Final Jeopardy: U.S. Government People (7-15-14)
The Final Jeopardy question (7/15/2014), in the category “U.S. Government People” was:
A committee chaired by the official in this job released the influential 1964 report “Smoking and Health”.
New champ Ben-Hur Flores won $20,000 in yesterday’s game, defeating a 2x champ. Today, he tries to become a 2x champ himself, competing against these two players: Anna Lawrence, from Duluth, GA; and Ed Patterson, from Washington, DC.
Round 1: Ed found the Jeopardy! round Daily Double in “Yellowstone National Park” under the $800 clue. He was in third place with $2,400, $3,000 less than Anna’s lead. He bet $1,400 and he was RIGHT.
These largest North American land mammals seem mellow but cause more injuries to humans in the park than bears do. show
Anna finished in the lead with $6,200. Ben-Hur was second with $4,200 and Ed was last with $3,800.
Round 2: Ed found the first Daily Double in “Movie Title References” under the $2,000 clue. He was mowing this category down hard and was now in the lead with $9,400, $2,000 more than Anna in second place. He bet $2,000 and he was RIGHT.
1944: A clause in a life insurance policy. show
Ben-Hur found the last Daily Double in “Let’s Go to Alaska” under the $1,600 clue. In third place with $8,200, he had $6,400 less than Ed’s lead. He bet $1,800 but did not know so he was WRONG.
This western peninsula is home to the world’s largest maar, or volcanic crater lake. show
Ed finished in the lead with $17,800. Anna was next with $14,200 and Ben-Hur was in third place with $6,400.
ALL of the contestants got Final Jeopardy! right.
“The U.S. Surgeon General’s first Smoking and Health report marked its 50-year anniversary Saturday [1/14/2014]. Led by then Surgeon General Luther Terry with the help of an advisory committee, the 1964 landmark report linked smoking cigarettes with dangerous health effects, including lung cancer and heart disease. After consulting more than 7,000 articles about cigarette smoking, the committee concluded smoking was a cause of lung and laryngeal cancer in men, a probable cause of lung cancer in women and the most important cause of chronic bronchitis.” (PBS NewsHour)
Ben-Hur bet $6,000. That brought him up to $12,400.
Anna bet $5,800. She finished with $20,000.
Ed bet $10,600 so he won the game with a very healthy $28,400.
Ed Patterson is an attorney who was in the army for a while. He graduated from both Airborne and Ranger schools and Alex Trebek asked him how tough Ranger School was. Ed said it was pretty tough — 9 weeks of intense training. Trebek then wanted to know if he thought his ranger training was tougher than Navy seals, and Ed said he thought so but he’d probably generate a lot of internet backlash for that. Ever the instigator, Trebek said “That’s all right. We don’t have too many Navy people watching, or do we?” But somehow, we feel that the topic of conversation will be about Anna’s bet today!
2 years ago:: ALL of the players got this FJ in “First Names”
A wife of King David & 2 of our early first ladies shared this name derived from Hebrew for “my father’s joy.” 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.
btw, Ben-Hur’s chat segment was funny. He did start it out by saying he’s not really a violent guy —
It was about a job interview where he was asked if he was a tree, what kind would he be. He told the interviewer that he would be an oak because they have sturdy and strong branches that he could beat you with. He said he didn’t get the job and the interview ended right there.
Alex was very amused.
This is an example of GAME THEORY (it’s ok to skip this, Nomi) to show how the this new trend of betting for a tie is dangerous: into FJ with the leader (L) at 14, second (2) at 12, and third (3) at 4.5. L bets 10, 2 is A.I. (all in; Roger Craig; Newton-Einstien). 3 should bet close to nothing in this case, because adding to the amount doesn’t help the chance of winning. So, if L and 2 miss, 3 wins (betting 499 or less). HOWEVER, I would advocate 2 betting 2.1-2.9, and thus winning if L misses and giving 3 absolutely no chance to win.
Ok Eric, I have a question that seems more about psychology than game theory. It is suggested that the leader allow the second placer to tie the game because he knows she knows she can beat the second placer on the buzzer again next game.
Now I think this would hold true if the second was very far behind you. But if the second is almost near the leader (like today, only about $3000 off), then why allow that dangerous player to match wits with you again?
Wow. I can’t believe I looked back and found such a loaded question. In all fairness, I’ll use ideas from others also, but here goes:
First, psychologically, it has been suggested that the player (2) betting who was given the chance to tie, may feel they owe a favor to the leader (1).
Secondly, the score differential (like of 3000) is not the only indicator of strength. Say 1 knew that 2 had totally guessed on a big DD, or that 1 had run across an oddly difficult DD. Or that 2 had run into favorable categories. In other words, 1 felt 2 was lucky to be even in the game.
Thirdly, there may be more dangerous players waiting.
(Please see other post for a more detailed account).
Next, 1 may have a feel for 2’s strengths and weaknesses. Of course it’s not totally the same, but look at Brad Rutter’s no bet to end the BoD: I knew that was a weak category for Jennings (I saw the majority of his games) and Brad certainly did.
Lastly, 1 is a nice person and would feel better about it. Wouldn’t you give me a chance for a tie?
As I reread your question, I realized that I had addressed the psychology issue and not the buzzer speed. If 1 thought oneself (ha, ha) to be faster on the buzzer than 2, that would be yet another reason to want to replay 2. That is, if much of 2’s score was on DDs, where buzzer speed was irrelevant (at least after the clue has been chosen), then 1 might feel it easier to beat 2.
Why not play for a tie…..on the next game you only have one unknown player.
If I was Ed, I would not have wanted to play Anna again. imo, she was a good player.
Up until the Movie Titles category, it was between Ben-Hur and Anna. Then Ed got in the lead and Ben-Hur and Anna were neck and neck when he got that last DD. Then he lost confidence but Anna kept going. So if Anna had went all in today, she very well could have won tomorrow esp if a category in her wheelhouse showed up, like it did for Ed today or there was an FJ she knew and he didn’t.
You know, Jesse said that they drew for game placement. I guess that they would know who followed them, so if that guy from Caltech (no doubt, a genius: so might not be easy) was slated as the “second” next (e.g. would play Thursday’s game in case of a tie), I might be more apt to play for a tie.
*Jeff from Caltech*
Actually, the draw is done away from the contestants. We (I’m on today’s show) didn’t have a clue who was going up next until the previous show ended. One of the contestant coordinators would look into the contestant section of the audience, point to two people, and off we’d go. (For the record, I was scared to DEATH that I’d face Jeff!)
First, thanks for stopping by. I’ve been to Nashville a few times and always enjoyed the Pub of Love (across from the bar 12th and Porter, I think, although it’s been awhile).
So, are you saying that you didn’t draw anything yourself? Did you witness the draw?
Since I don’t know the outcome, I hope that you enjoyed yourself and had an experience you will never forget!
When I first started watching the show, I used to think that the FJs should always be as hard as the last two DDs. Now, though, I realize that level of consistency would be bad for the game. That is, if the FJs were always hard (lets say 25% expected correct), the leaders should always sit on their lead as the best way to win. That really wouldn’t be very exciting. In fact, if the percentage could be estimated consistently, the betting stategy would become predictable and speculation of the difficulty of the category would prove irrelevant. That variation is one thing that makes this game more interesting than a quiz bowl.
I had the same assumption. Then I realized how easy the FJ questions have been lately. Never gave it much thought as far as betting strategy but I think your observation really sheds a light on this topic for me. Thanks!
I know, it seems like a paradigm shift, right? You are so very welcome, and thank you for posting.
@Eric, There was a category tonight that covered the universe. I wonder if Jeff was sitting in the audience watching since he will probably play either tomorrow or later in the week. I bet he wish that he was playing tonight with that category on the board.
I think that he didn’t see it because he was in the green room.
Nope. The rest of the week’s contestants are in the audience–sequestered in their own section, sitting nervously, trying not to freak out.
When Jesse was here, he told us that he drank a lot of water and soda, then did some pushups to calm himself: that must have all happened before any taping then?
@Jerome, thanks. Will watch tonight.
So you were undoubtedly right, Jacob. But now I’m thinking that if I could see the other contestants, why not try to see their reactions to categories?
Of course, I would’ve advocated a much higher wager on the second (middle) DD. There is always a good amount of board left, so losing the lead is not catastrophic and adding a solid amount to your lead can make other players panic. In this case, he was “mowing this category down hard”, so 5000 (or even more, if it was a dream category) would seem about right. This is the part of the game where the really great players make the other players play their game.
And the way he took command at that point, I really did think he was going to go with a big bet.
Yet again we see the leader offer a tie. Yes, too bad Anna didn’t bite: she should have, as betting enough to barely take the lead (if Ed was wrong) would’ve put her below the doubling of third. Thus, she should’ve fired it all.
I do wonder how much AChu’s tie affects the leaders’ betting these days.
Immediately reminded me of what happened last week when that lady had half the leader’s total. Intricacies of game theory are too much for me (and I made a joke about that earlier in the day), but these are the basics.
That was ludicrous: seriously literally unbelievable. This wasn’t anywhere near that, though. This was just not good, made worse by the fact that the leader bet for a tie.
my permanent pet peeve: if you are in second place, bet it all. as i remarked lately, offering a tie by the leader seems to become more and more common. you CAN NOT JUST HOPE THE LEADER GETS IT WRONG AND YOU GET IT RIGHT.
anna simply threw away 28.400. pity. and we have yet another champ.
Betting it all is not always a good idea if you’re in second, it can needlessly open the gate for third.
i agree, eric s. the lady who had 50% and HAD to know the leader would not bet a penny had a meltdown that “ludicrous” does not even begin to describe. but anna, anna,anna…. throwing away 28.400. when you land already in second and have the chance to win or a tie (as was offered so often lately): GO FOR IT! even worse than the leader bet for a tie: she was right and the money was there for the asking, er, betting. yet again, i wish i could read the mind of some contestants when they make their bet for fj. i stand corrected: not just a pity, DOUBLE pity. WRONG wager and RIGHT answer (question, technically). you have to presume the leader gets it right and may wager for a tie.well, she won’t get that chance again.
if you get a chance like that, grab it. i know i would.even if the category seems tough, you never know where you might have heard/seen/read the right response just by a freak coincidence. and the fj category was not outlandish. one should have some idea about one’s government. little did she know it was THAT easy.i did not KNOW it per se, but there was really only one logical answer for me when i read the clue and i was right. i almost think that 90% of just “regular” people would have gotten the s.g. right.don’t contestants play certain scenarios in their head BEFORE they even take the stage? i feel sorry for anna. unfortunately she is the only one to blame for missing to take home the dinero… lloro por anna.
John, I think you’re forgetting the Secret Service stumper of last week.
that secret service triple miss also surprised me very much. i would really think that contestants who make it all the way up there should know the basics of our government (of course you have the occasional canadian player…..) the secret service fj was also rather easy imo, so i was stunned. the s.g. was just a “gimme”. practically a confirmation that players should end up the way they were before fj. it still puzzles me that sometimes everybody gets a relative simple fj (as they should) and at other times everybody strikes out (secret service).
heck, even I (underlined) knew the s.s. offhand and i am just naturalized (although you hear and learn a lot when you are in a country for about 30 years…). the way we were BOMBARDED by the s.g. (especially koop) about smoking, this was a teenage tournament difficulty level fj.
I’m beginning to wonder if this is going to be a weekly event.
Keep in mind that these episodes were taped around the times Arthur Chu’s run aired. Until he came along, no one in season 30 had willingly wagered for the tie. I don’t think it’s fair to criticize Anna for assuming Ed wouldn’t wager for the tie.
It’s also possible she just didn’t like the category, yet wanted to cover a smaller wager out of him. Yes, I know that risks a loss to Ben-Hur, but that’s just another example of taking your life into your own hands, to some extent.
You sir, deserve your Booker’s.
Yeah, betting 1400 or less is very, very conservative, but not without merit. It does eradicate a player, and considering the leader’s assumed range requires further contention.
So, the range is: 0 to 1400, or all-in.
Just for the record, AChu tied the lovely Carolyn Collins on a game that aired on January 29th.
yeah, Jesse Yu said the AChu losing game aired the day after he appeared. The bet to tie strategy had already been in the news quite a while.
In all fairness to Keith, AChu actually had three small runs. The tie, although it occurred early, might not have been brought into the spotlight until later, upon a review.
OK. All I know is I had some of AChu’s bet to tie games posted before Jesse’s game was taped. I know the post itself (link) says it was put up 3/12 — but that’s just the last time it was updated. I was keeping track of it much earlier.
I forgot how Tom disliked Chuck Forrest. You know, just because the game is a runaway, it doesn’t mean it can’t still end in a tie. That could be a nice discussion: if the leader likes the category, why (perhaps, if the same favorable conditions apply) not? Huge paydays!!