-
http://www.jeopardy.com/gena.pjw?cont=utoc...r2Up&cat=events (http://\"http://www.jeopardy.com/gena.pjw?cont=utoc_4708_2r2Up&cat=events\")
Includes the full field, and the players for the first 5 matches.
-
I like how one spot has been reserved for "2005 Teen Tournament Champion", which of course THEY already know, but we won't know until tomorrow. What a roller coaster ride for that young person, to play in one tournament and immediately get swept into the Biggest Tournament Ever.
-
[quote name=\'OntarioQuizzer\' date=\'Feb 7 2005, 08:28 PM\']http://www.jeopardy.com/gena.pjw?cont=utoc...r2Up&cat=events (http://\"http://www.jeopardy.com/gena.pjw?cont=utoc_4708_2r2Up&cat=events\")
Includes the full field, and the players for the first 5 matches.
[snapback]74505[/snapback]
[/quote]
At least two notable oversights: Bruce Seymour(Super J! champion of champions) and Claudia Perry. Any other surprises not on that list?
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Feb 7 2005, 09:02 PM\']I like how one spot has been reserved for "2005 Teen Tournament Champion", which of course THEY already know, but we won't know until tomorrow. What a roller coaster ride for that young person, to play in one tournament and immediately get swept into the Biggest Tournament Ever.
[snapback]74508[/snapback]
[/quote]
That's even odder considering the Teen champion no longer plays in the annual $250K TofC.
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Feb 7 2005, 10:03 PM\'][quote name=\'OntarioQuizzer\' date=\'Feb 7 2005, 08:28 PM\']http://www.jeopardy.com/gena.pjw?cont=utoc...r2Up&cat=events (http://\"http://www.jeopardy.com/gena.pjw?cont=utoc_4708_2r2Up&cat=events\")
Includes the full field, and the players for the first 5 matches.[/quote]
At least two notable oversights: Bruce Seymour(Super J! champion of champions) and Claudia Perry. Any other surprises not on that list?[/quote]
Someone on the Jeopardy board pointed out that Bruce Seymour was only a four-day winner on his original appearance on Jeopardy, something I didn't know before and find surprising. If I'm making the list, I'd make an exception to include him by virtue of winning the Super Jeopardy tournament. But if their criteria was simply tourney and five-day winners -- and my understanding is that even some of THEM didn't make the cut -- then Bruce gets left out.
I don't remember Claudia Perry's situation, but four-day and even three-day champs made their way into ToC's all the time. She may also simply not have qualified under the structure they set up.
-
Well the "seeded" players in round two make pretty decent sense, and the early round payouts are pretty good as well, besides the finals. A lot of players will be getting a six figure payday even outside the top three it looks like.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Feb 7 2005, 09:09 PM\'][quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Feb 7 2005, 10:03 PM\'][quote name=\'OntarioQuizzer\' date=\'Feb 7 2005, 08:28 PM\']http://www.jeopardy.com/gena.pjw?cont=utoc...r2Up&cat=events (http://\"http://www.jeopardy.com/gena.pjw?cont=utoc_4708_2r2Up&cat=events\")
Includes the full field, and the players for the first 5 matches.[/quote]
At least two notable oversights: Bruce Seymour(Super J! champion of champions) and Claudia Perry. Any other surprises not on that list?[/quote]
I don't remember Claudia Perry's situation, but four-day and even three-day champs made their way into ToC's all the time. She may also simply not have qualified under the structure they set up.
[snapback]74511[/snapback]
[/quote]
Claudia was a four time champ, who lost in the semis of her TofC and competed in the Million Dollar Masters. Kerry Breitenbach, the only five time champ post-Kenjen, doesn't make the cut either. JJ Todor, the five-time champ currently being seen on the weekday GSN reruns, also doesn't make the cut. JJ's five day total was one of the smallest in the modern era, under $30K. They must have picked the highest scoring five time champs to fill out the field; Kerry would have won about $45K under the old system
-
I just saw David Siegel's name in the list of tournament participants, and that is good news! I think he's been waiting for an opportunity like this ever since his infamous mistake that cost him the 1995 Tournament of Champions (for those who don't know, he forgot to phrase a Daily Double response in game one of that tournament's finals in the form of a question, and it ultimately cost him the tournament, because he wagered $800 on that Daily Double, and he lost to Ryan Holznagel by $1301, less than the $1600 turnaround that would have occurred had he phrased that response properly. That mistake was rerun four times in 2000 on Game Show Network, so I feel he's been needled about it, either in jest or maliciously, ever since, but like the Boston Red Sox did in '04, I think he can put away his misery if he advances far enough).
-
[quote name=\'mbclev\' date=\'Feb 7 2005, 11:42 PM\']he forgot to phrase a Daily Double response in game one of that tournament's finals in the form of a question, and it ultimately cost him the tournament, because he wagered $800 on that Daily Double, and he lost to Ryan Holznagel by $1301, less than the $1600 turnaround that would have occurred had he phrased that response properly.
[/quote]
...or maybe (well, no, likely) that $1,600 swing would have caused all of the bets in both final games to be completely different, and he would have lost by even more, or less.
Claiming that a DD wager in Game One cost someone the whole tournament is a pretty ridiculous claim, considering all of the variables that are altered from the point of that wager on forward.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 02:04 AM\']
Claiming that a DD wager in Game One cost someone the whole tournament is a pretty ridiculous claim, considering all of the variables that are altered from the point of that wager on forward.
[snapback]74522[/snapback]
[/quote]
I'm only going by my reaction at the time I initially watched this tournament. I added the $1600 turnaround in when the final scores went up, and naturally, I was quite upset. People may not remember incorrect responses, but they usually remember egregious rule violations, and if David had followed the rules on that Daily Double, he would have won the $100,000.
-
[quote name=\'mbclev\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 12:11 AM\']I'm only going by my reaction at the time I initially watched this tournament. I added the $1600 turnaround in when the final scores went up, and naturally, I was quite upset.
[/quote]
That's fine. Logically, however, it's still rather invalid, is all I'm saying.
-
[quote name=\'mbclev\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 01:42 AM\']I think he's been waiting for an opportunity like this ever since his infamous mistake that cost him the 1995 Tournament of Champions
[snapback]74520[/snapback]
[/quote]
I refuted you on the J! Boards about this.
And it looks like Mr. Lemon has done the same here.
Your arguments are overly simplified and superficial.
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Feb 7 2005, 09:32 PM\']Claudia was a four time champ, who lost in the semis of her TofC and competed in the Million Dollar Masters. Kerry Breitenbach, the only five time champ post-Kenjen, doesn't make the cut either. JJ Todor, the five-time champ currently being seen on the weekday GSN reruns, also doesn't make the cut. JJ's five day total was one of the smallest in the modern era, under $30K. They must have picked the highest scoring five time champs to fill out the field; Kerry would have won about $45K under the old system
[snapback]74514[/snapback]
[/quote]
Yes. The cut was 5 wins and $48,800.
TPTB at Jeopardy halved the totals of the post-doubling contestants in order to seed the field. That means Breitenbach and a few others failed to qualify.
A few other players (Larry McKnight, Amanda Goad, Michael Block, etc.) weren't on the list - I'm presuming they were either unable to play or were unable to be located.
-
[quote name=\'OntarioQuizzer\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 03:36 AM\']
A few other players (Larry McKnight, Amanda Goad, Michael Block, etc.) weren't on the list - I'm presuming they were either unable to play or were unable to be located.
[snapback]74529[/snapback]
[/quote]
Are there any players from the first Trebek season in the tourney? TofC winner Jerry Frankel passed away at least a dozen years ago, so he naturally won't be there
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 07:44 AM\']Are there any players from the first Trebek season in the tourney? TofC winner Jerry Frankel passed away at least a dozen years ago, so he naturally won't be there
[snapback]74534[/snapback]
[/quote]
Actually, he will be there. He'll be propped in a corner next to Art Fleming. NO ONE!!!! is excluded from this Tournament Of Tournaments.
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 07:44 AM\']Are there any players from the first Trebek season in the tourney?
[snapback]74534[/snapback]
[/quote]
Paul Boymel, Mike Day, and John Genova.
-
Jeopardy took some criticism for playing favorites in selecting their Million Dollar Masters participants, and it looks like they scrupulously avoided doing that this time around. You can make a pretty good argument that simply dividing the doubled-values-era scores by two isn't a valid comparison between them and earlier scores, but it is simple and fair.
They clearly didn't pick $48,800 out of a hat, they must have worked their way down the list until they had filled their field, and that's where the cutoff ended up. I'd hate to be a five-day champ who just missed the cut, but it I was a five-day champ who just missed the cut AND I saw some four-day champs who got invited ahead of me, I'd probably make some noise. I'm sure Jeopardy is covering itself with disclaimers about this being an "invitational" tournament, as they did with the M$M, but it wouldn't do them any good to have some disgruntled 5X'ers complaining to the press if they really want to bill this as an "Ultimate" tournament.
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 05:44 AM\']TofC winner Jerry Frankel passed away at least a dozen years ago, so he naturally won't be there
[snapback]74534[/snapback]
[/quote]
Gawd. Let's hope not, anyhow. I'd pity the poor sod who had to stand next to him. :)
"Someone prop Jerry up...he's starting to slide again..."
EDIT: Dammit, Howard beat me to the joke. :)
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 11:21 AM\']I'd hate to be a five-day champ who just missed the cut, but it I was a five-day champ who just missed the cut AND I saw some four-day champs who got invited ahead of me, I'd probably make some noise.
[snapback]74544[/snapback]
[/quote]
Matt,
The beautiful thing about this field is that there is none of that. They took all of their TOC, Teen, and College Tournament winners, and then worked their way down by wins and money won.
It looks like it worked pretty well, and I'm looking forward to watching it.
-
[quote name=\'OntarioQuizzer\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 03:37 PM\']The beautiful thing about this field is that there is none of that. They took all of their TOC, Teen, and College Tournament winners, and then worked their way down by wins and money won.
It looks like it worked pretty well, and I'm looking forward to watching it.[/quote]
Absolutely, me too. I even have some rooting interests, since I've gotten to know a handful of the competitors personally.
At the Jeopardy board, it's being said that some of the TofC winners in their given years happened to be four-game winners initially, but since winning your TofC was one of the criteria for selection, that makes them eligible. So really, the only excluded person who has a decent case would be Bruce Seymour. "Official" Jeopardy records tend to ignore the Super Jeopardy tournament, so maybe he was left out for that reason. It's also possible that he either didn't want to participate or wasn't able to.
-
[quote name=\'OntarioQuizzer\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 02:37 PM\']
The beautiful thing about this field is that there is none of that. They took all of their TOC, Teen, and College Tournament winners, and then worked their way down by wins and money won.
[snapback]74561[/snapback]
[/quote]
Granted, the youngest of these would be in their 60s, but it seems like the Seniors Tourney champs were not invited or chose not to participate. What about Ulf Larsen(?) who won the International tournament in Stockholm in May 1997?
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 08:28 PM\']Granted, the youngest of these would be in their 60s, but it seems like the Seniors Tourney champs were not invited or chose not to participate. What about Ulf Larsen(?) who won the International tournament in Stockholm in May 1997?
[snapback]74588[/snapback]
[/quote]
Or they may be dead, Zach. Just a thought.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Feb 7 2005, 09:02 PM\']I like how one spot has been reserved for "2005 Teen Tournament Champion", which of course THEY already know, but we won't know until tomorrow. What a roller coaster ride for that young person, to play in one tournament and immediately get swept into the Biggest Tournament Ever.
[snapback]74508[/snapback]
[/quote]
With no wildcards, they probably scheduled this person later in the first round, which will take 2 months or so.
(I think it's a mistake, meself. To put this Teen Champ up against the best of all time is just a little overkill.)
-
And, to answer my earlier inquiry:
Eddie Timanus is in the field.
Looking forward to see him kick some tail.
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 07:28 PM\']Granted, the youngest of these would be in their 60s, but it seems like the Seniors Tourney champs were not invited or chose not to participate. What about Ulf Larsen(?) who won the International tournament in Stockholm in May 1997?
[snapback]74588[/snapback]
[/quote]
Well, I'm guessing that seeing as they've only invited TOC, Teen, and College tournament winners, that they did not invite Seniors, International, or the Super Jeopardy winner.
The other two International winners qualified on their own merits.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 03:00 PM\'][quote name=\'OntarioQuizzer\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 03:37 PM\']The beautiful thing about this field is that there is none of that. They took all of their TOC, Teen, and College Tournament winners, and then worked their way down by wins and money won.
It looks like it worked pretty well, and I'm looking forward to watching it.[/quote]
Absolutely, me too.[snapback]74562[/snapback]
[/quote]
It won't be a 7:30pm tradition for me during the fifteen weeks, but thanks to the Jeopardy! web site's heads-up on the contestants' identities and what days they'll be appearing, I'll probably check out the players who hold interest for me. Bob Harris, of course. Chuck and Frank certainly. V-Woman from the 2001 College Championship. And many others. I do, however, don't think Ken should get any money unless he wins. It really doesn't seem fair to be able to do the monkey dance for the first fourteen and a half weeks and be guaranteed $250K just for showing up. If he places second or third, the $$$ should go to a charity of his choosing.
By the way, will the "ultimate winner" of this Tournament Of Tournaments be declared the "national champion" as Rob Griffin was on The Joker's Wild?
-
It's almost time. The Quest for Ken starts tomorrow, so I will ask this to all interested parties:
Are you looking forward to it?
A) H*** Yeah! I'm going to add the whole thing to my collection!
B) I'll watch whever I can.
C) I'm holding out for the finals in May. Go Ken!
D) Funny you should mention that. My sock drawer needs sorting.
-
[quote name=\'GS Warehouse\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 11:06 PM\']It's almost time. The Quest for Ken starts tomorrow, so I will ask this to all interested parties:
Are you looking forward to it?
A) H*** Yeah! I'm going to add the whole thing to my collection!
B) I'll watch whever I can.
C) I'm holding out for the finals in May. Go Ken!
D) Funny you should mention that. My sock drawer needs sorting.[/quote]
I apparently fall under E) will watch/TiVo it nightly but will keep very few episodes.
My first must-see matchup involves Bob Harris next Tuesday.
Just curious, but why the negative feedback about this tournament? Is it because they're bringing back KenJen too soon? Is it because regular play's on hold until late May? The first round might be a tad boring, unless you get a match-up with two or three superb, memorable champs.
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 07:50 PM\']If he places second or third, the $$$ should go to a charity of his choosing.
[/quote]
Remember that, due to his religious affiliation, a good chunk of it will.
-
[quote name=\'hmtriplecrown\' date=\'Feb 9 2005, 12:28 AM\']Just curious, but why the negative feedback about this tournament? Is it because they're bringing back KenJen too soon? Is it because regular play's on hold until late May? [/quote]
I've heard several criticisms, again at Sony's Jeopardy board that I keep mentioning. The two you've named are at the top of the list. There is a small but very vocal contingent complaining that it's unfair Ken gets a free pass to the finals while everybody else has to fight their way up. There's also a concern that Jeopardy may fall victim to the "stunt" programming that was the original WWTBAM downfall.
-
As far as the Quest for Ken goes, I'm leaning towards option B. There may be a night or two where I might be doing something else. Once the semifinals kick in, I'll tune in every chance I get. The finals is a DEFINITE must-see.
-
[quote name=\'hmtriplecrown\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 11:28 PM\']
My first must-see matchup involves Bob Harris next Tuesday.
[snapback]74620[/snapback]
[/quote]
That's probably the hardest match of the first five to call . He's got competition as tough as Melia in Cubbage, and Epstein is no slouch IIRC. It'll probably go to Cubbage, but 'twould be wild to see Harris pull an upset. Epstein has the distinction of being the champion in the only civilian week of shows seen in Summer reruns since they went to a 46 week season(they had an extra week of reruns in Summer 1992 as Labor Day fell on 9/7 that year)
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Feb 9 2005, 07:47 AM\']Epstein has the distinction of being the champion in the only civilian week of shows seen in Summer reruns since they went to a 46 week season(they had an extra week of reruns in Summer 1992 as Labor Day fell on 9/7 that year)
[snapback]74630[/snapback]
[/quote]
Zach, I consider myself to be one of the continent's biggest fans of Jeopardy! and Jeopardy's history - and I still have to say, "WHO CARES?" about this one...
You're not impressing anyone by spouting off this minutae like this about the contestants...
-
[quote name=\'OntarioQuizzer\' date=\'Feb 9 2005, 10:14 AM\'][quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Feb 9 2005, 07:47 AM\']Epstein has the distinction of being the champion in the only civilian week of shows seen in Summer reruns since they went to a 46 week season(they had an extra week of reruns in Summer 1992 as Labor Day fell on 9/7 that year)
[snapback]74630[/snapback]
[/quote]
Zach, I consider myself to be one of the continent's biggest fans of Jeopardy! and Jeopardy's history - and I still have to say, "WHO CARES?" about this one...
You're not impressing anyone by spouting off this minutae like this about the contestants...
[snapback]74636[/snapback]
[/quote]
Come on, Andy, it's Zach Horan. Do you expect any less from him?
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Feb 8 2005, 08:28 PM\']What about Ulf Larsen(?) who won the International tournament in Stockholm in May 1997?
[snapback]74588[/snapback]
[/quote]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Michael Daunt win that tournament? There was no one named Ulf in that final...there was a Boris from Israel and the infamous Per Gunnar from the blooper reels ("What is your behind?"). So I don't remember their last names. Sue me.
I still remember those episodes, because I used the entire 6-week summer rerun gamut to prep myself for my J! tryout in 1997 (although looking back on it I might have been better served hitting the books for it, as well-didn't make it past the test. That test a bitch.).
Well, I got the tape in VCR all cued up, so I'm all set. I'm going to hold out judgment on this tourney for now- while 15 weeks seems like a loooooooong time for a game show to be having a tournament of champions of ANY sort, attempting to put the Ken Jennings vs. other champ arguments to rest is worth at least a few weeks' worth of shows.
-
[quote name=\'PYLdude\' date=\'Feb 9 2005, 09:39 AM\']Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Michael Daunt win that tournament? There was no one named Ulf in that final...there was a Boris from Israel and the infamous Per Gunnar from the blooper reels ("What is your behind?"). So I don't remember their last names. Sue me.
[/quote]
Correct, PYLdude. You are in control of the board.
According to Brian Dominy's Database of Champions (http://\"http://www.oddchange.com/jdoc/\"), Michael Daunt won the 1997 tournament. Ulf won the 1996 tournament.
Curt
-
[quote name=\'OntarioQuizzer\' date=\'Feb 9 2005, 07:14 AM\']You're not impressing anyone by spouting off this minutae like this about the contestants...
[snapback]74636[/snapback]
[/quote]
He's not looking to. He's looking to impress himself when people give him attention for it.
The killfile isn't perfect, I know, but if enough people use it, it can come close.
-
[quote name=\'curtking\' date=\'Feb 9 2005, 11:02 AM\'][quote name=\'PYLdude\' date=\'Feb 9 2005, 09:39 AM\']Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Michael Daunt win that tournament? There was no one named Ulf in that final...there was a Boris from Israel and the infamous Per Gunnar from the blooper reels ("What is your behind?"). So I don't remember their last names. Sue me.
[/quote]
Correct, PYLdude. You are in control of the board.
According to Brian Dominy's Database of Champions (http://\"http://www.oddchange.com/jdoc/\"), Michael Daunt won the 1997 tournament. Ulf won the 1996 tournament.
Curt
[snapback]74641[/snapback]
[/quote]
Thank you very much for confirming that for me, Curt, and I must say about Ulf Larsen...damn, was I wrong! I was always under the impression that Ryan Holznagel won that tourney. Oh well.
At the very least, I did prove Zach wrong, so...
*busts out victory jig*
Take THAT, you insignificant trivia-spouting monkey.
-
Does anyone have strong feelings one way or the other about the switch to a THREE day points addup for the finale? To me, it seems like overkill somehow.
-
[quote name=\'reason1024\' date=\'Feb 9 2005, 01:31 PM\']Does anyone have strong feelings one way or the other about the switch to a THREE day points addup for the finale? To me, it seems like overkill somehow.
[snapback]74664[/snapback]
[/quote]
140+ contenders fighting for the chance to play Ken Jennings? The WHOLE THING is overkill. :)
I don't have a problem with it. Fact is, it's necessary. Ken may well deliver such an asskicking in Day One that Day Two would end up being a fait accomplit. This way, there is a chance for people...or maybe even Ken...to get back in it. For $2,000,000, it seems that three days is the least they can do.
-
[quote name=\'PYLdude\' date=\'Feb 9 2005, 11:12 AM\']At the very least, I did prove Zach wrong, so...
*busts out victory jig*
Take THAT, you insignificant trivia-spouting monkey.
[snapback]74654[/snapback]
[/quote]
Now DANCE, MONKEY!
-
[quote name=\'PYLdude\' date=\'Feb 9 2005, 12:12 PM\']At the very least, I did prove Zach wrong, so...
[/quote]
that means its time to bring out the Dom Perignon.
-
Paul Boymel, Mike Day, and John Genova.
Day achieved his 5 wins via the questionable method of jiggling his buzzer the instant a clue was exposed, to be the first every time...it was because of him that they instilled the current lockout system, which requires a fraction of a second to reset itself once it's been pressed.
In his book, ex-J! writer Harry Eisenberg recalls that when Day returned the following season for the ToC, he seemed rather surprised to learn that his signaling button didn't work the same way that it had in the past.
Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby")
-
[quote name=\'ChuckNet\' date=\'Feb 11 2005, 11:36 PM\']
Paul Boymel, Mike Day, and John Genova.
Day achieved his 5 wins via the questionable method of jiggling his buzzer the instant a clue was exposed, to be the first every time...it was because of him that they instilled the current lockout system, which requires a fraction of a second to reset itself once it's been pressed.
In his book, ex-J! writer Harry Eisenberg recalls that when Day returned the following season for the ToC, he seemed rather surprised to learn that his signaling button didn't work the same way that it had in the past.
[snapback]74863[/snapback]
[/quote]
Hah!! Serves baby right. So when does V-Woman play?
-
[quote name=\'ChuckNet\' date=\'Feb 12 2005, 12:36 AM\']Day achieved his 5 wins via the questionable method of jiggling his buzzer the instant a clue was exposed, to be the first every time...it was because of him that they instilled the current lockout system, which requires a fraction of a second to reset itself once it's been pressed.
In his book, ex-J! writer Harry Eisenberg recalls that when Day returned the following season for the ToC, he seemed rather surprised to learn that his signaling button didn't work the same way that it had in the past.[/quote]
Well, a couple of things about this. The buzzer "jiggling" was a part of the entire Art Fleming run, as well as the first few months of Alex's version. It wasn't a "questionable" method, it was the way the show worked. If you were willing to take the chance that you'd know the clue, you could buzz in even before it had been read. That was part of the "jeopardy". In fact, a lot of purists at the time were disappointed that the game changed so dramatically to now be about the timing of your buzzer rather than your knowledge.
The problem was that there were people who weren't as smart as Day (or Chuck Forrest or a few others who benefited from this method) but who tried to do the same thing. They'd put themselves deep into the hole, and the show was left with a lot of awkward silences when the person who buzzed in didn't have the foggiest notion once the clue was read. That's the bigger reason why they changed it.
Also, the Eisenberg book makes it sound like they threw Day out on stage without telling him that they'd changed the buzzer system. I can promise you that sort of thing would have been gone over carefully by the contestant coordinators. It might have come as a surprise to him to be TOLD that was how the buzzers worked now, but it's not like he found out WHILE he was playing.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Feb 12 2005, 11:05 AM\']
The problem was that there were people who weren't as smart as Day (or Chuck Forrest or a few others who benefited from this method) but who tried to do the same thing. They'd put themselves deep into the hole, and the show was left with a lot of awkward silences when the person who buzzed in didn't have the foggiest notion once the clue was read. That's the bigger reason why they changed it.
Also, the Eisenberg book makes it sound like they threw Day out on stage without telling him that they'd changed the buzzer system. I can promise you that sort of thing would have been gone over carefully by the contestant coordinators. It might have come as a surprise to him to be TOLD that was how the buzzers worked now, but it's not like he found out WHILE he was playing.
[snapback]74884[/snapback]
[/quote]
This is probably the reason there were a few solo FJ! playings in season one. There was only one solo FJ! playing since then, sometime in season two. By the time of Forrest(early in season two), they'd changed the buzzer system(beginning of season two IIRC)
I wonder if anyone who appeared on the show since season two wondered how they'd do under the 1984-85 buzzer system. Gee, maybe J! will bring that buzzer system back for their next Ultimate TofC.
-
This is probably the reason there were a few solo FJ! playings in season one. There was only one solo FJ! playing since then, sometime in season two.
And there was almost another during KenJen's reign, but one of his opponents pulled himself out of the hole at the last possible moment by correctly answering the final clue in Double J!.
Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby")
-
[quote name=\'ChuckNet\' date=\'Feb 12 2005, 10:40 PM\']
And there was almost another during KenJen's reign, but one of his opponents pulled himself out of the hole at the last possible moment by correctly answering the final clue in Double J!.
[snapback]74927[/snapback]
[/quote]
SOme of us were so sadistically hoping that guy wouldn't have answered that last clue. WOuld have been lovely to see the first solo FJ! playing in more than 18 years, but oh well.
-
What I'd like to see is a game where all 3 players finish in the red. It'd be interesting to see how they fill the FJ time, and it'd also be interesting to know how payment would be structured. Normally, the person in first place gets to keep the cash. Needless to say, that wouldn't work with -$1,400, although the idea of someone going on a game show and having to pay THEM is kind of funny...
-
[quote name=\'whoserman\' date=\'Feb 12 2005, 11:35 PM\']What I'd like to see is a game where all 3 players finish in the red. It'd be interesting to see how they fill the FJ time, and it'd also be interesting to know how payment would be structured.
[snapback]74929[/snapback]
[/quote]
This has happened at least once (in the last Seniors Tournament, as I recall); I didn't see it, but as I recall, Alex spent the last segment making some comment about his tie. (In the tournament, it was in the first round, and a fifth wild card player advanced from the other four first-round shows.)
I do know that if everybody finishes with zero or less (something that happened in the first season, when everybody in FJ bet everything and missed), it's three new contestants the next day. That's why some players bet everything but $1 in FJ.
-- Don
-
Silly question time...
Whose bright idea was it to schedule the tournament so that the three-day final is on a Thursday-Friday-Monday? Okay, the last day is Memorial Day, but still...
(Assuming there are no pre-emptions, and each round is completed before the next round begins (as opposed to playing out the half of the tournament that decides who one of the finalists is before starting the other half), I work out the schedule as:
First round - 48 games - 2/9 through 4/15
Second round - 18 games - 4/18 through 5/11
Quarter-finals - 6 games - 5/12 through 5/19
Semi-Final #1 - Friday 5/20 and Monday 5/23
Semi-Final #2 - Tuesday 5/24 and Wednesday 5/25
Final - Thursday 5/26, Friday 5/27, and Monday 5/30)
(And does anybody have any idea when the final will be taped, so we know to keep our TVs and radios turned off when the show isn't on, just in case some news program decides to break silence (and spoilers) and announce the winner?
Never mind that...who's going to be keeping an eye on this board to delete the inevitable "I WAS THERE! THE WINNER WAS..." posts?)
-- Don
-
[quote name=\'That Don Guy\' date=\'Feb 12 2005, 11:16 PM\']First round - 48 games[/quote]
There's your problem; it's only 45 games. The final should be on a Monday-Tuesday-Wednesday.
And does anybody have any idea when the final will be taped, so we know to keep our TVs and radios turned off
To reduce the chances of just such an occurrence, it looks like they'll be taping the final just a week or so before it airs.
Never mind that...who's going to be keeping an eye on this board to delete the inevitable "I WAS THERE! THE WINNER WAS..." posts?
Don't worry, the EPs here do a fine job of that, and I'm sure they'll be patrolling a bit more often when they know that there's information like that out there.
-
[quote name=\'That Don Guy\' date=\'Feb 13 2005, 12:16 AM\']Whose bright idea was it to schedule the tournament so that the three-day final is on a Thursday-Friday-Monday? Okay, the last day is Memorial Day, but still...
[/quote]
I will guess, and this is just that, a wild-assed guess, that the end of the tournament and the end of the May sweeps period run concurrently with each other.
As a rule of thumb, just as when the question is "Why did they...?", the answer is usually Monday, when the question is "What were the schedulers thinking?", the answer is usually "Sweeps."
-
[quote name=\'That Don Guy\' date=\'Feb 13 2005, 02:00 AM\']
This has happened at least once (in the last Seniors Tournament, as I recall); I didn't see it, but as I recall, Alex spent the last segment making some comment about his tie. (In the tournament, it was in the first round, and a fifth wild card player advanced from the other four first-round shows.)
I do know that if everybody finishes with zero or less (something that happened in the first season, when everybody in FJ bet everything and missed), it's three new contestants the next day. That's why some players bet everything but $1 in FJ.
[snapback]74937[/snapback]
[/quote]
There were two three way zero ties in the 1984-85 season. A three way tie at zero also happened late in the 1997-98 season. I do not, however remember the Seniors Tournament ep. you mention. I do remember a three way tie on zero at the end of a Quarter Final game of the 1989 Seniors Tournament. They did indeed pick the five high scorers among non-winners to go with the other four game winners to the semis. Another three way tie on zero occurred in a November 1996 celeb episode with Jon Lovitz/Matthew Fox(Party of Five co-star)/Carl Lewis.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Feb 13 2005, 06:14 AM\']I will guess ... that the end of the tournament and the end of the May sweeps period run concurrently with each other.
[snapback]74942[/snapback]
[/quote]
According to Game Show NewsNet, the tournament runs through Wednesday, May 25, the last day of May sweeps. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to deduce that the timing is not a coincidence (or even irony).
-
[quote name=\'That Don Guy\' date=\'Feb 13 2005, 03:00 AM\']I do know that if everybody finishes with zero or less (something that happened in the first season, when everybody in FJ bet everything and missed), it's three new contestants the next day. That's why some players bet everything but $1 in FJ.[/quote]
The irony is that more people have lost (or cost themselves a tie) because they didn't bet that last dollar than have won because they kept it. You should bet to WIN by a dollar, but it's virtually never helpful to you to keep that last dollar when going for broke.
-
I can put a number on the second scenario. The exact number of players (except possibly in Celebrity J!) who have trailed going into FJ and won the game because they held out $1 is--zero. There's been one $1 win, and it came about because the leader had a $1 lead. The win-by-$1 bet in this instance was the same as the leave-yourself-$1 bet.
That said, there have probably been many players who were in third going into FJ and took second by leaving themselves $1 when the second-place player didn't.
-
[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' date=\'Feb 13 2005, 01:24 PM\']That said, there have probably been many players who were in third going into FJ and took second by leaving themselves $1 when the second-place player didn't.[/quote]
That's a good point, and something I don't ever, ever think about. There are probably many situations where saving that last dollar puts you in a position to win a second-place prize instead of a third-place prize. In that case it's OK, unless that last dollar limited your ultimate chance at winning. Still, overwhelmingly, after twenty years of doing this, we see people holding back that one dollar for no practical reason.
-
[quote name=\'Steve McClellan\' date=\'Feb 13 2005, 04:07 AM\'][quote name=\'That Don Guy\' date=\'Feb 12 2005, 11:16 PM\']First round - 48 games[/quote]
There's your problem; it's only 45 games. The final should be on a Monday-Tuesday-Wednesday.
And does anybody have any idea when the final will be taped, so we know to keep our TVs and radios turned off
To reduce the chances of just such an occurrence, it looks like they'll be taping the final just a week or so before it airs.
[snapback]74939[/snapback]
[/quote]
Considering that last week's tournament games had material on the inauguration and the Oscar nominations, it looks like they're taping the entire tournament closer to air date than normal. When really-current current events material shows up, that's a very good sign. I wonder if they'll tape the finals on something like the Thursday or Friday before air...
-
[quote name=\'uncamark\' date=\'Feb 13 2005, 10:21 PM\']Considering that last week's tournament games had material on the inauguration and the Oscar nominations, it looks like they're taping the entire tournament closer to air date than normal. When really-current current events material shows up, that's a very good sign. I wonder if they'll tape the finals on something like the Thursday or Friday before air...[/quote]
Jeopardy! should do this more often--I think we've seen that it's not an insurmountable Challenge.
-
I don't know whether to laugh or cry, but I noted that our cluster-schmass of a Governor's election made it to "News of '05" on the first day.
-
[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' date=\'Feb 13 2005, 10:48 PM\']Jeopardy! should [tape close the air date] more often--I think we've seen that it's not an insurmountable Challenge.
[snapback]75000[/snapback]
[/quote]
If they want a challenge, try next-day or next-week tape. IIRC, The Challengers did this, and the P+ premiere was taped literally the day before it aired. Of course, methinks editing, post-production, et al. would make this a little too close for comfort.
-
[quote name=\'GS Warehouse\' date=\'Feb 13 2005, 10:34 PM\'][quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' date=\'Feb 13 2005, 10:48 PM\']Jeopardy! should [tape close the air date] more often--I think we've seen that it's not an insurmountable Challenge.
[snapback]75000[/snapback]
[/quote]
If they want a challenge, try next-day or next-week tape. IIRC, The Challengers did this,
[/quote]
VA-ROOOOOOOM!
-
[quote name=\'GS Warehouse\' date=\'Feb 13 2005, 11:34 PM\'][quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' date=\'Feb 13 2005, 10:48 PM\']Jeopardy! should [tape close the air date] more often--I think we've seen that it's not an insurmountable Challenge.
[snapback]75000[/snapback]
[/quote]
If they want a challenge, try next-day or next-week tape. IIRC, The Challengers did this[snapback]75011[/snapback]
[/quote]
Thus, this is why the word "Challenge" was capitalized.
WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH!!!!
-
[quote name=\'sshuffield70\' date=\'Feb 14 2005, 09:27 AM\']Thus, this is why the word "Challenge" was capitalized.
[snapback]75032[/snapback]
[/quote]
Oops, I missed that hint. I didn't know whether that was intentional or whether it called for...
...here it comes...
...captial punishment.
I guess these last two posts earned me an extended stay in the TTD90 room.
-
Ah, heck, I'll give you a smartass exemption. (The smartass being me)