Final Jeopardy: 19th Century Politics (5-30-14)
The Final Jeopardy question (5/30/2014), in the category “19th Century Politics” was:
A Senate seat from this southern State sat vacant for 4 years; when it was filled, its ex-occupant had become U.S. Pres.
19x champ Julia Collins has now won $410,000! Her last two games were in the $18K range. She needs to win this game to surpass Dave Madden on games, but she needs $20,400 to beat him on money. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Let’s see how Julia stacks up against these two players: Wendy Hardenberg, from New Haven, CT; and Sami Siegelbaum, from Chicago, IL.
Round 1: Julia found the Jeopardy! round Daily Double in “The Roaring ’20s” under the $1,000 clue. She was in the lead with $6,800, $4,400 more than Sami in second place. She bet $1,800 and thought it was Cuba. That was WRONG.
In May 1926 President Coolidge sent U.S. Marines into this nation to quell an uprising led by General Augusto Sandino. show
Julia finished in the lead with $6,800. Sami was second with $3,600 and Wendy was last with $1,000.
Round 2: Sami found the first Daily Double in “The 28 Countries of NATO” under the $2,000 clue. He was in third place with $4,400, $10,000 less than Julia in second place. He bet $2,500 and he was RIGHT.
The one that’s 99% Muslim. show
Julia found the last Daily Double in “Poetic Lines” under the $800 clue. In the lead with $15,600, she had $8,600 more than Wendy in second place. She bet $2,400 but did not know so she was WRONG.
“10,000 eyes were on him as he rubbed his hands with dirt; 5,000 tongues applauded when he wiped them on his shirt” show
Julia finished in the lead with $11,600. Wendy was next with $9,000 and Sami was in third place with $8,100. Close scores and first time she didn’t have a runaway since her 12th game on May 20th.
TWO of the contestants got Final Jeopardy! right.
Andrew Johnson “first served in the Senate from 1857 to 1862. In the early months of the Civil War, Johnson– the only southern senator to remain loyal to the Union after his state seceded– was obliged to flee that state to avoid arrest. When federal troops conquered Nashville, he resigned his Senate seat in March 1862 to accept President Abraham Lincoln’s appointment as military governor of Tennessee….” (U.S. Senate: Death of Andrew Johnson)
On March 23, 1866 “Tennessee was readmitted to representation in the Union. On July 24, the Senate seated Tennessee senators David Patterson of Greeneville (son-in-law of President Andrew Johnson) and Joseph Fowler of Nashville. Patterson’s Class 1 seat had been vacant since Johnson’s resignation on May 4, 1862. Fowler’s Class 2 seat had been vacant since March 3, 1861. (Tennessee in the Senate – click on the printer friendly icon on that page for an easier to read version)
Sami only got down “Te” before time ran out. That cost him $7,000 and he wound up with $1,100.
Wendy got it right. She added $7,201 to finish with $16,201.
Julia also got it. Her $6,500 bet brought her up to today’s winning total: $18,100. Her 20-day total is $428,100, only $2,300 behind Dave Madden’s winnings.
And so, Julia IS the second winningest player in games, and we don’t have to end our recap with “Mighty Julia has struck out” yet.
Have a great weekend everyone. We’ll be back on Monday and hope you will, too.
2 years ago:: Only ONE of the players got this FJ in “Airline History”
Clipper Goodwill, a Boeing 727, took this airline’s last passengers from Barbados to Miami December 4, 1991. show
We may earn a small commission from qualifying purchases made from Amazon.com links at no cost to our visitors. Learn more: Affiliate Disclosure.
When it comes to conspiracy theories I try to err on the side of caution. There are plenty of human phenomena that contain various whiffs of potential scheming, but in most cases the “scheming” might better be termed ineptitude, or more or less random quirks of what was supposed to be “intentional” behavior –humans don’t have free will, in my firm opinion, in large measure because there isn’t a definition of free will that even begins to hold water.
To take the JFK assassination as an example, in the final analysis there simply isn’t enough compelling evidence to overturn the Occam’s Razor explanation of Lee Harvey Oswald as a lone gunman who “struck gold” (in his imagination) when the local paper printed the presidential limo’s route which ran right by the Dallas School Book Depository. Oswald was a fairly addle-brained conspiracist himself, and he had already made an earlier attempt at assassination (which he botched) only weeks before the JFK success.
So in the case of Jeopardy, it seems reasonable to assume that the pressure is certainly there to pad the ratings with desired competitive outcomes. But the ways in which those outcomes might be generated could be angled for in various subtle ways that might not be fraudulent per se, but could be seen as manipulative.
These questions of methodology ought to be brought to at least some level of public disclosure, I think. At the very least, the Jeopardy fan base should be informed of how any oversight process works, and what the standards are.
I totally agree with you about Oswald. In fact, I dislike conspiracy theories as a rule.
So, being a non-conspiracist generally, I’m amazing myself that I’ve come to believe that something’s fishy on Jeopardy.
In the quiz show scandals of the ’50s, the perpetrators said, “We’re putting on a show! It’s entertainment!” This could be the same way they’re thinking on Jeopardy.
Another suspicious thing is that Julia is a history buff, and on the show where she moves into 2nd place for “games won,” the FJ is “19th Century Politics.”
H’mn.
Well, they can do what they want. I don’t care who wins or loses or how much money they make. As I’ve said, I’ve been watching Jeopardy for half a century now for one reason only: I want to see how much I know. That’s why I used to like “The College Bowl” years ago. (There’s a show I wish they’d bring back!)
First, please let me say that it is out of respect for you that I write this. Your previous posts have led me to view Jeopardy differently.
So, with all of that in mind, say it ain’t so, Tom. “They can do what they want. I don’t care…how much money they make.” This must be a beaten attitude. Previously, you called Roger Craig “an effin’ idiot”, you said “I’m sick of the whole champion thing”. You certainly cared then what “they” did, as they did what they wanted. Further, you were more annoyed by how much money was being made.
You say that you generally dislike conspiracy theories, so let’s recall actions: a relatively unknown Senator from Wisconsin pulls out a sheet of paper and starts a national witchhunt then later gets censured by the Senate, a second term President blatantly lies on national television, and “the smartest guys in the room” commit fraud. These actions are far more egregious than any of which Jeopardy has been accused.
I love the show, too. I used to watch it with my grandmother when I cared for her. Going to the taping was one of the cooler things that I have done. I want to enjoy Jeopardy for a long time. I want you to, also. Earlier, I watch the “institutions” episode and actually screamed at the screen. You, I, or anyone really can not be getting as much from the show when there are so many stumpers and clues left up. In a way, we are being cheated. Now whether they are fixing the final jeopardies, adjusting buzzers or purposely providing weak candidates, I can only suspect. It does seem like something is not right. Viewers like you and all fans should be agitated. Please don’t let them numb you. And, yes, it would be awesome if they televised the quiz bowls, and even better if Larissa Kelly and Dave Madden had some hand in it.
I guess I should say I dislike conspiracy theories that don’t make sense and for which there’s no proof. There ARE real conspiracies in this world.
I think the problems you’re finding with me involve terminology. My “I don’t care” isn’t so much “indifference” as it’s anger at the whole idea that all that really matters is how much money someone can win, so it’s in line with what I said before. Also, “conspiracy theory” signifies to me a belief in something that isn’t true, which I guess it shouldn’t.
Now, which second term president were you referring to? There are so many second-termers who blatantly lied on national television: Reagan by denying he knew anything about the Iran-Contra scandal; Clinton with his “I do not know that woman”; Bush, Jr. with his “weapons of mass destruction”; Obama with his “you can keep your insurance” and several other questionable comments.
Let’s face it. It’s a rare politician that isn’t a big, fat liar.
First, thank you for reading and responding.
Now, I will freely admit that I brought up the idea of changing FJs without a shred of evidence, much like the idea of a faster buzzer. It does, however, explain many things: the dismissal of a very talented player who is looking to start a competition, the displacement (in rankings) of someone not involved in the BoD, and the continued reign of the poster-girl. I simply wanted to generate thought by feasibility.
Ironically, most of this is your fault. Reading your earlier posts got me to thinking about the money, which lead to wondering about the seedings and contrived matchups in the BoD. As I imagined how else the show might be engineered, I thought of monopolistic destruction of possible competition and of outcome manipulation. Again, the idea of selecting a FJ to suit a desired outcome fit made sense.
So now we come to the answer of your last question: the answer is none of the above. Although I knew the reference to be a little ambiguous, I was actually thinking of Nixon.
Now, how can we get those quiz bowls televised? Maybe we can get Colby Burnett involved. Colby, are you out there now?
I also wouldn’t be surprised if, like with Ken Jennings, they decided to protect Julia by not holding a ToC. I believe they like their poster-girl and their elite three.
just one more point before I fold for the night — Julia has won 20 games so that means she’s defeated 40 players. Surely, if it felt like there was something fishy afoot, somebody would run to the media.
What a story — the media these days doesn’t even care if it’s true or not.
Heck, that kid who felt like his emancipTation spelling mistake should have been accepted (even though it didn’t change the outcome of the game in any way at all) and his father went public with the kid’s I was cheated lament. #boohoo
That father did no favor for that kid, but I think that the media reacted because it was a kid.
Again, I don’t believe Jeopardy is doing anything illegal. I’m not even sure the actions that I am implying are unethical: contestants get on television with an experience they will never forget and with monetary compensation for being on a show. The only victim is our naivety: our gasping as the curtain is pulled back to reveal the wizard. Thus, a compensated person making an allegation that is nearly impossible to prove of legal engineering would not be worth the effort or risk for the media to pursue.
READ THIS ONE: this is big. If I don’t post by Monday, you’ll know it’s true. This one is inspired by Tom.
Fact: Larissa Kelly (one of the best players ever) was eliminated on the same game as she said that she is working on a format for a game/quiz show by a triple stumper, probably the hardest FJ of the entire Battle of the Decades tournament. An inferior player wins, knowing his only chance to win is to bet nothing and have Larissa miss (she simply is not the type of player to sit on her lead and bet nothing: she averaged 37,000+ per game). So, a stumper favored his position.
Fact: Dave Madden is working on quiz bowls/ shows and does not make it to the BoD. His standings have been diminished by a, most probably, not as strong player.
But how? By choosing FJ questions that favor the desired outcome. Now, I don’t know the legality involved. I am certainly not accusing anyone of anything illegal. But just short of that, suppose they want Julia as a poster-girl. They need three elite players for show purposes, and were not thrilled with Roger Craig’s antics. Julia is a very bright woman who grew up watching the show. So, if she’s in the lead, give her an easier question. Engineer an outcome. If she’s in a runaway, make it look good and make the question tougher: she has a worse record in FJs in runaway.
Alex has said before that the games are preset. But, he said that in a kids’ tournament: engineering a kid’s outcome would be unforgivable.
Again, I do believe that Julia is, at least, a very good player. I also believe that her competition has been diluted. This theory of late-choice final jeopardy would also explain part of her success and more, as well.
How can they know what one contestant will be able to answer and two others won’t?
What about all the triple stumpers? What’s to stop the other two from answering something Julia doesn’t know? (video coming soon of today’s triple stumpers).
Today, Wendy did know the answer to the poetry Daily Double that Julia missed (or it at least seemed so by her nodding her head affirmatively when Alex gave the answer). But that was just the way the mop flops. Same as how Wendy got ahead of Sami with the Prufrock clue.
Let us go then, you and I,
When the evening is spread out against the sky
Like a patient etherized upon a table
Only the FJ is chosen for desired outcome: easier if she is in the lead, tougher for a runaway (just to throw them in), maybe a stumper if she’s in second. Although it may be possible to change categories for Double Jeopardy, but that’s deeper. If she loses before FJ, that’s just the way it goes.
P.S. you seem to be making Wendy out to be stronger than before.
How so, Eric? I thought the whole poetry category would have been in Wendy’s wheelhouse but she didn’t get the Keats poem after Julia blew that one. I would have given her more props for Ode to a Nightingale than Casey at the Bat. (Ah, she knows the difference between Shelley and Keats)
Here’s an idea we can try next week if you guys want to — I can put the CotD in a separate thread with SPOILER in the title. That way whoever wants to talk about it, take a stab at it — whatever — can do so without having to write SPOILER ALERT before their comment. Feedback welcome 🙂
I was thinking that, or perhaps in the tags section. I don’t know about logistics.
Sounds like a fantastic idea. Would there be any legal issues with the NYT and Jeopardy? They’ve had a partnership for years. It would be nice to discuss it online. I always discuss it with my colleagues and it generates a good debate among us. It would be great to discuss it with my online Jeopardy buddies too.
that’s where the first amendment comes in. if j does nothing illegal, the n.y.t. publishes the clue, you can talk about it till the cows come home. at least that’s what my attorney told me. you must just be careful not to outright ACCUSE j of something illegal.
The way my colleagues and I work it is we use the honor system. No googling allowed. We write our responses on a sheet of paper. When Jeopardy airs then we will know who was right or wrong. All we get are bragging rights. No rewards are involved. It’s just good old trivia fun. It brightens up the day for us.
I don’t see any problem with it. We’re not going to promote the thread or make any effort to interfere with their readers. JBoard posts it every day. They have a spoiler feature that works in their comments and, at the moment, I don’t. But I don’t think we would need a spoiler if it’s set up in such a way that people who don’t want to read a spoiler won’t even open the post.
In honor of John, Tom, Bill and the others who enhance this site with augmented information, I will quote Kenneth C. Davis, from Don’t Know Much About History, (about Andrew Johnson):
“He campaigned for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1860, but he stayed loyal to the Union after Lincoln’s election, the only senator from a seceding state to remain in Congress, proclaiming in 1861, ‘Show me the man who makes war on the government, and fires on its vessels, and I will show you a traitor.'”
Pretty powerful words in Tennessee.
Yeah, but he was a vile person and an extreme racist even by the low standards of the day. He was against the 14th Amendment; he thought blacks should not have the right to vote; he thought the blacks should be sent back to Africa.
That was how many Democrats felt after the Civil War. Isn’t it sad that there are some Republicans who still feel that way today?
Wow. I apologize for going positive: it doesn’t seem fair in context.
It is sad that there is so much needless hatred still today.
Mark, who writes Sports on here, has his own Civil War blog, IronBrigader.com. Lots of interesting stuff. These are links to synopses of a couple of autobiographies that are online — one by a southerner who fought on the Union side (Parmenas Taylor Turnley) and one by a northerner who fought for the South (Samuel French). Both were West Pointers. Fascinating stuff, their personal opinions of people of the day. Both men had their grudges. French says Andrew Johnson would have had Lee and the Confed. Genls. arrested if it wasn’t for U.S. Grant. Turnley, who was from Tennessee, never forgave Gen. Burnside for his elderly father’s mistreatment at Knoxville prison.
Eric, I bet you loved the Poker category. My favorite category was Rodin. We have a huge picture of Rodin’s The Thinker in our house and a small sculpture of The Thinker.
Julia surprised me with the correct $1,000 response in the Poker category.
Alas, my friend, I live without a television. It takes an effort for me to be able to watch (another reason I love this site). I’ll have to catch it on the archives. Please tell me, though, was there discussion of Stu Ungar or World Series of Poker wins? He was an absolute genius and quite a pioneer in applied game theory.
Just tweeted a Stu Ungar question to Julia for Monday’s Good Morning America. If anyone watches, please let me know if it makes it.
Good stuff, Eric. I was just reading the Stu Ungar wiki page. Powerful, sad, and amazing story. I’m embarrassed that I didn’t know who Stu Ungar was.
Just another example of the holes that we all sport, many of them egregious.
Yes, truly unfortunate. He was a stupid freaking genius cokehead who broke the hearts of everyone who knew him. Alas, everyone who knew him loved him, then hated loving him.
Of course, the $64,000 question is what was your question for Julia regarding Stu Ungar. One reels at the possibilities.
This three-time winner of the World Series of Poker pioneered applied modern game theory.
Note: he was main-event champion three times. Now, there are many more events than just the main event.
“Alas, my friend, I live without a television.”
Dude, that is awesome! Doubly ironic and way cool, I am also sans glass teat.
Alas, I did watch tonight’s somewhat comical travesty of a Jeopardy match at my sister’s place. And again, not to beat the deceased eohippus, Julia is a very competent Jeopardy player, and with 20 wins she has achieved immortal status, whether anyone likes it or not. Yet….
In a nutshell, Julia’s 24 for 33 on DDs does not flatter her in light of Dave Madden’s 41 of 43.
The fact that Julia is a female contestant muddies the controversy waters quite a bit, but for me I had a problem with Chu’s (weak) competition already. This Julia run has been interesting primarily because (again, in my opinion) the eye test shows her overall game-play wanting for a 20 game winner.
Part of me hopes that the streak goes on for a long, long time to the point where a genuine storm of controversy erupts. Another part of me hopes this goes quietly away, and we can soon watch Jeopardy in the comfort of being with a trusted companion.
🙂
Uh….controversy.
Dude, I am an idiot…not to mention, a strange loop. [Kind of an inside joke.]
😉
Can’t say I blame you about the tv thing. Mine is on maybe 1 hour a day. I prefer reading and using my tablet for internet access to information. More commercials than substance on tv. About the Poker category I can’t remember the clues. I just remember being shocked that Julia got the $1,000 clue correct on Poker.
In Jan Brady voice “Julia, Julia, Julia, that’s all I ever hear”. I wonder what these people would look like competing all day in front of cameras?
these posts are just for you VJ. Erase them if you like.
OK then!! I will make the Poker category the video for tomorrow’s FJ recap
Nice. Is this in honor of the fight the librarian put up? #glimmerofhope
Thanks as always.
ah, no, not in honor of the librarian but I’ll leave in the part where she gets out of the hole.
In the chat, Alex asked her a question he is often asked — how many languages she speaks. 5 to varying degrees, French is her best, German is good, Hindi not so good and basic Italian. She also translates literature as a side career.
Quel dommage that there were no categories that complemented her talents (don’t think poetry is her strong suit).
Sami though is an art history professor and they had a Rodin Museum category that was right up his alley.
Well, that bit helps with her geek cred, at least!
one more win and she will hold the #2 ranking positions all by herself.(games and money).
her opponents were stronger today it seems, or did julia have a “mini” meltdown? as an aferthought: who determines who appears on the program and when? one individual, a group of people, are they randomly selected by a computer among those eligible????
just to throw another theme into the rigging” ring.
anyway, like neil diamond once sang (..straight ahead and steady as gibraltar)
that’s julia. uncharacteristically she missed on both her DDs. i wonder, if they “let” her have the #2 spot moneywise as well….
either way: excellent job, julia. with her style to play AND the knowledge she has, she should do it on monday. personally i hope she wins the game on monday, and when she holds both #2 rankings i am curious how far she will go. she has a long road ahead to travel, before she can even begin thinking about breaking ken’s record. although the weirdest things happen, even on j. who would have thought that dave’s reign would come to an end on a “no brainer” fj.
have a great and safe weekend everyone !!!
and don’t eat TOO many pineapples..:-)
The pineapples here are not as good as the ones where you live.
I remember Ken in a lot of wins, going down to the wire, but under pressure, never drew a blank during that stretch is wins. He was calm under pressure.
None. Ken was amazing.
Aaaaahhhhhhh. So close, and yet so far away. Well, at least Wendy was by far the most formidable competition.
no she wasn’t. Sami was playing better than her and was in the lead a couple of times in the first round. Wendy spent half the round in the hole.
In round 2, Wendy didn’t get ahead of Sami till the very last clue they had time for — in Poetic Lines. She didn’t even ring in for the first easy Longfellow clue — Sami got that! Right after blowing the Casey at the Bat DD, Julia blew a Keats poem (going for the Ancient Mariner because it talked about a bird). Nobody else rang in and then Wendy rang in on the $2K clue – a T.S. Eliot poem. That’s when they ran out of time.
I wanted to make this category my video but they left the $1200 poetry clue on the board (and also the $2K clue in A Real Mac Daddy)
She came the closest to winning and had the lead at Final Jeopardy.
That being true, I’m sure that your analysis is correct. As I don’t have a tv, I like Nomi and many others, count on your recap. For that, we are grateful.
Yes VJ. I second Eric. A mere thanks doesn’t come close.
So she has done it! VJ, you wrote the update well, keeping me hopeful and optimistic till the end :).
Not being on this continent, I wasn’t aware of the show’s existence when Ken was on his run. Were there mutterings about cannon-fodder opponents and rigging during his reign too?
I know that he tweeted her something to the effect of when a woman keeps winning, they say that she doesn’t have very tough competition and when a man does, they say that he is being fed the answers.
People always have to bring race, ethnicity or sex into these things. Chu did that, too.
I don’t care what Jennings says — anyone can see that most of Julia’s competitors have been pretty lousy Jeopardy players. I think she’s aware of it herself!
You probably didn’t mean it this way (and I won’t read anything else into the question), but that’s a bit of an unfair comparison. Putting aside the gettable material left behind during her games (which, to say nothing of her, speaks volumes about her opponents), Ken was on a completely different level. During his run, out of 60 clues on the board (assuming time doesn’t run out and leave clues unrevealed), KJ averaged – AVERAGED – 35 right answers by himself, and routinely reached 40-42. 60-70% of the board, all to himself. That kind of domination simply rendered the quality of his opponents irrelevant.
That’s not to say she isn’t a worthy champ – yknow, 20 wins – but the level of competition was bothering some (including me) during and even before Arthur Chu’s reign. It’s just been that kind of season. I don’t think it’s an insult to say some champs are better than others, and frankly I think last season’s champs were top to bottom better than this years batch, gaudy win totals aside.
You, sir, were a great President. Did my quoting you bring you to us?
TR….yes. It was the bat wings that gave him away!
As in, “in belfry”. [I’m referring to the manly man, not his echo here on this thread.]
😀
Ok, thanks. I didn’t know any of this since I’ve only seen short clips of Ken’s games on youtube…the game when he broke the one-day record, the Nancy Zerg game (his last), the one where he uses the word ‘ho’ and Alex says, “They teach you that in school in Utah :)”. But those are all very short clips.
He was like a machine. All hesitation was politeness, but businesslike: a man on a mission. A true juggernaut.