[Mr. Mojo]

I think you’re on to their scheme.

Ratings have been in the sewer since Alex died. Manufacturing an all-time great may be the only chance to bring them back. When it didn’t work with 38-consecutive game winner Amodio a couple months ago, they decided to up the ante with a tranny freak.

Aside from fixing games in the manner you described, which I think is spot on the money, they can also be fixed by buzzer manipulation. A split second delay on the buzzers of a favored player’s opponents is all it takes.

What are the chances that 2 of the top 4 winners in the show’s very long history happened within a few months of each other when the ratings desperately needed a boost, and one of the winners is a politically fashionable gender deviant?

“I’ll take 1 in a Million for $200, Alex.”

[Sans-Culotte]

I believe I read once that the buzzers work in such a way that if you try to buzz in before the question (answer) is completely read, you are locked out for a second or nanosecond as a penalty (far different from the Art Fleming days where players buzzed in almost immediately). So, the people who are multi-day champs have their buzzer skills honed while the challengers are still learning the ropes.

I have liked Mayim Bialik as the host and I hope she gets the full time gig. She's funny and has a personality. I notice that Johnny Gilbert introduces her as "the host of Jeopardy", whereas Ken Jennings is merely referred to as "hosting Jeopardy". My wife and I watch it primarily as a brain exercise. I read a lot of history and can usually ace those categories. If I miss one I feel I should have known, it tells me I may need to brush up on that period. We both do poorly on African and Asian geography. Since I mainly read about western civilization, I have tended to ignore those areas of the world. And we both are bad at modern pop culture (because we don't care about it).