Skip to content
July 9, 2014

Daily analysis, Wednesday, July 9

I’m back at the board tonight, which means I’m at worst very displeased. But things aren’t necessarily that bad.The Final Wager - July 9, 2014

Campbell looked good again today, and has a commanding lead heading into Final.

Campbell Warner: 19,200
Sara Tess Neumann: 2,600
Nick Lasik: 11,600

The Final Jeopardy! category: CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHIES

In the video, I talk about Nick’s Daily Double opportunity toward the end of Double Jeopardy!. There were three high-level clues remaining and he had exactly half of Campbell’s total.

In a situation like this, a late Daily Double is a bit like a single-player Final Jeopardy! with some wiggle room. The question should be: do I like this category better than a random Final category? If so, might as well wager everything. If not, you can bide your time and throw the Hail Mary.

Another consideration is your opponent will also be playing Final Jeopardy!, and will likely wager so that he’ll win if he gets it right. That should tip the scales toward a larger wager if you’re on the fence.

Basic strategy – first vs. second

Campbell should wager 4,000 to cover Nick‘s proper double-up wager.

Sara Tess should hold back a few dollars in case Nick misses, in which case she would get second.

That’s all, folks!

What actually happened

Campbell went for the tie! Campbell went for the tie!

Is it a coincidence that he’s the first multi-day male champ since Arthur Chu – or did Campbell, too, do some preparation for his appearance?

The Final Jeopardy! clue for July 9, 2014 (CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHIES):

THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS COUNTRY ALLOWS THE MONARCH TO ABDICATE, WHICH HAS HAPPENED IN 1948, 1980 & 2013

Correct response: Show

 

2 Comments
  1. Kelly permalink

    When you brought up Nick’s DD, I thought you were about to suggest he bet zero to preserve the potential lock-tie (which you know is not allowed).

    • With three clues left, there are probably too many variables to preserve a lock-tie, so the best bet might be to wager the cumulative total value of clues left divided by two. That way if you get it right, the leader can’t runaway from you, but you aren’t completely eliminated if you get it wrong. In fact, if you have a weaker third player, if you answered the DD correctly, you could then intentionally NOT ring in the last 3 clues, and hope the lead player gets all 3 clues correct and it WILL force a lock-tie.

What do you think?