Skip to content
October 9, 2014

Daily analysis, Thursday, October 9

previous week same week following week
2930123 678910 1314151617

It was a cloudy day in New York, so I wore my yellow shirt.The Final Wager – October 9, 2014

A higher-scoring game than last night.

Emily Herndon: 11,600
Venkat Krishnan: 7,400
Rena Morse: 16,200

The Final Jeopardy! category: HISTORICAL FIGURES

This is more straightforward than it looks at first.

Basic strategy – first vs. second

Rena should wager 7,000 to cover Emily.

Emily can wager up to 2,400 to stay above Rena if they’re both wrong.

Venkat is still alive, but must get it right.

Basic strategy – second vs. third

Since Venkat will likely wager everything, Emily should wager 3,200 to cover him. But that would mean she’d lose to Rena if she’s wrong, so she might as well go all in.

…aaaaaand done.

What actually happened

No need to leave that (potential) extra cash on the table, Emily and Venkat!

The Final Jeopardy! clue

HISTORICAL FIGURES

A 2012 POLL BY BRITAIN’S NATIONAL ARMY MUSEUM VOTED THIS MAN, BORN IN 1732, AS THE NATION’S GREATEST MILITARY ENEMY

Correct response: Show

 

previous week same week following week
2930123 678910 1314151617
2 Comments
  1. Aaron Fisher permalink

    I’m curious why you discarded the 0-2,400 range for Emily. It wins on the triple-stumper if Rena makes the lockout wager. Going all-in only wins if Emily gets the swing.

    Looking at Season 29 data, there were 53 triple-stumpers. There were only 37 instances where the leader going into Final missed, and second place got it right.

    • Kelly permalink

      I agree – in a Stratton’s Dilemma game the small range, even if third needs to get it right to have a chance (and thus would be justified at betting it all), the “small” wager should get credit at least as an “alternative” one. (When third can bet small too it of course gets more complicated.) As PP said the small bet may actually have somewhat better odds (assuming the leader won’t bet to tie or make a non-cover bet) given how triple stumpers are more likely than split-response outcomes (of course the large bet has the advantage that you don’t risk losing to a trailer if you both get it right, hence Keith’s Rule #1). (A similar pattern was found when Bob Shore tracked how well the leader would win with a standard vs. “shoretegic” bet in Shore’s Conjecture games – the smaller bet has slightly better odds, but at the cost of possibly being overtaken on a double get.)

What do you think?