Will that guy on Jeopardy ever lose?

for the hive, right

you do still have to beat people on buzzer races, which you don't if they're eliminated

sure, but you're going to have to beat someone on buzzer races in the next taping - it shouldnt matter to you if its current contestant A or next taping hopeful B

between the three week break and all the press this has gotten i wonder if someone will try to flip this strategy back on him when they come back

yeah this is interesting to me - other players knowing you are aggressively hunting for the daily doubles means they should be doing the same, but other players knowing you are 'playing for the tie' makes wagering potentially trickier for contestants going into final jeopardy in second place.

Also I'm having a pretty hard day. I had just bought this big ice cream cone and, just as I was about to have some, it fell off the cone and onto the ground before I could lick, balls then asked that question, so I was pretty ornery in my response. I'm sorry

― 龜, Wednesday, February 5, 2014 10:28 AM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this post has the most important comma of all time

I do agree that Arthur's APM is impressive compared to the rest (only true Azn nerds will get this joke)

dont front like you even

Kekekekeke

lol you seriously think 'this guy plays the game in a way that is beneficial to him but ruins the experience for much of the audience and comes across as against the spirit of the game' has been 'knocked down' but 'america has never seen an asian nerd on jeopardy before and is in a panic' stands up? which while not denying dude is asian and a nerd he hardly fits the stereotype of the asian nerd, you might want to revisit sixteen candles and revenge of the nerds again. anyone who applies game theory or really any kind of counterintuitive strategizing to a non-academic arena (ESP an actual game, where winning is the point on a micro level but entertainment is the point on a macro level)(hence alot of ppl bitching about moneyball in the early 00s not cuz they thought it didn't work but cuz it made for boring fucking baseball even by baseball's standards).

C'mon balls are you really trying to lecture me about the asian nerd stereotype. You're really showing your age grandpa if you think that the current version still references Sixteen Candles

Actually as the starter of the LONG DUK DONG thread I'm not even sure what the fuck you're talking about - that stereotype had nothing to do with nerdiness

As someone who's been the butt of more asian nerd jokes than you have ever been, I'll tell you to politely sit down and have a seat and please refrain from posting again in this thread. Thank you, balls.

as someone who's actually deployed asian nerd jokes in my life i'll not so politely recommend the next time you want to post on a subject make it something you were familiar w/ at least an hour before yr post.

i mean i get you're going for an asian mordy thing and it's cute, everybody should have a role model, but mordy actually does the reading at least, there's the potential that he'll post something useful. you're just lex crossed w/ david brooks social scientist.

Bet that's not all you do to gooks, you fucking asshole.

enjoy yr ice cream.

d this dude is way more /u/fedora than an 'asian nerd stereotype'

he does voice work for commercials and tweets about 'haters' i mean cmon

hey hey hey hey hey

why yall gotta be like that

too many cichlids in the tank

龜 otm

I'm with 龜 - given that it's been repeatedly established that nothing "show-ruining" this guy does hasn't been done before (many times), and that he hasn't even been on that many episodes or anything, then it being a "news story" is worth interrogating. Sure yeah, could generally be that stories with a supposed "game theory" hook have a resonance in 2014 that they wouldn't have in 1986 or whatever. But why not allow that the narrative of "guy is intense about a secret strategy, doesn't get that it's all about the game, mannnn" maps directly onto "socially maladjusted nerd" which maps right onto Asian stereotypes coterminous with "not normal, not one of us"...I mean it's not such a stretch.

I was also wondering if maybe some of the media outlets have Jeopardy ties - slow news week plus hype up a co-brand. Sorta like how every third story on cnn.com these days is about movies Netflix is adding or removing.

Has it been established that the tying strategy has been done before many times? Category-hopping is old, apparently, but the tying strategy supposedly comes from the Final Wager blog.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7J3Ewo_H9M

pretty awesome interview - looks like he's neither intense nor keeping his strategy a secret at all...recommends blogs, etc

kinda boggling at while not denying dude is asian and a nerd he hardly fits the stereotype of the asian nerd. is the idea that people who make fun of asian nerds are really discriminating about which asian nerds they have a problem with? that if you talk like john cho nobody'd call you Data?

I imagine the show pays both contestants in that case and thus the producers are probably not too happy about this.

Oh yeah, I didn't think about that but it basically means he's giving the other player thousands of dollars. If you look at it that way, wagering the extra dollar is a dick move.

maybe arthur has a backstage deal with the other players to let them tie and then he gets 30% of their cut

the fact that people normally wager an amount that's just above what it takes to beat someone else in final jeopardy, when there is no incentive to knock them out, is basically a hole in the game that should probably be addressed if they actually intended only one person to be able to win

i feel like first we should address the deeper problems with family feud, like the one where none of the rounds matter except for the triple-score round

if you take the first three then you're at least going to sudden death

what makes it worse is that they need to ensure that the triple-score round scores enough to either win (or that it + one sudden death question = 300) so they totally front load it. it's always "top 4 answers" where the top answer is worth like 75. so not only is the top answer usually something very obxious but it only leaves a few difficult ones, meaning the 'steal' team is likely guessing at just one answer. in other words Family Feud can be 'gamed' simply by placing your quickest draw in the 4th postion.

i mean i bet there is a real strong coorelation between the winning team and the team that buzzed in first on triple-score

kinda boggling at while not denying dude is asian and a nerd he hardly fits the stereotype of the asian nerd. is the idea that people who make fun of asian nerds are really discriminating about which asian nerds they have a problem with? that if you talk like john cho nobody'd call you Data?

― da croupier, Wednesday, February 5, 2014 3:44 PM (2 hours ago)

obviously the way he talks and his self-confidence are inconsistent with the "asian nerd" stereotype, this isn't hard to grasp

i feel like first we should address the deeper problems with family feud, like the one where none of the rounds matter except for the triple-score round

― Karl Malone, Wednesday, February 5, 2014 5:26 PM (55 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yeah ive always thought how fucked up this is

Actually as the starter of the LONG DUK DONG thread...

Argh people kept saying you weren't you and I thought you'd disappeared! Damn these pranksters.

And to keep on topic, whenever I play any sort of video game version of jeopardy I am always hunting around for the daily double, it kills me when contestants stick to the top down format, or even worse, pick $200 questions when you know time is about to run out and there are thousand dollar questions left. Use your brains, morans.

obviously the way he talks and his self-confidence are inconsistent with the "asian nerd" stereotype, this isn't hard to grasp

no, what's apparently hard to grasp is that when people dare to suggest the undue negative attention someone is getting for daring to google "jeopardy strategies" could stem from racism, pointing out that they don't epitomize the racist stereotype gives an awful lot of credit to racists.

what undue negative attention - there's like four thinkpieces on arthur chu (though that number will rise thank you internet hegemony) and the takes they have have been either this guy is a genius using game theory on jeopardy or this guy is a douchebag using game theory on jeopardy. i've yet to read a this guy is a modern day fu manchu using ancient chinese secrets on jeopardy. btw this split 'genius/douchebag' response is pretty uniform for any person who comes up w/ an innovation (or just decides to use someone elses like arthur chu or billy beane) that pits the individual motivation within the game (you play to win the game) against the group motivation for the game (entertainment, increased efficiency and innovation in the economy, general good times). everybody here has played a game w/ someone who were ultracompetitive and took the game too seriously and ruined the fun of the game. when friends had 'fun' w/ this type w/ monica they weren't indulging in antisemitic stereotypes (as far as i know, maybe i'm wrong, will the real slim mordy plz stand up). if you want to find what a definite racist response to this kind of behavior looks like go back two weeks. personally i love this kind of douchebag behavior. you play to win the game.

The Kotaku bit of this guy goes into how his aspiration is to be a game voice-actor, which is a nice touch.

http://kotaku.com/meet-the-man-who-hacked-jeopardy-1516792430

balls, did you watch that interview with him? how is he being a douchebag? i think you answered your own question ("what undue negative attention?") right there.

obv some people just hate moneyball too, so if you wanna be the guy scoffing that race could possibly play a part fine. Still, "but he speaks so well!" is asinine logic for that claim.

wait do you seriously not understand how someone making something designed to be entertaining less entertaining might come off as a douchebag???

wait do you still think that asian nerds don't get shit unless they resemble long duk dong???

i mean do you seriously think 'great - some asshole is using fucking game theory to win a trivia game' = 'richard sherman is a thug who set his race back 500 years'???

no i didn't make that false equivalency

now you answer my question

wait do you still think that asian nerds don't get shit unless they resemble long duk dong???

― da croupier

i never thought this, do you still beat yr wife?

then why did you say which while not denying dude is asian and a nerd he hardly fits the stereotype of the asian nerd, you might want to revisit sixteen candles and revenge of the nerds again. ?

bummer for the guy in the 2nd kotaku clip (final jeopardy) who writes down "equalivency" and alex can't even figure out what word he was going for

also, if he's genuinely making the show "less entertaining" it's pretty ironic that this is, like, viral news

Man makes watching jeopardy even less fun than usual! (See Clip)

again i've seen three thinkpieces on this dude so far in kotaku, business insider, the fucking new republic and each of them have been the same fluff piece saying 'look at this dude using game theory to win at jeopardy. here's how he does it. some ppl hate it cuz it makes watching the show less entertaining. entertainment ostensibly being the reason they produce and televise the show.' lex brooks said it was impossible ppl might think someone using game theory in nonacademic setting is a douchebag and that the only reason ppl could have for thinking someone using game theory in a nonacademic setting is a douchebag is anti-asian nerd racism. i pointed out that chu is an asian nerd but that i hadn't seen any evidence that ppl found his method of gameplay made watching the game less entertaining cuz he was asian but i had found evidence that ppl found his method of gameplay made watching the game less entertaining cuz this is an extremely common reaction to ppl using game theory in a nonacademic setting or just ppl using nonintuitive strategies to win a game - it feels like cheating to them and it makes the person who does it look like a douchebag. again if someone actually wants to make that argument i'll listen to it, but don't make that argument some david brooks malcolm gladwell method come to the conclusion first then gather evidence and if not enough evidence exists to support yr conclusion disqualify any evidence that contradicts it on the basis of yr emotions. or if you do don't expect me to not call you out as a lazy thinker and fraud. as if it needed calling out.

croup (or lex brooks if he's finished his ice cream) do you actually think arthur chu is some asian nerd stepin fetchit figure?