will often make a bet that doesn't benefit them in any way.

I'm convinced that Jeopardy! contestants as a group are completely clueless when it comes to Daily Doubles. If I'm reading this correctly (and there's a chance I'm not), then about 2/3 of Daily Doubles are answered correctly. In the Jeopardy round, assuming it's not a category you feel particularly weak in, it's very hard for it to be correct to do anything other than bet the maximum; you're just giving up too much equity. Maybe if you're a Jeopardy! superstar like Ken Jennings and/or you have a commanding lead, it could be correct to limit your variance as you figure to have a big edge the rest of the way. Otherwise it's just too good of an opportunity to pass up.

In Double Jeopardy contestants are still too cautious, though obviously the optimal bet size is much more context-dependent.

[pulykamell]

Originally Posted by panache45

It was a dumb bet . . . and it's amazing how often this happens.

And yeah, I got it right. My brain went "The Danube . . . no wait, the Nile . . . no wait, the Danube."

I might have gotten it wrong if the hint that it was four cities wasn't there. Given that I've been to all four and know all are capitals, I would've felt pretty dumb if I got it wrong. However, I'm a bit surprised that there isn't a river with more capitals on it.

[MPB in Salt Lake]

Originally Posted by VarlosZ

I'm convinced that Jeopardy! contestants as a group are completely clueless when it comes to Daily Doubles. If I'm reading this correctly (and there's a chance I'm not), then about 2/3 of Daily Doubles are answered correctly. In the Jeopardy round, assuming it's not a category you feel particularly weak in, it's very hard for it to be correct to do anything other than bet the maximum; you're just giving up too much equity. Maybe if you're a Jeopardy! superstar like Ken Jennings and/or you have a commanding lead, it could be correct to limit your variance as you figure to have a big edge the rest of the way. Otherwise it's just too good of an opportunity to pass up.

In Double Jeopardy contestants are still too cautious, though obviously the optimal bet size is much more context-dependent.

This bugs me more than anything else on Jeopardy (Alex's "correcting" everyones pronunciation is a close 2nd).........

Betting less than the value of the clue??? It seems like such a wasted opportunity.

[ShibbOleth]

I would have got the river correct but called it the Donau. I wonder if they would have given me credit?

[The Tof]

I admit to being stymied by her bet as well. That she bet to a $1 increment makes me think that she forgot how much the leader had and didn't realize she had to bet it all.

(As for the question- I guessed The Nile. )

[Snarky_Kong]

Originally Posted by VarlosZ

I'm convinced that Jeopardy! contestants as a group are completely clueless when it comes to Daily Doubles.

I think it's more that Jeopardy doesn't emphasize math or science at all and as a result draws contestants that are weak at those things.

[cmosdes]

Originally Posted by borschevsky

You are worse off being down $5,000 in that situation. The leader would only have to bet $4,000 to guarantee a victory with a correct answer, so the only way to win is for them to be wrong and you to be right. If you were closer, then the leader would need to bet more, and you can win if they give a wrong answer, regardless of your own.

Yes, I see your point. But by betting less than the amount needed to take the lead, you are essentially betting the leader will get FJ wrong. I don't see how that is a good bet. I'd much rather be the leader and then have a look at the category to determine my optimal strategy rather than hoping the leader gets FJ wrong. And, as I said, even if you get DJ wrong, you still can win if the leader gets FJ wrong (which you'll need anyway).

[Invisible Chimp]

I groan whenever somebody bet's less the value of the clue. If I were ever on the show, I would make finding and optimizing the Daily Doubles my first priority. I would assume that my opponents were my equals and therefore buzzer timing and Daily Double optimization would be the difference. Also, if I were anything but first going into Final Jeopardy!, and it was not a runaway for the leader, I would risk it all. Go big or go home.

[Surbey]

Originally Posted by Ataraxy

I groan whenever somebody bet's less the value of the clue. If I were ever on the show, I would make finding and optimizing the Daily Doubles my first priority. I would assume that my opponents were my equals and therefore buzzer timing and Daily Double optimization would be the difference. Also, if I were anything but first going into Final Jeopardy!, and it was not a runaway for the leader, I would risk it all. Go big or go home.

I agree, completely. You are on the show for a reason. Why each and every person doesn't make it a true daily double is beyond me, especially in a category they have just been tearing apart. Second place in this game is simply the greatest loser.

[Leaper]

Originally Posted by Surbey

Why each and every person doesn't make it a true daily double is beyond me

I know there's hyperbole there, but I just wanted to say that I, at least, can see logical reasons to bet relatively low, especially if it's a category you're uncomfortable with.

Though I can definitely see the logic of always betting at least the original value of the question. (OTOH, one could argue that in "normal" circumstances, you just wouldn't have rung in. Which seems to bring it back to value judgment level.)

[Rigamarole]

Originally Posted by Hippy Hollow

Not in my experience. They come out to futz with your makeup, but the math is all you. Which is a bother if you aren't great with mental arithmetic.

So they don't let you use a calculator? If not, they should.

[AppallingGael]

Originally Posted by Rigamarole

So they don't let you use a calculator? If not, they should.

Certainly people screw up the arithmetic often enough, but I'll bet the big majority of incomprehensible FJ bets are due to bad thinking rather than bad calculating. But that's fine with me. Unlike too-small-to-give-themselves-a-chance DD wagers, stupid FJ bets at least do not detract from the supsense of the game.

As for staff providing betting consultation, that strikes me as a bizarre idea. For one thing, many FJ scenarios present a number of defensible betting options.

[Hippy Hollow]

Originally Posted by Surbey

I agree, completely. You are on the show for a reason. Why each and every person doesn't make it a true daily double is beyond me, especially in a category they have just been tearing apart. Second place in this game is simply the greatest loser.

Well, sometimes you're doing well in a category through dumb luck. You don't know the topic and you've just been fortunate to get the right answers so far. What's potentially more important that getting questions right is controlling the board. So if you make a small DD bet you are a) able to keep the board under your control if you're right, and b) not out of a lot of money if you're wrong.

Losing money when you're wrong definitely hurts and it takes you out of your game.

Rig. definitely no calculator help, at least when I was on. I think we were given scrap paper and a golf pencil...

[hellpaso]

Originally Posted by zagloba

She also surprised me with her extremely conservative Daily Double wagers.

Another oddity about her was her habit of saying the complete name of categories and giving giving full names as questions where just the surname would do. This slowed the pace of the game, but I think it was driven by lifelong bureaucrat/prescriptivist English teacher tendencies. The complete names thing isn't very good tactics. The surname is almost always sufficient. Alex will prompt for disambiguation if it's needed, but if you get the rest of the name wrong, you lose.

That was driving me crazy! She was the type to say "George Z. K. Washington"--that was sooo annoying.

[HeyHomie]

If you get a Daily Double, are you allowed to bet zero? Like, say, it's a high-dollar clue in an obscure category that you're certain you know nothing about?

[notfrommensa]

Originally Posted by HeyHomie

If you get a Daily Double, are you allowed to bet zero? Like, say, it's a high-dollar clue in an obscure category that you're certain you know nothing about?

I would guess that there is a minimum wager. If you bet 0, why would they even reveal the clue, other than to show. It wastes time and has no consequence.

[Munch]

Originally Posted by notfrommensa

I would guess that there is a minimum wager. If you bet 0, why would they even reveal the clue, other than to show. It wastes time and has no consequence.

But in some situations, wasting time would be the desired consequence.

[Invisible Chimp]

Originally Posted by HeyHomie

If you get a Daily Double, are you allowed to bet zero? Like, say, it's a high-dollar clue in an obscure category that you're certain you know nothing about?

You can not bet zero on a DD, IIRC.

Originally Posted by zagloba

She also surprised me with her extremely conservative Daily Double wagers.

Another oddity about her was her habit of saying the complete name of categories and giving giving full names as questions where just the surname would do. This slowed the pace of the game, but I think it was driven by lifelong bureaucrat/prescriptivist English teacher tendencies. The complete names thing isn't very good tactics. The surname is almost always sufficient. Alex will prompt for disambiguation if it's needed, but if you get the rest of the name wrong, you lose.

She was not an English teacher, but a retired librarian.

Also, I think the only scenario where it is correct to wager less than the clue amount for a DD is if you already have a runaway, but would not if you lost the value of the clue and it is the last clue of the game.

[AppallingGael]

Originally Posted by HeyHomie

If you get a Daily Double, are you allowed to bet zero? Like, say, it's a high-dollar clue in an obscure category that you're certain you know nothing about?

$5 is the minimum bet on a Daily Double.

I don't get the talk about betting "at least the clue amount". A $2000 clue in a tough category for you is a good candidate for a $5 bet, while a top-row clue almost always demands a bigger bet.