Alex Trebek suffers 'minor heart attack'

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (121 of them)

Z S, Tuesday, 9 November 2010 02:40 (3 years ago) Permalink

I heard he was a total lush!

Flavors: Onions and other flavors (Abbbottt), Tuesday, 9 November 2010 02:41 (3 years ago) Permalink

Know what the Jeopardy! archive should contain, are lists of his question (technically, answer) responses in the affirmative. Any old Jeopardy! viewer can notice that Trebek won't merely regurgitate "correct" after every correct answer. But only the truly astute among us have observed that his alternatives to "correct" are as varied as they are plentiful. "Yep," "uh huh," "that's the one," etc. Obviously there is a finite supply, of which these are but a few, but because Trebek produces such a robust vocabulary of these utterances designed to signify the contestant has answered correctly, it appears, to the casual observer, that they are rarely repeated. It is unlikely, for example, that you would ever hear a "that's right" followed immediately by another, or for that matter, consecutive "you got its." So, unless it can proven that Trebek is naturally a statistical anomaly with the ability to maintain a remarkable adherence to some statistical measure of random distribution, I assume his writers are rightfully credited with this phenomenon. And if indeed the writers are responsible, they should be archiving this shit. It's incredible.

del griffith, Tuesday, 9 November 2010 03:08 (3 years ago) Permalink

glengarry glenn danzig (latebloomer), Tuesday, 9 November 2010 03:19 (3 years ago) Permalink

Not quite as great as the 'drunk' video but:

EveningStar (Sund4r), Tuesday, 9 November 2010 04:18 (3 years ago) Permalink

"that's the one"

I LOVE when he says that

Z S, Tuesday, 9 November 2010 04:20 (3 years ago) Permalink

Z S, Tuesday, 9 November 2010 05:07 (3 years ago) Permalink

8 months pass...

Back and kicking ass (but also tearing tendons).

Ned Raggett, Thursday, 28 July 2011 03:48 (2 years ago) Permalink

not sure quite why, but something about him has always bugged me sooo much, like to the point where i find it hard to watch the show

dell (del), Thursday, 28 July 2011 03:53 (2 years ago) Permalink

It's his utter inability to feign the slightest interest in the interviewing-the-contestants segment. Every single show there's a supremely awkward moment.

shake it, shake it, sugary pee (Tarfumes The Escape Goat), Thursday, 28 July 2011 03:54 (2 years ago) Permalink

del, you and i are hella different dels, dog.

del griffith, Thursday, 28 July 2011 03:55 (2 years ago) Permalink

9 months pass...

Trebek is 71. The past three decades have passed by in a blur, he says. He wanted to be many different things when he was growing up — actor, doctor, prime minister — but somehow ended up doing what he’s doing: presiding over five tapings every Tuesday and Wednesday, arriving at work at noonish and returning by 6 or 6:30 p.m. to his mansion in Studio City, his wife of 22 years and his 91-year-old mother. He spends the rest of the week traveling (he’s been to every continent except Australia), devouring television (“The Borgias” and “Law & Order” marathons) and books (he recently bristled at the iffy merits of Bill O’Reilly’s “Killing Lincoln”). He mentions, as he has in previous interviews, that he likes to fix his property’s aging sprinkler system. L.A.’s gurgly water pressure — which varies from 105 to 155 pounds per square inch, he says — strains the system’s old rubber diaphragms. Trebek talks about the sprinklers like Lennie talks about the rabbits or Norman Thayer talks about the loons on Golden Pond.

Ned Raggett, Monday, 30 April 2012 05:34 (2 years ago) Permalink

I cannot host as my wife hates Walker (latebloomer), Monday, 30 April 2012 07:27 (2 years ago) Permalink

9 months pass...

Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 19:40 (1 year ago) Permalink

This was a great tournament -- Leonard's huge comeback was great.

HuffPo Sideboob/Underboob Bureau Chief (WilliamC), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 19:53 (1 year ago) Permalink

It was great, but Leonard botched the math - if Nilai gets Eisenhower, he wins, right? That's a 14,000 swing and gets him to 40,400, 400 pust Leonard. The bet 0 and write "I just won 70k" move would've looked really foolish if he had lost.

Panaïs Pnin (The Yellow Kid), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:02 (1 year ago) Permalink

That one match that ended without a winner was pretty funny.

Trip Maker, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:04 (1 year ago) Permalink

But he didn't, so...

xp

Ulna (Nicole), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:04 (1 year ago) Permalink

he did singlehandedly make the teen tournament entertaining, which I usually dislike watching (I schedule my workouts around Jeopardy, damnit). I love the contestants that aren't afraid to get a few wrong.

frogbs, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:25 (1 year ago) Permalink

the fact that he could have still lost makes it all the more badass

frogbs, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:28 (1 year ago) Permalink

Was totally rooting for Leonard. The everyone-at-zero game was weird enough, but for Leonard to not only bet $18k on a Daily Double, but to also be all "Hi, I just won" on Final was brilliant.

The guy next to him was kind of hilarious, frantically flailing around with his buzzer and shouting all his responses.

Tarfumes The Escape Goat, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:34 (1 year ago) Permalink

I love the contestants that aren't afraid to get a few wrong.

My impression is that smart Jeopardy gameplay involves not guessing if you're not 100% sure of the answer. Barrett, the Young Republican guy in the final, had his momentum stalled several times in the final with wrong guesses, especially the Bible category in day 1.

xp -- that was Barrett, I couldn't stand that unctuous toadying shit.

HuffPo Sideboob/Underboob Bureau Chief (WilliamC), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:38 (1 year ago) Permalink

in a vacuum, shouldn't it be correct to guess if you're 51% sure of the answer?

frogbs, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:41 (1 year ago) Permalink

nope

Ima R.A.E.D. (DJP), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:44 (1 year ago) Permalink

it's just poor strategy; if you don't know the answer, you can't be penalized if you don't guess, whereas if you guess and get it wrong you are definitely penalized

basically it's SAT test strategy mapped onto a game show

Ima R.A.E.D. (DJP), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:45 (1 year ago) Permalink

It's a math equation - say you're 60% sure of the answer and the question is worth $1000.

Getting it right (1000 x .60) vs. getting it wrong (-1000 x .40) ~ an EV of +$200 for guessing

Plus, buzzing in gives you a few additional seconds to get the answer...

frogbs, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:48 (1 year ago) Permalink

Z S, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:51 (1 year ago) Permalink

I'm always buzzing in for alec trebek ;)

乒乓, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:54 (1 year ago) Permalink

I love Leonard!! Barrett was THE WORST. UGH.

go to party leather (ENBB), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:54 (1 year ago) Permalink

that gif

:C (crüt), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:57 (1 year ago) Permalink

It's a math equation - say you're 60% sure of the answer and the question is worth $1000.

Getting it right (1000 x .60) vs. getting it wrong (-1000 x .40) ~ an EV of +$200 for guessing

Plus, buzzing in gives you a few additional seconds to get the answer...

hmmmmm...this makes sense to me IF jeopardy was, as you said, played in a vaccuum - with no other players competing. because when you incorrectly answer in jeopardy, you're not just losing $1000 (or whatever), but it's very likely that another player will buzz in and correctly answer and GAIN $1000, meaning that there was a $2000 net loss.

Z S, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:58 (1 year ago) Permalink

i'm glad i saw this thread, because when i was making that gif (many months ago), it got me thinking about making a series of vibrating chest hair gifs. they take a long time to make but they're so satisfying

Z S, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:59 (1 year ago) Permalink

chalk that up under the heading "posts I never thought I would read"

Ima R.A.E.D. (DJP), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:00 (1 year ago) Permalink

don't even get me started on the other kinds of hairs

Z S, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:05 (1 year ago) Permalink

all strangely satisfying

Z S, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:05 (1 year ago) Permalink

hmmmmm...this makes sense to me IF jeopardy was, as you said, played in a vaccuum - with no other players competing. because when you incorrectly answer in jeopardy, you're not just losing $1000 (or whatever), but it's very likely that another player will buzz in and correctly answer and GAIN $1000, meaning that there was a $2000 net loss.

well what I meant was, you have to keep the other players' scores in mind. like if you're at $20000 and 2nd place has $8000, you should guess a lot less, and vice versa if you're way behind. but what you're saying doesn't really figure in, because if you just don't answer and another contestant gets the answer, you're still looking at a $1000 net loss by that math.

frogbs, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:07 (1 year ago) Permalink

Barret was actually a robot project of Tagg Romney's.

Tarfumes The Escape Goat, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:09 (1 year ago) Permalink

funnily enough I was just reading this

On Being Blue (Da Ba Dee): A Philosophical Inquiry (wins), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:16 (1 year ago) Permalink

the 18k bet was a good move because the daily double was on the 2nd row (questions get harder the lower down the board they are). i don't think they put daily doubles on the first row, so that was the easiest possible daily double to get, so might as well bet it all.

Philip Nunez, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:17 (1 year ago) Permalink

I like Barrett. I'm clearly only ever going to (fantasy) date Republicans.

Zero Dark 33⅓: The Final Insult (Eric H.), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:19 (1 year ago) Permalink

he did singlehandedly make the teen tournament entertaining, which I usually dislike watching (I schedule my workouts around Jeopardy, damnit). I love the contestants that aren't afraid to get a few wrong.

― frogbs, Wednesday, February 13, 2013 8:25 PM (58 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

did you see the ep last week where the kids were betting like insane gamblers and everyone ended up with $0?

panettone for the painfully alone (mayor jingleberries), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:25 (1 year ago) Permalink

That was hilarious -- a semifinal match with nobody going to the final. If any bit of tv deserved the sadtrombone, that was it.

HuffPo Sideboob/Underboob Bureau Chief (WilliamC), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:29 (1 year ago) Permalink

i did not but i do think that contestants are maybe too conservative on Daily Doubles in general.

frogbs, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:30 (1 year ago) Permalink

but what you're saying doesn't really figure in, because if you just don't answer and another contestant gets the answer, you're still looking at a $1000 net loss by that math.

ooooh, you're right. so let me do it again, then, assuming a 2-player version of Jeopardy, and an 60% chance that you know the correct answer, and an 60% chance that your opponent knows the answer

Deciding not to answer
Opponent gets it right (-1000 x .6) vs. Opponent gets it wrong (+1000 x .4) + an EV of $-200, relevant to your opponent, for choosing not to answer

Deciding to answer
You answer the question correctly (1000 x .6) vs. You answer the question incorrectly and your opponent answers correctly (-2000 x .24) vs. You answer the question incorrectly and your opponent answers incorrectly (0 x .16) ~ + an EV of $120, relevant to your opponent, for choosing to answer.

so you're right, the correct choice would seem to be choosing to answer, even if you're only 60% sure.

Z S, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:32 (1 year ago) Permalink

relevant = relative, fuck

also, this doesn't take into consideration the possibilities that a)you decide not to answer, the opponent answers incorrectly, and then you hop in with the correct answer (2000 x .?), and b)you answer the question incorrectly and the opponent decides not to answer (-1000 x .?)

Z S, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:33 (1 year ago) Permalink

Exactly - the point I was trying to make though is that if you penalize the guesser because their opponent would then get it right and "double" the loss, then you also have to give them credit for getting it right and not letting the opponent even try. As a whole, your opponents are going to average way in the positive on questions you don't answer so if anything I'd think that's more incentive for just guessing, especially when you figure it over a 3 player game.

frogbs, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:45 (1 year ago) Permalink

with three players there's more incentive to let the other two duke it out if you're not reasonably sure.

Philip Nunez, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:48 (1 year ago) Permalink

I can see why since "net +" is really hard to calculate w/ 3 players but I still don't see why you wouldn't want to answer anything you were more than 50% sure of. I'm saying that if not answering/getting it wrong results in a big net$+ for an opponent then it seems to suggest that answering even when you're at like 45% is correct. Like in Z S's example, it would be more in favor of guessing if your opponent was more than 60% to get the question right. Your average Jeopardy contestant can get like 70-75% (according to Ken Jennings' book, that is) and you can't assume that YOU being "only" 60% to get it means your opponents are.

frogbs, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:53 (1 year ago) Permalink

how do you calculate on the fly if you're more than 50% sure of an answer? you're treating that like it's a real statistic instead of just meaning "i think i know the answer but i'm not confident about it"

congratulations (n/a), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:55 (1 year ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.