Jeopardistas: What do you think of Arthur Chu?

[Irishman]

@etv78

Because the clue has a value over what the player bet.

So? You just restated the issue.

@JRDelirious

Their focus groups must tell them the audience wants a show full of ups and downs and switching leads and close finals and :smack: moments and dramatic come-from-behind endings and the DD must cause a BIG change in the lead picture. Playing to not lose means not dancing to the production team’s research-tested drum.

Okay, that makes sense. “Play to make it fun for the home viewer, not necessarily to be smart.”

@RickJay

Remember that Trebek’s admonishment against low DD bets was directed at most players who take the “just go from top to bottom” strategy.

Was it? I thought it was directed at anyone underbetting the value. Trebek’s comment was not about people not getting the most bang for their buck. Statistically, Daily Double’s are easier than the regular questions at those dollar values. That means even if you don’t know European Literature well, you still might know “Les Miserables” is musical about a orphan girl with a broom. Telling players that is more likely to get them to consider higher DD bets.

But telling them “you should at least bet the dollar value we assigned, because really we like it that way, nevermind what’s in your best interest” is bullshit. I’ll say “Thank you, Alex, but I’ll play the way I want. When you’re the contestant, you can bet the way you want.”

I understand what home viewers want: big bets, dollar value swings, leader changes, players swapping back and forth who runs the board, mistakes to show the smarties are dumber than me. But the contestants can’t play with that as their strategy - they’ll lose. They have to try to win, so it’s in their best interest to optimize the strategy to get the questions early, control the flow of the board, get the Daily Doubles themselves so their opponents can’t use them against them, and - if they don’t know the category (19th century sports records) - bet low to kill off the DD for as little pain as possible.

I just didn’t realize the minimum DD bet was $5. Yeah, I’d totally think about doing that. Especially if the point is to kill the DD’s early rather than just playing through the board and accidentally uncovering one.

But I’d more likely try to make money on the DD, because we’ve had the discussion and I see the statistics favor the DD’s winning.

[Sean_Factotum]

@Irishman

But I’d more likely try to make money on the DD, because we’ve had the discussion and I see the statistics favor the DD’s winning.

I haven’t seen that statistics on that, but I do remember Ken Jennings saying that the eventual winners have a higher win on the DDs, so the smart player (as in, playing to win, not necessarily being the smartest player of the three) should bet high on these. I think it was somewhere in his “Brainiac” book, IIRC.

[K364]

I haven’t gone through this entire thread, but the primary reason for a dominating Jeopardy player to hunt for DD’s… is to stop his/her opponents from getting them at a critical time and pulling off a “Hail Mary” finish.

[etv78]

@K364

I haven’t gone through this entire thread, but the primary reason for a dominating Jeopardy player to hunt for DD’s… is to stop his/her opponents from getting them at a critical time and pulling off a “Hail Mary” finish.

Which is what practically everyone who HAS read the thread has said!

[K364]

yep, I deserved that.

[janeslogin]

Have you found Jeopardy! to be somewhat bland since Chu’s departure?

[fjs1fs]

It may have been mentioned upthread, but for clarification on this “Hunting for Daily Doubles” strategy, is it a fact that Daily Doubles are placed in the top row(s) less often than the bottom row(s)? It does seem that way, but are there statistics on that?