The real problem to me is it wasn’t a growth spurt, he just stretched. I believe they are wrong. No hijack intended.
Chronos’ provides an excellent analysis of this situation.
But Final Jeopardy is a great example of a situation where there is usually no optimal strategy. Esp. with 3 players but many times with just 2. If there were an optimal bet (for a wide range of situations) for the 2nd place player, then the 1st place player could bet according and improve the odds. Then the 2nd place player, foreseeing this, could instead bet differently to counter the 1st player’s bet and change the odds, etc.
The third place player muddies things even more. Also, the 2nd place player gets $2k and the third place player $1k from what I’ve searched for. Not wanting to finish 3rd when 1st is not likely can factor into the decision. Hence the decision to bet all but $1 can sometimes help then.
But the OP’s situation takes a lot of this out and greatly simplifies it. I.e., players shouldn’t base their strategy on this in general.
Nevermind…
Wait, what? I can lead you in a race but if it was in the past I led you? I was sure this was the same as read and read. Something tells me you’re wrong, but I’m unsure.
I wouldn’t have got the answer (question, whatever) and the phrasing is misleading and scientifically invalid.
Shenanigans, I say.
If only there were some sort of a book to which we could refer in order to rid us of our uncertainty…