View Single Post
Old 05-07-2019, 11:58 AM
enalzi is online now
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 8,177
Originally Posted by Tired and Cranky View Post
Paragraphs (1) and (2) don't apply to what I've suggested. My question for you is whether rearranging the board and tweaking the difficulty of the questions constitutes an "artifice or scheme" prohibited by paragraph (3). It doesn't involve any scheme between any of the players and the producers. My suggestions don't prearrange or predetermine the outcome. Jeopardy continues to be a bona fide contest of intellectual knowledge. Anyone could come on the show and beat James. It requires no changes to the rules or unfair advantage to any player even if it might have the effect of reducing James's winnings. So what law does it violate?

For what it's worth, it looks like the locations of Daily Doubles over James's run line up pretty closely to historical patterns so I don't think producers are playing with James that way.
I think the problem is that once you remove the psuedo randomness of DD and have some Jeopardy producer put it in a specific spot, it's just a short hop to "You put that DD in a category because one competitor would do better at it than another."