This is Jeopardy!

A bit of a surprising result on Jeopardy today, especially considering the competition.
Yes, Ike Barenholtz played a really strong game for the win. He's the real deal. And the whole game was good, with 3 great contestants, and several lead changes.
 
One of the shows last week had a Double Jeopardy round with a series of categories revolving around the supergroup Boy Genius. It was surprisingly geeky fanboy behavior from Jeopardy writers.

1710176272870.webp

They had the categories "Boy Genius", "Bridgers" (for Phoebe Bridgers), "Baker" (for Julien Baker), and "The Tallest One" for Lucy Dacus. And while the latter didn't get her own name as a category, she was the answer to the only band-related question (which none of the ToC players got).
 
That ToC game last night was awesome. Luigi de gooz-MONNNN was walking away with it for a while, and then something snapped in Troy Meyer's brain, and he just unleashed this relentless wrath like an animal that smelled blood. He sailed by Luigi, and the 3rd guy wasn't a factor. I believe Ken said that they got every question correct in Double Jeopardy.

So now we have the big 3 for the finals, which start tonight.
 
Great first game of the finals last night, with a kind-of surprising finish. But at the start of the show, I learned it's a best-of-7 final! Holy moly.
 
It's best of 7, so it can take as little as 4 games, or as many as 7. Playing more than 7 games would not be within the definition of "best of 7".
Best of 7 is always usually defined within he confines of 2 teams. The 4 wins automatically means that the other team has no more than 3 wins. There is no need for any tiebreakers. Once a team reaches 4 wins, the series is over. The series can go no longer than 7 games. With 3 players/teams, it is not so clear cut. If Player A and B each win 3 and Player C wins once, has the criteria for best of 7 been reached? You have played 7 games.
 
Best of 7 is always usually defined within he confines of 2 teams. The 4 wins automatically means that the other team has no more than 3 wins. There is no need for any tiebreakers. Once a team reaches 4 wins, the series is over. The series can go no longer than 7 games. With 3 players/teams, it is not so clear cut. If Player A and B each win 3 and Player C wins once, has the criteria for best of 7 been reached? You have played 7 games.
First of all, this wasn't my idea; so I'm not sure how I got stuck defending it. I had assumed the finals would be a 2 game total score affair. But Ken Jennings made it sound like they've done this before, although I can't recall it. For the Masters Tournament, they did a round-robin thing where they played all combinations of contestants facing each other for the entire tournament.

I can't believe they would play 7 games in a row with the same 3 finalists; that seems nuts. But anyway, if your inconclusive scenario occurs, they would most likely go to the next criteria, such as total points. Or maybe they can just play a game of "I know you are but what am I?" until one of them explodes.
 
He clarified today by saying 1st to win 3 games is the winner.
Haha, I was just about to post that. Although it would seem that one player can have 3 wins, and another can get 4 in a row, and that would be 7 games. So I don't really understand.
 
That was an excellent tournament of champions. I would've liked Troy Meyer to have won, or Ben Chan, but the villain - Yogesh Raut - took the win. They were all deserving.

And now... it's the Jeopardy Invitational Tournament. Yay?
 
I understand why they are stuck in the tournament rut, but damn!
When will it end?!?!
I just looked it up, and the earliest the JIT finals can end is April 8th. That'll be the 2nd finals game, and you need 2 wins to be champion. But it could go until the 10th.

Andrew He won the first game of the tournament tonight. He looked like the guy from Sprockets.
wk28_0318_0322_he_home.webp

Snl89187.webp
 
Back
Top Bottom