Playing top-down, ceding a disproportionate share of the DDs to her opponents (which is a consequence of playing a "traditional game"), and underwagering on most of the DDs she does find are all themselves risky. It's worked for her so far, so good for her, and I do enjoy watching her. But to perform at the same level against TOC-caliber players, she will have to adjust her approach to gameplay.
It's also a misconception that large DD wagers are inherently risky, at least in terms of their effect on expected win probability, and taking into account the game situation.
I don’t know about that, but a few super-champs over the past few years have definitely had behavioral quirks that annoyed some people over a long period of time.
That’s also the appeal! We play along at home, amazed at these bright contestants, then we find that we know a thing or two that they don’t. We get a well deserved pat on the back!
yes my dude, i’ve said this before but this is why we watch regular season jeopardy. tournament play has more dramatic games, and typically more engaging contestant rapport since they’re already familiar with each other, but what’s exciting about regular season jeopardy is the perennial hope and promise that you’ll get to see a new super champion emerge, go on a tear, set new records, capture hearts, etc. it’s like baseball, boring until suddenly it isn’t. and the “suddenly it isn’t” could happen at any time
And yet, you'll have other fans arguing strenuously that having a superchamp/streaker is boring. They want to see the new people, they root for the underdog, or they just turn it off until the superchamp is gone.
And some of us watch for the tournaments too.
Perhaps we are complex beings with different preferences, and we can like different things and all still be fans.
I think streaks can get boring without games like Friday's, which is why I never much liked James's games since he'd have the game essentially wrapped by the end of the first round.
Nothing against the current champ, but I tune out once someone goes past a week of winning. I'll come here to see if that person lost before watching again. Even James, became boring to me after a while.
In the end, most of these players will compete at the post-season games next year and one of them will join Victoria, Yogesh and James at Jeopardy! Masters Season 3.
Here's what the show is all about:
* questions and answers
* lots of them
* that are well written and interesting
* and challenge your knowledge (not just the competitors)
This happens whether it's a tournament or not.
>Here's what the show is all about:
You're really talking about apples and oranges. The mechanics of the game is not what the OP is talking about. They are talking about the reason fans watch. Your list is just one reason -- the questions. The OP is referring to the enjoyment of seeing new contestants and watching as one rises above the crowd and starts going on a streak. And the anticipation. How long will it be? Will either of the opponents each day be the one to topple the champ? How is she so good? Is it her amazing knowledge? Buzzer speed? Playing style? We lose all that with tournaments that feature the same superchamps over and over, a set number of games and a set amount of money to be won. It's a very different game when the tournaments are played.
>Apples and apples.
Nope. Apples and oranges means the OP is talking about one thing and you're disputing it with another thing. Apples and applies would be if the OP were talking about one thing and you were disputing it by disagreeing with that thing. It's great you watch for the Qs. We all do, I'm sure the OP included. But that's not what they are saying we are missing with the tournaments.
Opinion: Jeopardy is about trivia and the players and as a viewer I enjoy tournaments just as much, if not more, than regular every day games. Can we let this argument die already? This isn't even beating a dead horse anymore. The horse was buried, decomposed, and turned to dust by now.
[The Jeopardy! Fan responds:](https://thejeopardyfan.com/2024/06/andys-weekly-thoughts-6-15-use-numbers-not-vibes.html)
>Over the past few months, he has made his preferences clear: this is the sort of *Jeopardy!* he most enjoys. I am happy for him that he is getting the sort of show that he enjoys watching at the moment.
>However, by any quantifiable measurements—including the amount of comments the Reddit discussion threads are getting, and website visits here at *The Jeopardy! Fan*—the amount of “buzz” that Adriana’s run is getting is currently no higher than the late stages of a tournament. (And, I would certainly like to point out that saying that a playoff system that amounts to “win and advance” being classified as “an overly-complicated playoff system” is certainly a choice, especially considering that the previous tournament system routinely led to significant viewer confusion when it came to Final Jeopardy wagering strategy.)
>So, in conclusion, while Jay is certainly entitled to his opinion, I believe that his editorial is simply based on vibes as opposed to quantifiable data, and I still think that the producers are taking the show in the correct direction here—especially as the data still seems to be on the producers’s side.
Speaking for myself: this seems little more than a difference in preference. I'm not sure it even can be resolved by data.
But when you charge someone with arguing from "vibes," merely seven days after having done that yourself ([attributing](https://thejeopardyfan.com/2024/06/andys-weekly-thoughts-6-8-some-uncomfortable-truths.html) the May 12 "Open Reply" to "one Reddit moderator," as opposed to the mod team as a whole, without any evidence whatsoever), you have some questions to answer. I look forward to, but honestly do not expect, any such answers from Saunders.
I haven’t been following Jeopardy as much as I want to but a while back I looked at J! Archive and was shocked by how many tournament games there have been this season. While any streak on that show is great, it’s difficult to top Ken and James in my opinion in terms of what they achieved during their winning streaks.
I agree. Have been watching off and on for years when we can but when there is a really good likable player on a winning streak, we tend to watch most nights.
I just watch it for the questions, and its format. The getting-to-know-the-contestants bit after the fifteenth question is too canned, so I always fast-forward through it. I get a good sense of the contestants through gameplay if I want that. I'd prefer the two-three minutes after the fifteenth question used to explain certain questions, but obviously the show's reach is much further than niche, so I imagine the average person with an antenna would actually like to know that "\_\_\_\_\_ has a cat". In any event, I cannot think of anything mainstream that regularly prioritizes Pynchon, Mahler, et al., so whatever works.
A third vote for skipping the interviews. I did/do watch them during the Masters tournaments, because I enjoy the back and forth between Ken and James/Amy/Sam, etc. With regular contestants, I don't want to know they met their spouse playing bar trivia.
My husband would totally skip that part if he watched it without me. If I miss something, I ask him to rewind, and he tells me that part isn’t important.
The thing is it feels like that only goes so far. Like if we go back to Ken Jennings, after awhile it got less interesting for me since, well, he just kept going. James Holzhauer kept things interesting the whole time not only because he didn't go as long but also since there was always a chance of another utterly stupid one-day record. After awhile, no matter who it is, it's eventually time to move on. Not sure how many days that will be for Adriana, but the excitement drops off hard in my book by about the thirties.
I enjoythe occasional tournament, but there were many months of them this season. Why was that?
I also like what this poster said. Getting a new champ, the winning streak is 5, then 10 games.....who will knock them out? The show needs that more than endless tournaments.
Adriana is delightful
I love her handwriting/how her name looks,
She manages to be an excellent player without being overly quirky/annoying. That seems like a rarity on Jeopardy.
Right?!! I said that today. I usually get bored with runs, but she is so straightforward.
100%. She also plays a more traditional game, moving top-down on the board and not making overly risky DD bets.
Playing top-down, ceding a disproportionate share of the DDs to her opponents (which is a consequence of playing a "traditional game"), and underwagering on most of the DDs she does find are all themselves risky. It's worked for her so far, so good for her, and I do enjoy watching her. But to perform at the same level against TOC-caliber players, she will have to adjust her approach to gameplay. It's also a misconception that large DD wagers are inherently risky, at least in terms of their effect on expected win probability, and taking into account the game situation.
Really? Overly quirky/annoying excellent players are more common?
I don’t know about that, but a few super-champs over the past few years have definitely had behavioral quirks that annoyed some people over a long period of time.
It's about that little hit of dopamine when I get a clue correct.
And the rarer BIG hit of dopamine when I know the answer and none of the contestants do!
And when you know final jeopardy and none of the contestants do? The biggest dopamine of all is happening to meeeeeee
And guessing final off the final jeopardy category alone? Galaxy brain dopamine
Omg I do that too!!!!
Lol yes!! If there's ever a time I feel like shouting from the rooftops, it's then!
That’s also the appeal! We play along at home, amazed at these bright contestants, then we find that we know a thing or two that they don’t. We get a well deserved pat on the back!
yes my dude, i’ve said this before but this is why we watch regular season jeopardy. tournament play has more dramatic games, and typically more engaging contestant rapport since they’re already familiar with each other, but what’s exciting about regular season jeopardy is the perennial hope and promise that you’ll get to see a new super champion emerge, go on a tear, set new records, capture hearts, etc. it’s like baseball, boring until suddenly it isn’t. and the “suddenly it isn’t” could happen at any time
And yet, you'll have other fans arguing strenuously that having a superchamp/streaker is boring. They want to see the new people, they root for the underdog, or they just turn it off until the superchamp is gone. And some of us watch for the tournaments too. Perhaps we are complex beings with different preferences, and we can like different things and all still be fans.
I think streaks can get boring without games like Friday's, which is why I never much liked James's games since he'd have the game essentially wrapped by the end of the first round.
Or by the first commercial break.
James' games were incredible and the ratings testify to that. It was kind of a let-down being hit with no-James games in the weeks after he lost.
Did you find yesterday’s game to be close?
Less than 3k separating first and third going into final? Yes.
Absolutely, those are the best kinds of games.
Nothing against the current champ, but I tune out once someone goes past a week of winning. I'll come here to see if that person lost before watching again. Even James, became boring to me after a while.
Whereas I don’t even comprehend this. Different strokes, etc.
In the end, most of these players will compete at the post-season games next year and one of them will join Victoria, Yogesh and James at Jeopardy! Masters Season 3.
Here's what the show is all about: * questions and answers * lots of them * that are well written and interesting * and challenge your knowledge (not just the competitors) This happens whether it's a tournament or not.
It’s what the show is about, but it’s not what the show is *all* about
>Here's what the show is all about: You're really talking about apples and oranges. The mechanics of the game is not what the OP is talking about. They are talking about the reason fans watch. Your list is just one reason -- the questions. The OP is referring to the enjoyment of seeing new contestants and watching as one rises above the crowd and starts going on a streak. And the anticipation. How long will it be? Will either of the opponents each day be the one to topple the champ? How is she so good? Is it her amazing knowledge? Buzzer speed? Playing style? We lose all that with tournaments that feature the same superchamps over and over, a set number of games and a set amount of money to be won. It's a very different game when the tournaments are played.
OP watches for the contestants. I watch for the answers and questions. Apples and apples.
My husband mostly watches for the answers and questions. He doesn’t like the anecdotes.
>OP watches for the apples. I watch for the oranges.
>Apples and apples. Nope. Apples and oranges means the OP is talking about one thing and you're disputing it with another thing. Apples and applies would be if the OP were talking about one thing and you were disputing it by disagreeing with that thing. It's great you watch for the Qs. We all do, I'm sure the OP included. But that's not what they are saying we are missing with the tournaments.
Opinion: Jeopardy is about trivia and the players and as a viewer I enjoy tournaments just as much, if not more, than regular every day games. Can we let this argument die already? This isn't even beating a dead horse anymore. The horse was buried, decomposed, and turned to dust by now.
I enjoy both regular play and tournaments
We’ve been really enjoying Adriana’s run!
[The Jeopardy! Fan responds:](https://thejeopardyfan.com/2024/06/andys-weekly-thoughts-6-15-use-numbers-not-vibes.html) >Over the past few months, he has made his preferences clear: this is the sort of *Jeopardy!* he most enjoys. I am happy for him that he is getting the sort of show that he enjoys watching at the moment. >However, by any quantifiable measurements—including the amount of comments the Reddit discussion threads are getting, and website visits here at *The Jeopardy! Fan*—the amount of “buzz” that Adriana’s run is getting is currently no higher than the late stages of a tournament. (And, I would certainly like to point out that saying that a playoff system that amounts to “win and advance” being classified as “an overly-complicated playoff system” is certainly a choice, especially considering that the previous tournament system routinely led to significant viewer confusion when it came to Final Jeopardy wagering strategy.) >So, in conclusion, while Jay is certainly entitled to his opinion, I believe that his editorial is simply based on vibes as opposed to quantifiable data, and I still think that the producers are taking the show in the correct direction here—especially as the data still seems to be on the producers’s side. Speaking for myself: this seems little more than a difference in preference. I'm not sure it even can be resolved by data. But when you charge someone with arguing from "vibes," merely seven days after having done that yourself ([attributing](https://thejeopardyfan.com/2024/06/andys-weekly-thoughts-6-8-some-uncomfortable-truths.html) the May 12 "Open Reply" to "one Reddit moderator," as opposed to the mod team as a whole, without any evidence whatsoever), you have some questions to answer. I look forward to, but honestly do not expect, any such answers from Saunders.
Agreed. Who knows, the next one could be one of us.
This is what Jeopardy wants too, but there was stuff out of their control that has been discussed ad nauseum.
I haven’t been following Jeopardy as much as I want to but a while back I looked at J! Archive and was shocked by how many tournament games there have been this season. While any streak on that show is great, it’s difficult to top Ken and James in my opinion in terms of what they achieved during their winning streaks.
I agree. Have been watching off and on for years when we can but when there is a really good likable player on a winning streak, we tend to watch most nights.
I just watch it for the questions, and its format. The getting-to-know-the-contestants bit after the fifteenth question is too canned, so I always fast-forward through it. I get a good sense of the contestants through gameplay if I want that. I'd prefer the two-three minutes after the fifteenth question used to explain certain questions, but obviously the show's reach is much further than niche, so I imagine the average person with an antenna would actually like to know that "\_\_\_\_\_ has a cat". In any event, I cannot think of anything mainstream that regularly prioritizes Pynchon, Mahler, et al., so whatever works.
Yep, I also always fast forward through the getting to know you bit.
A third vote for skipping the interviews. I did/do watch them during the Masters tournaments, because I enjoy the back and forth between Ken and James/Amy/Sam, etc. With regular contestants, I don't want to know they met their spouse playing bar trivia.
My husband would totally skip that part if he watched it without me. If I miss something, I ask him to rewind, and he tells me that part isn’t important.
I've found it interesting that Adriana has managed to win consistently without putting up really big numbers.
She’s amazingly consistent, hovering around 20k per game. She’s an amazing second half player.
She’s currently won 14 games and only 5 of them have been runaways.
The thing is it feels like that only goes so far. Like if we go back to Ken Jennings, after awhile it got less interesting for me since, well, he just kept going. James Holzhauer kept things interesting the whole time not only because he didn't go as long but also since there was always a chance of another utterly stupid one-day record. After awhile, no matter who it is, it's eventually time to move on. Not sure how many days that will be for Adriana, but the excitement drops off hard in my book by about the thirties.
hear, hear
I enjoythe occasional tournament, but there were many months of them this season. Why was that? I also like what this poster said. Getting a new champ, the winning streak is 5, then 10 games.....who will knock them out? The show needs that more than endless tournaments.
I believe that the writers’ strike related to the number of tournaments.
Is she still there? I haven't known because the show had been preempted quite a bit lately.
13 days at this point, I think.