There were only two Final Jeopardy players tonight - one had $5,600 and the other $11,200.
The $5,600 bet it all, of course, but the other guy with $11,200 bet $0!!
Unfortunately, they both got the question wrong, but I have two questions:
What happens if they tie?
1a) If the answer to 1) is that the both get the money, and both come back the next day, then why don’t players use the “tie bet” more often?
It seems to me that it’s a sportmanlike thing to do… provide the person you’re giving another chance doesn’t appear too intimidating. After all, you’re only going to get one unknown opponent the next day, and maybe that’s the right way to arrange it.
I believe the biggest advantage the champion has over the challenging players is a familiarity with the buzzer. Most of the people know the answers to most of the questions. The difference is the contestant’s ability to ring in. So it is in your best interest to make make sure that someone who is familiar with the buzzing system does not follow you to the next round.
I don’t watch Jeopardy very often any more but when I did watch it a few years ago players who tied returned the next day as co-champions. Generally, you’re better off with two newbies than someone who came close to beating you. I remember a few times seeing someone who was ahead and on their fifth (and final) win setting it up so that the 2nd place person could tie them if they got the question correct.
If I remeber correctly there is one exception on a tie. You can’t tie if you’re trying to become a 5 day champion.(I believe you would actually lose and the challenger would become the champion.) So if I remember correctly you have to win outright on your 5th day.
My oldest brother was on Jeopardy and he tied. But it was against a guy who had won his 4th straight. They both came back for another game and my brother got his butt kicked.
I thought if you were going to be a 5-time winner and you tied, you got to keep the money, but you didn’t come back.
But I haven’t watched in a while to see if they changed the rules.
I agree that it is sportsmanlike, but you’ve got thousands of dollars on the line. If a tie is possible, then that means that the person tying you is playing at your level – better to get rid of someone you know is good enough to beat you and take your chances. Also, as Lost in Reality mentioned (and as I remember from my high school quiz team days), familiarity with the buzzer system can be a big plus.
Once I saw a show where all three people tied (on a non-zero number). They all got sent home and three new contestants were there the next day.
Has it ever occurred that all three players were in the hole at the end of the Double Jeopardy round, and thus no one was eligible to play the Final round?
I’ve always thought the standard Final Jeopardy betting strategy is unsportsmanlike. Generally, if you have X and your nearest opponent has Y, the bet goes like this:
If X/2 > Y, then bet X-2Y-1
If X/2 < Y, then bet 2Y-X+1
Thus in the first case, you win no matter what and your closest opponent can’t win any money. In the second case, getting the quesion correctly assures that your opponent can’t win any money. I believe the guy in the lead should bet X-2Y with an insurmountable lead and 2Y-X when he can be caught. This lets the tie possibility exist and both players keep the cash and return.
Why is purposely tying with someone sportsmanlike? Isn’t sportsmanship doing everything you can (fairly) to win? I think purposely trying not to win is actually un-sportsmanlike.
The reason contestants don’t use the “tie bet” more often, is that it’s pretty rare for the scores before Final Jeopardy to end the way they did in the original post.
x-ray, suppose we were on the show. Going into the final round, I’ve got $22,000 and you have $12,000. You wager it all and get it right, now you’ve got $24,000. I wager $2001 and get it right, giving me $24,001, leaving you with lovely parting gifts. Now if I’m nice, I wager $1 less, and we both finish with $24,000 and we both come back. So that extra $1 wager would cost you $24,000. I think it’s more sportsman like to wager so that you can both keep the money.
MSU 1978, If I’m ever on Jeopardy, I definitely want you as a competitor! You sound like a nice person. But, nice doesn’t equal sportsmanship. What you’re doing is akin to throwing a game. Also, on the next show there was going to be two more contestants on the show, now because of you, there will only be one. Since you’re so conncerned about your competitors making money also what about him/her?
I think NBC can cough up another $24,000. That’s chump change for them. If they would let the losers keep the cash I wouldn’t worry about it, I’d just go for the win.
True, I’d be facing a vet instead of a rookie for day 2. But it would be someone I knew I could beat rather than an unknown. Plus he might be so grateful that he’d return the favor if the roles were reversed in show #2.
As for the person who wouldn’t make the next show, I’m not sure. If indeed my actions would cost somebody an appearance, then I guess I’m wrong. But I bet they have a batting order in place and the guy who misses out on my second show would be my next opponent on my third.
No, but I did see a show where two players fininshed in the hole at the end of DJ. When they did Final Jeopardy (with the single player) they revealed the wager first, then the contestant’s question.
I don’t think you’re getting the point. It doesn’t matter how much money NBC has (actually Jeopardy! is on ABC), we’re talking about what is and what isn’t sportmanship. Purposefully not winning is not sportmanship. In your new scenario you have your competitor returning favors. This is sportmanship? It may be a good way for two people to make money, but this is not sportsmanship.