Everybody knows all the totals, and the FJ category, before placing their final wager.
I’m guessing there are pretty strict rules against collusion, and ISTR reading that the players have zero off-screen contact until the game is over.
I wonder…?
+++++
In any case, is there a standard Final Jeopardy wagering theory?
It seems the leader (player A) should bet only enough to tie the second place player (player B) should B correctly double his total. Player B should wager everything. The third place contestant (player C) should wager, if possible, only enough to tie Player A if A is wrong. If C cannot tie A’s pre-FJ total minus B’s pre-FJ total, then C should wager nothing.
When I was on, they had production assistants working with us, answering our questions about what we needed to bet in order to tie or to get second, etc. I bet for second place because I didn’t have enough money to beat the first placer, but I did have enough to insure that I wouldn’t get third place if I missed the FJ question.
I saw that and my mind was [del]bottled[/del] boggled as well. 
Did she think he was going to specifically wager $8400 or more? Totally confusing.
Which just goes to show that he doesn’t understand the game. If the second place and third place people could keep the money they had, he would have a point. But they only get $2K and $1K.
No wonder he gets snippy when people don’t bet the max in daily doubles. Here’s a clue, Alex: they are trying to win. The other strategy of daily doubles is, if you get them, even if you bet $5, no one else can use that DD to double their money.
When I was on (two years ago) they didn’t give you any help. You did get scratch paper.
Well, he got the answer right, so you could make the case it was the wrong thing to do. Could’ve made another 22k. And come back next day, by himself.
Curious, did he win the next day? And did he make more than 22k? If he lost, and walked away with a 2 day total of 24k and a box of rice, how do you feel about his previous strategy now?
When I was on, he was fielding questions from the audience during a commercial break. During one answer, he wondered aloud why everybody didn’t just postpone filing their taxes until November like he did.
He’s a game show host and obviously not a game theorist or a financial adviser.
It’s really different standing behind the podiums. It’s really easy to brain fart while standing up there. I don’t mind the FJ screwups much. I almost did it myself.
It should be standard practice for the FJ leader to bid for a tie. We have had several threads, I see, over the years on Jeopardy strategy, and nothing argues well against playing for a tie. Not only is it kind of mean to screw the second place player out of thousands of dollars, the situation could well be reversed on the next show. The “plan to tie” among the two leading players is the soundest play-- no collusion needed.
I must politely disagree. The point of the game is to win. This isn’t kindergarten “we don’t keep score/everyone gets a trophy”. This isn’t The Politeness Society. **This Is Jeopardy!
**
The goal of you as a Jeopardy player should be to crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women.
I must politely disagree.
The goal of you as a Jeopardy player should be to bring as much cash home as possible for as long as possible. I don’t know about the lamentation of their women, but I am going to hear something a bit stronger than a lamentation from mine if I don’t adopt the greed strategy and thereby return home without maximum dollars possible.
They’re all really nice, though. Seriously, the people playing the day I played were the nicest damned people. I didn’t have the heart for any driving before me.
Someone upthread said the money was all pretend until the game is over, but I don’t think that’s strictly true. You know, even before the show starts, that you will get $1,000 if you finish in third, etc. That’s real money, and smart wagering will help you take home the most real money at the end of the day.
For the woman discussed in the OP, it breaks down like this (in real money terms); she was guaranteed $1,000 , made a wager that guaranteed her $2,000, but had a chance at $22,000. Had she bet everything, she was risking $1,000 for a chance at $21,000. Those are pretty attractive odds.[sup]*[/sup]
But the math is different for the guy who was leading. He was guaranteed $22,000. Had he bet everything. he could have won $44,000, or finished last and only got $1,000. He was risking $21,000 for a chance at $22,000; barely better than even money. With that in mind, Gato, I think he made the smart play.
- Of course, the whole thing will never be an exact science because each player’s final place will be determined by all three wagers, not just their own. The analysis for the second-place player assumes, for example, that the leader will bet nothing. Under the circumstances, though, that seems a reasonable assumption to make.
Quite the opposite — back in 1982, anyway. The day’s dozen or so contestants all gather in a large room, chat, shoot the shit, fill out paperwork, and get instructions. Then they are all taken down to the studio where they sit together in a designated section.
They go up on stage in groups of three, and Alex reads them some practice questions (so they can practice using the buzzer) and does a practice interview. Those not on stage watch and talk amongst themselves until it’s their turn.
Contestants stay together while the audience is let in, and then two are chosen to face the returning champion. The rest sit together and kibbitz.
As soon as one show is done taping, the contestant coordinator points at two people — “You, and you.” — and they go onstage and face the winner. The remaining members of the pool continue chatting.
I. If two players tie for 2nd/3rd place in FJ for more than $2000
Got caught by the five minute bell. So again:
I. If two players tie for 2nd/3rd place in FJ for more than $2000 what do they take home? Tie for exactly $2k or $1k or $0 what happens?
II. What do they get for today if two or more players tie for first place?
III.If a player has less than zero before FJ do they get any consolation?
I **think **that the person who went into FJ with the larger amount is considered 2nd place.
They each get the total they won. If they tie with $22,000 they each win $22,000. Though I am not sure if a player wins the game with less than $2000, if they get a minimum amount or only what they actually won (plus whatever they get on the next show.)
They’ll get the 3rd place $1000.
Suppose there’s an episode with three weak players and they go in to the Final Jeopardy round with $500, $200, and $100. The lead player bets nothing and holds on to his lead and $500 in winnings. The second and third place players walk away with the $2000 and $1000 consolation prizes.
Does the lead player still get just the $500 he won? Or is there a minimum prize he gets for winning first place (beyond the chance to return for the next game)?
This winner would still be guaranteed at least another $1000 in his next game, so I would bet that he just gets his winnings.
Though I’m sure they’re intricately linked, success on Jeopardy! is indicative of knowlege and memory, not intelligence. So it is not surprising when, occassionally, a contestant who correctly answers a lot of the questions, err, correctly questions a lot of the answers, doesn’t seem to understand the betting mechanics.
If you’re assured first place, if just a tie, then any money you have accrued is your money. So, if you wager any money that jeapordizes (ha) your position, then you are risking your own money. Maybe that’s not the case with “Double Jeopardy,” as you’re generally not assured first place at that point, but you still have to wager wisely in an effort to attain first place.