OK, so it takes a 500 word post to explain the reasoning behind why a player should bid a certain amount, but don't these people get like 5 seconds to make their wager? It seems that the people freak out and just write some **** down given the time they had.

"LOL look at this completely ******ed wager! This is what he should have done..... *30 minutes later a huge post is completed explaining what the optimal wager was* See! What an idiot!"

while i'd love to give these people credit, they know they're going to be on jeopardy for months. the bidding mistakes that are constantly made are just unforgivable - even if people aren't making optimal wagers, they're making massively suboptimal wagers in a lot of situations that shows they haven't considered these things at all.

This is why you always just give a last name.

They actually have an unlimited amount of time. And a pencil+paper.

Well... today's wager by the chick belongs in this thread too.

I watched yesterday and todays on DVR (total time was something absurd like 30 minutes). If you win you get automatic berth in the "playoffs," and there are some amount of wildcard spots.

Players would have <50% of the top score ( and no chance of winning) but would bet like 7000 of 8000. Having 16000 can definitely be better than 15 (i imagine it'll be pretty close) but having 0 and $1200 are exactly the same

Having 1200 could possibly give you the win, where 0 would never give you the win.

There's like less than a 1% chance that a 1200 is going to get a 2nd place player into the next round.

Probably less than 1% chance of that, but depending on the other players amounts, 1200 might be enough to win the round.

if
P(winning with 1200) * P(missing the question) > P(advancing with 16000 but not 15000) * P (getting the question correct), then its the smart play.

(just saw this on a rerun)

you're in last place with 6200, and your opponents have 9500 and 19200. you have control with 1 question left, and the last clue of double jeopardy is a daily double.

what's the correct amount to bet?

3401?

There's absolutely no reason to not bet it all. If you miss it, no matter what you bet, 19200 guy wins 100% of the time. So you need to get it correct to matter. Since having more $ > less $, betting it all is the only correct play. So you either have 12400 or 0. The only exception is if you get a better prize for being 2nd than 3rd, but in terms of playing to win, you have to bet it all.

This actually helps out your 9500 opponent as well! In Final Jeopardy, you gain nothing in betting small, so you need to again bet it all. The leader would then need to bet more. The 9500 guy can now win if you both fail and he gets it right, where he couldn't before.

It's a very obvious strategy, but fairly interesting in terms of the implications for the other players.

Never bet it all in that situation. Leave yourself with a dollar if you get it wrong so you can at least avoid the shame of missing final Jeopardy.

I always think about this sort of thing in the context of that Newlyweds game show.

I feel like before we went on the show, I'd sit down with my wife and be like "If it asks for a room in the house: kitchen, your friend: Kate, my friend: Steve, food: steak, x per week: 5, etc.

The fact that people don't seem to do stuff like this makes me mad.

You guys are making way too many assumptions. A lot of you are going by the belief "I'm just going to make 100% sure I win it if I get the question right. "-suzzer That's fine, but not close to ideal situation.

A lot worse result I feel is being in first going into the final, and getting the question wrong and losing. That's why as 1st place going into FJ I would not bet enough to lockout 2nd place if they max bet.

This example is a good illustration of how to play second place going into FJ.

A lot of you are having too high a probability that the FJ question is easy. So as second place if you can get the answer correct, you either must bet past 1st, or rely on 1st place getting it wrong. On an easy (answerable) question this is rare. That's why you can throw out your whole optimal betting in 1st place position having to lockout 2nd by betting at least double.

If the FJ question is difficult, as 2nd place you can underbid, and put the the leader in the hot seat. This requires them to either get the answer correct, or bid less than double but not guarantee victory.

Just curious, which helps my argument, is the percentage of answers to FJ that the contestants get wrong.

This is a very bad strategy if you think you are weak in the category.

It'd be much easier if someone had a FJ answer correct statistic.

Its never the obvious answer. Everyone guesses Sheen. I bet that is what all 3 players guessed.

I would have gone through as many recent movies with a president as I could think of and pick one of those since there obviously were not too many series about presidents in recent memory.

I think it was a pretty easy question in that regard as W was a recent film and you know his Dad is an actor.

Andy Richter is cleaning up on celebrity jeopardy. I love it when comedians do well on these shows.

This didn't really seem to deserve its own thread so I just bumped this one.

Wolf Blitzer: -$4,600
Dana Somebody: $4,800
Andy Richter: $39,000

Awesome.

edit: reworded

i read that three times and have absolutely NO CLUE what you are saying.

just an observaition. In Norway when it ran, i don`t think you know how much the other players have at any time in the game. If this is the case this whole debate is just pointless. If this differs in the U.S version forget it.

bonus info. my high school chem teacher won the max programs allowed (5 i think) and he showed us all off the programs in class. He is just the most ridic man i know. He knows just everything. Really freaky. He also played the weakest link and did not answer a single question wrong but got booted off in one off the last rounds because the others diden`t wanna face him in the final. He also tried countless times to get on who wants to be a millionarie but never got the call.

you can see how much everyone has and you have unlimited time to wager

forget the numbers, they're probably botched.

basically if either 1st or 2nd are cognizant of the fact that they have to make defensive bids against 3rd, they're going to bid an amount where you cannot win even if you double up.

there's no advantage for them to bid defensively against your current score instead of bidding defensively against your double up.



edit again... uhm, ok, im not so sure now. disregard that