This Twitter account is rather entertaining, too... definitely had some past participants reach out to him: https://twitter.com/whoisalexjacob

+1

I like how he wagers it all for daily doubles.

It's not as easy as it looks. The rarely spoken about dark secret of Jeopardy is that timing the buzzer correctly is a skill that is far too important for a show like this. There are a lot of questions that all three players can answer, in which case the one most skilled with the buzzer gets it. Eventually those who always get beaten on the buzzer then get frustrated and start trying to buzz in every time, and then trying to think of an answer, which often just digs you deeper into the hole.

Yes. In a lock situation the proper wager is either $0 or the max that still guarantees victory. Hardly any contestant understands this, but I would expect poker players to.


You don't seem to understand much here. KJ is one of the top 2 Jeopardy players ever. His knowledge base and buzzer dominance is unbelievable. From what we've seen so far, while Alex has played awesomely, KJ would still destroy him.

He doesn't play with an aggro approach, he plays the closest to GTO of almost any contestant.

This. Combined with near perfect strategy it's easy to make good players look bad.

Interesting that he bet so much on final Jeopardy today after he passed the two previous shows. Maybe he liked the category -presidents - today or maybe he has been reading this thread. But I'd be surprised if he really feels he is a dog on any random category on Final Jeopardy being that he is clearly very bright and seems supremely confident.

currency trader lol

I'm not saying I expect Alex to go on a 70 game winning streak , I'm saying that if they played heads up Ken Jennings would find him an exceptionally tough opponent and certainly would not destroy him.

As for being aggro I think his tactic of betting it all on the Daily Double when he already has a big lead is pure aggro and somewhat reckless , and I'm willing to predict it'll be his eventual downfall.

This is not true. When you're in a lock situation, you are playing with strictly your OWN money. Because of this, you have to factor in your life roll. Some of these contestants could easily have a $0 net worth before the start of the show. Let's say they're net worth just jumped from $0 to $30k, because they're going to FJ with $30k and a lock win. Let's also say they have the opportunity to bet $10k and still lock up a win. It'd be fairly reckless to bet $10k (1/3 of your net worth) on a question where your edge is ~53%. I also think it's reasonable to vary your bets based on your confidence in the category and net worth. Just making up some numbers with a small/medium sized net worth: if you have 55% confidence you can bet like $1k, if you have 65% confidence you can bet $5k, if you have 80% confidence you can bet $10k. Basically, it's reasonable to bet small with a small edge and up your bets with a large edge because of the Kelly criterion.

Best part was when Alex claimed to be a currency trader.

KJ has faced perhaps 200 opponents in his Jeopardy career, 148 of those regular contestants, the other ~50 in special tournaments meaning these were the best of the best. He destroyed all but about 10 of the 148 and all but about 5 of the other studs. So he destroyed around 90% of the best of the best of all time. So by this you're saying Alex has the talent level of someone who only comes around once every two years or so? After watching only three games?

You're willing to predict a nearly perfect GTO strategy will be his eventual downfall? Are you one of those types who thinks the results are perfectly reflective of the strategy? Never mind if this strategy wins him umpteenth games before his eventual loss.

I haven't seen any of his bets being reckless. Yes they are big bets, but hitting these DD's locks up the win so often. You are probably around 65-70% to get these DDs correct. When you miss, you still have a reasonable chance to win anways. The people that bet small to keep the lead are the people that never end up with lock wins. They often end up losing on FJ where they're like ~43% to get the final question correct. Going into FJ without a lock and missing the FJ frequently ends up with leader losing. I basically agree that yes, missing a true DD will probably be the cause of his eventual downfall. However, it's way more likely if he was betting these DDs small, he will lose a game by simply not having a lock and not knowing the FJ.

Mary: "oh gee, I just blanked"
Trebek: "oh thats too bad. It'll cost you a thousand dollars."

xD

alex still playing poker?? didnt read thread