Posted on 06/04/2019 12:13:06 PM PDT by DFG
The answer: Polishing their résumé.
The question: How will a member of the “Jeopardy!” production team soon be spending their time?
“Jeopardy!” executive producer Harry Friedman said Tuesday that he thinks he knows who’s responsible for leaking the ending of James Holzhauer’s final episode, and that “very, very, very appropriate” action will be taken.
“We think we know where and who and how,” Friedman told the Washington Post, as he recounted the moment he learned on Sunday that a clip showing Holzhauer’s defeat in Monday’s episode was going viral.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
“Quite possible someone behind the scenes rigged the doubles.”
There are likely many controls in place to avoid any rigging, no need for another game show hearing as when there was rigging in the 50’s.
This was simply luck catching up with him. The show was taped on March 12th, a Tuesday before any of his shows had aired. Tapings are on Tuesdays and Wednesdays, 5 shows each day. There are alternates that sit through the shows and then come back the next taping if they are not used. Based on the fact both “new” contestants were playing his game, likely they were both in the audience the preceding Wednesday and saw him in action for 5 shows. They had a full 6 days to digest and adopt his strategy of picking the high values first along with searching for the Daily Doubles to take those away from opponents.
His very bad luck was picking the first round Daily Double on his first pick, when he had no amount to wager and was only able to pick up the $1,000. While he entered the second round ahead, her picking up both Daily Doubles and adopting his game plan of betting it all on the first one was the clincher.
You KNEW it was Curtains when Alex showed a Get Well Card from James' daughter!
BINGO!! James was OUT of THERE, one way or the other!
“He knew that he could not beat the woman. He knew the woman knew she HAD to bet it all to beat him. He could bet a little and hope she missed, or he could bet it all, and risk getting blown out entirely.”
That doesn’t make sense. The woman didnt have to bet it all to beat him, she only had to bet 20201. If she is right she wins even if he bets it all and both are correct. Holzhauer did not have a reason to assume the woman would be confident just because the question was about Shakespeare. Not all librarians are familiar with that topic. She could have bet NOTHING and still beat him given his bet was so small. His best strategy would have been to make a large wager and hope that she didn’t bet enough to beat him.
uh....did you see “her” tonite??
Ok. It was fixed. Happy now?
I think I said it earlier, I was explaining what he said. I don’t really care to get into it with viewers with theories. This means almost nothing to me. It’s a TV show. Go outside for a walk.
Have to disagree. In 2nd place, you have to assume that if the leader gets the answer right, they have bet enough to defeat you even if you are right and bet all you have.
So - you have to hope they get it wrong - and if they do, you want to have enough left to beat them after they lose the bet that covers double yours.
Your mistake is assuming that she would know his bet - she wouldn’t so she has to cover his max bet.
In addition, in this case, he had to be concerned about the 3rd place guy betting all he had and getting it right.
His bet was the right amount that allowed him to maximize his chances to win, or alternatively, come in 2nd
Yes I did.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.