The answer: This Canadian game show host, age 67, has probably had loads of botox.
The question?
― Z S, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 02:05 (5 years ago) Permalink
Who is Avril Lavigne?
― Abbott, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 02:06 (5 years ago) Permalink
No, I'm sorry, the answer is Al Dubois.
― Z S, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 02:10 (5 years ago) Permalink
I couldn't see the forest for du bois.
― Abbott, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 02:13 (5 years ago) Permalink
WHO IS al dubois, bitchez
― mookieproof, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 02:16 (5 years ago) Permalink
How much did you risk? All of it?
― Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 02:19 (5 years ago) Permalink
― latebloomer, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 02:31 (5 years ago) Permalink
Indiana Trebek and the Poorly Chosen Question
― Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 02:32 (5 years ago) Permalink
'X-Files' cameo = anything can be forgiven
― Oilyrags, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 03:06 (5 years ago) Permalink
Ohh, I'm sorry, so sorry. The answer is "Finebaum".
― Pleasant Plains, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 03:16 (5 years ago) Permalink
"Finebaum".
Oh, those jokers at E! Online: "Alex Trebek Jeopardized by Heart Attack"
― clotpoll, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 03:40 (5 years ago) Permalink
the answering-in-the-form-of-a-question thing is such bullshit. It implies that if the game show were in the reverse format it would go like "What is a koala?" "This Australian mammal is known for its affinity for eating eucalyptus leaves, and no, you can't eat it."
― Curt1s Stephens, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 04:40 (5 years ago) Permalink
they don't reverse the questions and answers, they just reverse the form they are said in.
― abanana, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 04:47 (5 years ago) Permalink
my one great regret in life is not getting jeopardy on the tv channels i get.
i would watch it every day.
― s1ocki, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 07:12 (5 years ago) Permalink
I like when someone goes "umm, is it Straviski?" and he's like "sorr-- oh wait, that is in the form of a question!"
― nabisco, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 07:19 (5 years ago) Permalink
Like the accidental questions. It always happens on Daily Doubles, too. I'm surprised more people don't start freewheeling and doing dumb question forms.
― nabisco, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 07:21 (5 years ago) Permalink
Trebek is a quintessential NERD and a know it all who appears smarter than everyone on the program, except he has all the answers! This guy,in real life, would put the dead to sleep! He certainly qualifies to be in politics: full of BS and an empty suit who thinks well of himself! LOSER!!!!!!!!!!
― omar little, Monday, 8 November 2010 23:16 (2 years ago) Permalink
Thank you so much, omar. Now the rest of my life may at last begin.
― Aimless, Tuesday, 9 November 2010 01:56 (2 years ago) Permalink
FUCK YOU "ALEX" "TREBEK"
― Z S, Tuesday, 9 November 2010 02:07 (2 years ago) Permalink
:/
― bloc trebek-quois (donna rouge), Tuesday, 9 November 2010 02:10 (2 years ago) Permalink
I still like this guy!
― 17th Century Catholic Spain (Abbbottt), Tuesday, 9 November 2010 02:11 (2 years ago) Permalink
Wait, I just noticed Trebek rhymes with Quebec. Nothing will ever be the same again.
― Aimless, Tuesday, 9 November 2010 02:12 (2 years ago) Permalink
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/08/mondays-intriguing-people-35/
― my sex drew back into itself tight and dry (abanana), Tuesday, 9 November 2010 02:30 (2 years ago) Permalink
I was just joshing - I think he's probably an ok person. Pat Sajak, on the other hand, seriously, fuck that guy
― Z S, Tuesday, 9 November 2010 02:33 (2 years ago) Permalink
Alex is so subtly snide, I love it.
― Flavors: Onions and other flavors (Abbbottt), Tuesday, 9 November 2010 02:38 (2 years ago) Permalink
Maybe I'm just reading too much into his voiceovers for the PS2 Jeopardy! game. "Oooooh...I'm sorry." You're not sorry, Alex, you snide old fox.
― Flavors: Onions and other flavors (Abbbottt), Tuesday, 9 November 2010 02:39 (2 years ago) Permalink
I love you can tell he's getting fed up with the ineptitude of the contestants. After 3 wrong answers in a row: "....no...."
― Z S, Tuesday, 9 November 2010 02:39 (2 years ago) Permalink
― Z S, Tuesday, 9 November 2010 02:40 (2 years ago) Permalink
I heard he was a total lush!
― Flavors: Onions and other flavors (Abbbottt), Tuesday, 9 November 2010 02:41 (2 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 (2 years ago) Permalink
― glengarry glenn danzig (latebloomer), Tuesday, 9 November 2010 03:19 (2 years ago) Permalink
Not quite as great as the 'drunk' video but:
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Tuesday, 9 November 2010 04:18 (2 years ago) Permalink
"that's the one"
I LOVE when he says that
― Z S, Tuesday, 9 November 2010 04:20 (2 years ago) Permalink
― Z S, Tuesday, 9 November 2010 05:07 (2 years ago) Permalink
Back and kicking ass (but also tearing tendons).
― Ned Raggett, Thursday, 28 July 2011 03:48 (1 year 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 (1 year 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 (1 year ago) Permalink
del, you and i are hella different dels, dog.
― del griffith, Thursday, 28 July 2011 03:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
Still Trebekin'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/alex-trebek-thinking-deep-after-28-seasons-of-jeopardy/2012/04/29/gIQAgi1MqT_story.html?hpid=z4
― Ned Raggett, Monday, 30 April 2012 05:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
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 (1 year ago) Permalink
― I cannot host as my wife hates Walker (latebloomer), Monday, 30 April 2012 07:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
― Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 19:40 (3 months 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 (3 months 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 (3 months ago) Permalink
That one match that ended without a winner was pretty funny.
― Trip Maker, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:04 (3 months ago) Permalink
But he didn't, so...
xp
― Ulna (Nicole), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:04 (3 months 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 (3 months ago) Permalink
the fact that he could have still lost makes it all the more badass
― frogbs, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 20:28 (3 months 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 (3 months ago) Permalink
Barret was actually a robot project of Tagg Romney's.
― Tarfumes The Escape Goat, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:09 (3 months 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 (3 months 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 (3 months 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 (3 months 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
― 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 (3 months 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 (3 months 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 (3 months 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 answerOpponent 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 answerYou 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 $120, relevant to your opponent, for choosing to answer.
so you're right, the correct choice would seem to be choosing to answer, even if you're only 60% sure.
― Z S, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:32 (3 months ago) Permalink
relevant = relative, fuck
also, this doesn't take into consideration the possibilities that a)you decide not to answer, the opponent answers incorrectly, and then you hop in with the correct answer (2000 x .?), and b)you answer the question incorrectly and the opponent decides not to answer (-1000 x .?)
― Z S, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:33 (3 months ago) Permalink
Exactly - the point I was trying to make though is that if you penalize the guesser because their opponent would then get it right and "double" the loss, then you also have to give them credit for getting it right and not letting the opponent even try. As a whole, your opponents are going to average way in the positive on questions you don't answer so if anything I'd think that's more incentive for just guessing, especially when you figure it over a 3 player game.
― frogbs, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:45 (3 months ago) Permalink
with three players there's more incentive to let the other two duke it out if you're not reasonably sure.
― Philip Nunez, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:48 (3 months ago) Permalink
I can see why since "net +" is really hard to calculate w/ 3 players but I still don't see why you wouldn't want to answer anything you were more than 50% sure of. I'm saying that if not answering/getting it wrong results in a big net$+ 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 (3 months 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 (3 months ago) Permalink
"frogbs, how did you score a zero in Jeopardy!?""I was so busy calculating the probability that I knew the answer that I forget to buzz in ;_;"
― Ima R.A.E.D. (DJP), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:56 (3 months ago) Permalink
you just activate your Terminator HUD and have it calculate the probability really quickly
― Z S, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:57 (3 months ago) Permalink
Basically, in addition to the standard EV of guessing something you're more than 50% on, getting it right also deprives your opponents of answering, which is a hidden bonus.
― frogbs, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 21:57 (3 months ago) Permalink
my jeopardy strategy if I ever get on would be to just to eat a lot of taco bell the night before and then fart a lot and hope that it distracts the opponents enough to give me the edge
ideally I would be in the center position
― 乒乓, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 22:00 (3 months ago) Permalink
"um, can i have the center position?""why?""....*fart*"
― Z S, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 22:01 (3 months ago) Permalink
with more people, the more likely it is that one of them does know the correct answer. if the other two are about evenly matched, they'll cancel out each other while you steeple your hands and murmur "excellent" in your best burns voice.
― Philip Nunez, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 22:02 (3 months ago) Permalink
ken jennings' secret is finally revealed. no wonder he couldn't beat a computer.
― Z S, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 22:02 (3 months ago) Permalink
Given what Ken writes in Brainiac I think that people who compete probably have a good sense of it. I agree that in most situations this kind of math is useless because for most questions it's either you're 98%+ sure or can't offer anything but a wild guess (and Jennings does talk a bit about how trivia contestants do this). I definitely think there are questions for which a contestant has an answer in mind but isn't totally sure and I'm arguing they should go for it anyway. There are also questions for which a contestant doesn't know the answer right away but can figure it out with the extra 3-4 seconds that buzzing in gives you. Certain categories that feature wordplay are pretty good for this.
― frogbs, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 22:03 (3 months ago) Permalink
a lot of questions also lend themselves to being narrowed down by the two chumps who answer ahead of you. like "this stooge was the stoogiest of the three stooges"
― Philip Nunez, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 22:07 (3 months ago) Permalink
on average, how many answers do the contestants whiff on every show?
― frogbs, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 22:07 (3 months ago) Permalink
the amount of whiffing depends on whether or not dayo is the center contestant
― Z S, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 22:08 (3 months ago) Permalink
Hubris is a bitch. Barrett was so sure he was right on a lot of those wrong answers...his jaw-drop reactions were satisfying.
xp to no-one in particular
― HuffPo Sideboob/Underboob Bureau Chief (WilliamC), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 22:09 (3 months ago) Permalink
speaking of that reminds me of a pretty infuriating episode where a Double Jeopardy category was "Also a chess piece". All the answers were chess pieces which means there were only 6 possible answers. The first four were hit, then the last was a Daily Double. Meaning there's only two possible answers left, and you have the entire clue to go off of. And yet the contestant only wagered like $3000 instead of their whole stack. I mean I know that guessing wrong sucks but you have to think you're 90% or more to get that one right.
― frogbs, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 22:09 (3 months ago) Permalink
"But Rush Limbaugh told me it was like this!"
― Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 22:12 (3 months ago) Permalink
― 乒乓, Wednesday, 13 February 2013 22:18 (3 months ago) Permalink