Last edited by Dbs6582; 06-04-2019 at 11:29 AM.
z
z
z
Excellent reading:
https://waitbutwhy.com/2019/06/did-j...ign=pockethits
Articulates the situation quite nicely. Here’s a copy paste from my post 50, which shows this
“This means, that if she loses final jeopardy, and James gets it right, she would have realized that she required $1.00 more than James, in order to win. That sum is obviously is $24800. Simple arithmetic, therefore, makes her final wager $1800 (Don’s post 34).
Her total, prior to final jeopardy, was $26600. This total minus $24800 (if she loses) would be $24800. She wins.
Yes Dipshit - I get it, clearly better than you.”
Freightman, I can see you're still struggling with this. Tim Urbon (the guy who wrote the article) didn't seem to get it either. By the way, are you two related?
You said this article "articulates the situation quite nicely." Nothing could be further from reality. In fact, this article misses the situation completely. You could say "He pulled a Freightman." Lol
Tim's basic premise is wrong since he's completely off on the percentages of both of them (James and Emma) getting the Final Jeopardy question right. Tim says "So let's assume that they both had a 90% chance of getting final Jeopardy right.", and then he has these stupid little boxes showing each scenario. Why would anybody assume such a low number? James had already got 97% (31 out of 32) of Final Jeopardy questions right. The category was Shakespeare which was Emma's quote "dream category". James had to know this since he heard her introduction at the start of the show, where I'm sure Alex said something about Emma being a librarian with a major in English at Princeton.
So both Emma and James had to know Emma had over a 99% chance of getting the final Jeopardy question right. Why would Emma ever bet in a way that didn't guarantee her the win when this was her "dream category"? Why would she get cute and pull a Freightman, and bet an amount below what guaranteed a win?
James and Emma made the right bet based on the circumstances and the knowledge they had at hand. Case closed. But I can see from Freightman's repeated attempts at trying to defend his position, he's probably never going to get this. At least he now has an ally in Tim Urbon. Lol
Last edited by Dbs6582; 06-09-2019 at 07:33 AM.
Freightman, to your credit you aren't giving up even though you still aren't getting it. Since you didn't post all your great "caveats of post 50, paragraph 2", I went back and read them. Here is the paragraph you wanted me to review:
Quoting Freightman: "The lady should know that James is a killer at final jeopardy, that the odds of him getting it right are enormous. She needs to be very confident that she will get it as well. If she’s not, then her final wager must take into account her “theoretical” deep deep knowledge (my post 31) of James tactics. She must, therefore, rethink her final wager to account for both James and her, getting it wrong. Clearly, anyone can see, as I’ve already pointed out, that with wagers made, James would win if the lady gets it wrong, and James gets it right."
Okay, here's what your missing. I'm going to type this very slowly so you get it. Lol. She was very, very confident that would get the answer right. Emma and James knew the category going into Final Jeopardy. It was Shakespeare. Emma is a librarian with a degree in English from Princeton. Emma called this her "dream category". The odds of Emma getting it right were much higher than for James, and based on James past success with Final Jeopardy, James odds were 97%.
One more time. No, she should not "rethink her final wager". Her bet should be based on her knowing that she had a greater than 99% chance of getting the question right. She should not go through some convoluted "double or triple mind screwed up think" (or whatever you want to call it). Using your logic in how she should have bet, she could have lost the game if James would have done his own "triple or quadruple mind-out-of-control think" and bet it all. That would really make her look like a fool, losing to James after both of them get the question right because she didn't bet enough. But in your world you'd probably think she was a genius.
I'll quote one more post from you that I thought was right out of a male chauvinist handbook. It's from post #29: Quoting Freightman: "...because the lady, though smart, doesn't get optimal betting and will wager a shitload."
The only thing you got right in this sentence is the lady is smart. What you got wrong is saying she "doesn't get optimal betting" and then making fun of her by saying "will wager a shitload." I am not the only person who thought Emma bet optimally giving the circumstances. Many articles have been written saying she bet optimally. Any other bet would have made no sense to someone thinking clearly.
Maybe we should start calling you the Dipshit. Maybe you need to look in the mirror. Lol
Freightman, you're the one being "Mr. Contrary". You tried to show us how making the logical straightforward bet that anybody would make (if they weren't dropped on their head as a baby) could be the wrong choice in this situation. I'm trying to be the sensible person, showing that she made the right bet. Any other bet would have made no sense. This was no time to go into double or triple mind-screwed-up-logic, trying to second and third guess what your opponent was going to bet.
Using Zee's logic (one of the smartest members on this forum) this question was the equivalent to a dunk for an NBA player. Why would she get cute with her bet when she had such an easy question? Why would she bet in way that someone could beat her if everybody got it right, which was the most likely outcome?
Okay, so now it looks like you want us to call you "Mr. Contrary" too. Isn't Dipshit enough? Lol
Last edited by Dbs6582; 06-09-2019 at 03:24 PM.
Hey Freightman, I’m with some colleagues and we started talking about James and Jeopardy today and someone I know well shared that his dad had been on Jeopardy and won, but only once. I’ve known him for 20 years but never knew this bit of trivia...guess we never had any reason to talk about Jeopardy before. He proceeded to tell me some interesting things about Jeopardy and how his dad got on. Since we were all talking about Jeopardy, I shared this post with him, and some of my other colleagues.
They got a chuckle out of your posts and how you made fun of Emma for betting the correct amount. This guy said anybody who knows anything about Jeopardy would bet the way Emma did. I told them this is how some APs (mostly you, Bosox, 21forme, and a couple others) think...they try to be so smart they start thinking stupid.
They also got a kick out of Bosox posts. I told them, yeah, he’s kind of the forum clown, who everybody laughs at. I told them he was your side kick, kind of like Andy Griffith and Barney Fife.
Anyway, it’s been an interesting day. I now know more about Jeopardy, and we all got to enjoy a good laugh at you and Bosox’s expense. Hope you didn’t mind. Lol
It's a great story. When I saw how he was performing and his background, I figured he worked on efficient betting. Youjizz Pornhub Tubegalore
Last edited by karimmopa; 06-17-2019 at 01:18 PM.
We have another champion on a significant run. Matt Amodio has now won 11 games and over $360,000.
He appears to be influenced by James Holzhauer: getting ahead by playing the high value clues at the bottom of the board, hunting for and leveraging the daily doubles and making the maximum safe bet in Final Jeopardy when he can't be caught. There have been very few players since Holzhauer to play this way and I've quite frankly been at a loss to understand why. It's been about two years since Holzhauer's run. One difference this time is that most of the other players seem to be at least attempting to keep up by betting the bottom of the board.
Amodio has been a bit over the top with some of the daily doubles, betting more than is necessary at times, including an unnecessary all-in earlier this week. Hopefully that is not his eventual downfall.
Bookmarks