It’s libelous and vile to accuse someone of such a thing, and I’m genuinely horrified so many people on the internet are already doing so.
He was up against two challengers who were as sharp as he was in buzzer control, and he was still winning for much of the game, but upon falling behind was visibly rattled. That happens, and you get off balance and your brain doesn’t work as well as it did. He had effectively zero previous experience trying to catch up at the end of DJ.
In truth it didn’t matter if he got it right or not, which is why he bet an irrelevant amount. Both would probably bet it all or close to it, so if either got it right he would lose, and if both got it wrong he would win, no matter what he answered.
IIRC, chimeras have two sets of DNA. There was an episode of CSI where Grissom nailed a murder suspect by realizing their tests were detecting the DNA of his “twin.”
Trying to change the outcome of the game would be a Federal crime, and all game shows continue to take this very seriously, even 60+ years after the scandals.
Why would a new EP in particular want to do this?
It would be nearly impossible for them to be able to accomplish some of the things you suggest. For instance, how could they know who in the contestant pool would be able to ring in faster than someone who’s been successfully doing it for dozens of shows?
Why would they? They gain far, far more in revenue from the increased ratings during a long winning streak than they lose in payouts. In any case, they have a budget for prizes, and Matt’s winnings have not been extraordinarily higher than average, unlike Holzhauer’s. They have no conceivable reason to make Matt (or any highly successful player) lose.
Interesting how things play out. It really took two very good players ganging up on him to take Matt down. If either of today’s challengers had been drawn for yesterday’s game instead, it’s a good bet he would still be playing. Jonathon barely broke a sweat brushing off these two lightweights.
Maybe Jonathan is good enough to start a run of us own, but you couldn’t tell from this game.
The current, new Jeopardy champion is an actor. And is it just me, or does he bear a striking resemblance to the kid on Bad Santa? So much so that I looked up the actor in that movie and found that no, it’s not him.
Sorry for the double-post (too late to edit), but just for everyone’s information, Robinson-Gissette Cruz is non-binary, and uses “they/them” pronouns.
… Especially the “Oh, wait…!” moment. Was it my imagination, or did Mayim sound a bit miffed when she jumped in and cut him off with “Sorry, too much time!”
I just finished watching the episode for 13 October on YouTube. Good game, but I couldn’t believe the clue on Lincoln’s second inaugural was a triple stumper!
First: my bolding in both quotes (and I removed the spoiler tags which are no longer relevant).
Second: How does your remark that Matt “was visibly rattled” differ materially from my remark that he “looked distressed and disappointed”?
Third: My own remark was made as an observation of what I felt: “I thought he looked”. Does this site prohibit expressions of personal reactions and observations?
Your accusation of “libelous and vile” for an expression of what I perceived is ridiculously inappropriate and over-the-top.
And I hope you don’t plan to claim that your “libelous and vile” was in response to my stating “I don’t think he threw the game.” Since I said that I don’t think he did—clearly in response to other online talk about the possibility that he might have done so—your accusation would be just as inappropriate as it would be if you referred to my expression of opinion of his demeanor.
What would be libelous would be to claim he lost because his earpiece lost connection with his coaches. Actually, if you listen carefully, at one point he answers wrong and you can hear him mutter under his breath, “damn it, guys!”