> On Nov 12, 2015, at 8:19 AM, Joe Hass <[email protected]> wrote: > > 2. This situation brings to mind (for me) one of the fundamental flaws of > Jeopardy v2: the "dollar values" are purely metaphorical unless you win. You > have to play to win, which makes Final Jeopardy into much more of a > mathematical problem than it should be.
I assume you know this, but in case anyone else reading is unaware: on the original version, they apparently had a fair amount of contestants who would come in with a certain dollar amount in mind (saying to themselves, for example, “I’ll win $400 to get that new hi-fi system I’ve had my eye on"), and would get to that amount of money and then just not ring in for the rest of the show. The idea of only the daily winner being allowed to keep their monetary winnings on the Trebek version was specifically to avoid that type of scenario, to keep all three contestants involved until the end of the episode. > I've had an idea on how to "adjust" Jeopardy v2 to bring back that risk, but > I want to run it against actual data to see how it'd affect the cash payout. I’d be very interested in what you come up with. -- Jim Ellwanger <[email protected]> <http://www.ellwanger.tv> -- -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
