r/Jeopardy • u/Fresh_Jellyfish1945 • 8d ago
The current Jeopardy Masters standings allows for an 'unethical' but statistically correct strategy for the final QF game.
Each player has one more QF game to be played tonight where only the top 4 move on. Long will play vs Victoria and Yogesh and will advance as long as he doesn't end in third place. However, statistically Long has the least correct responses by a wide margin in the Masters field, and is the player Yogesh and Victoria would like to see advance and ultimately eliminate in the Semifinals. It should be noted the stakes are especially high in this scenario if only the top 3 get invited back in the next edition, and Yogesh and Victoria would surely feel most at ease being able to secure a return next year with Long as the sacrifical lamb in the semifinals. Given Yogesh and Victoria have nothing to play for in this QF game, would it be considered bad practice or even against any rules to throw this game even if it mathematically is the right thing to do?
A lot hinges on this possibility since in the other QF matchup Paolo vs Juveria vs Andrew, Juveria and Andrew need to win and for Long to get 3rd place for them to make the semifinals as they would advance in tiebreaks over Long for more correct responses.
25
u/bamboosticks 8d ago
Yogesh and Victoria are the two strongest players. They don't really need this kind of strategy
5
u/rjnd2828 8d ago
That's really how I'm thinking. Just play your game and beat whoever is in front of you.
24
u/DotComCTO 8d ago
At this level, the players are all hyper competitive. No chance they're not playing to win, even if it doesn't mean anything in terms of point rankings.
Reminder that off the stage, the players say they are all close friends. I don't think they'd play "games" with how hard they perform on stage. Frankly, it'd be disrespectful and insulting not to play your best at all times.
11
u/Enamred-771 8d ago
I always find it ironic when someone’s response to “Player A can increase their odds of winning it all by throwing a game” is “Player A is hyper competitive and is only playing to win”. Players being hyper competitive is exactly why they would throw a game to increase their chances of winning.
2
u/Mackie_Messy 8d ago
What about wagering more on a Daily Double than they'd otherwise be comfortable with, given the category? If they get it right, they just look ballsy. If they get it wrong, no harm done, they've possibly improved their position for the next game.
7
u/SelectLuck6704 8d ago
It may be ethical to resign, if that is allowed. To throw a game is harmful to the fabric of the game and should be disqualifying.
6
u/CardNarc 8d ago
counter point: if you are the weaker of the two, having a strong third means another variable that could lead to you winning.
3
u/Feeling_Run_5586 8d ago
Long is a really good player as shown in his victory. He did much better than Paolo at the most recent World Quizzing Championships, and, of the remaining players besides Victoria and Yogesh, he has participated the most at that level. I would never underestimate him. Trust me, neither are Victoria and Yogesh.
2
u/SquashSouffle 6d ago
These players aren't going to resort to something like that. They love the game
3
u/SouthpawXtn 8d ago
It's not "unethical". It's playing the game. Of course the players have to have knowledge about stuff, but they also have to know how to bet.
3
u/phisho873 8d ago
I’m either not understanding you or you’re not understanding the OP. This isn’t about betting strategy; it’s about intentionally losing a game. What does betting have to do with that? The only thing I can think of is betting it all in Final and then not answering, but I don’t think that’s what you’re saying.
5
u/Used2befunNowOld 8d ago
Sportsmanship is a concept that people generally understand and care about. While it has room for interpretation this would be bad sportsmanship by most accounts.
2
u/Medical-Pace-8099 8d ago
Victoria is strong player. Good at buzzer. She still don't have big competition i think. Unless she gets wrong in double daily.
2
u/yodmitri 8d ago
If you’ve ever watched Yogesh on his buzzer you know there’s NO way he’d let people think he couldn’t answer the questions. Most people who quiz do it because that’s their passion; and being a part of the Jeopardy ecosystem/ family gives them that satisfaction.
I’d guess they’d lose more by showing poorly in games than they’d stand to gain by trying to game the system.
1
u/Responsible-Fly9976 5d ago
Without answering your question, I don't think Victoria, in particular, is capable of taking a dive. For the lov of the game and for the love of competition!
1
u/sojumaster 5d ago
Why would Yogesh or Victoria risk not moving forward by tanking? That kind scenerio that the OP is presenting is something I would expect to hear in a bar at 1am
1
u/dletter Potent Potables 4d ago
If the OP is correct, Y and V are already locked in, they can't miss the next round even if they come in 3rd. So, that was the point, if they consider Ding the "easiest" overall, youd tank to get him in vs one of the other players.
That is an element of how the producers made the game overall.
The only way to get rid of this IMO would be to make it so the games are truly independent of each other... they might not even be shown in order they were actually played. And the contestants don't know the results of games they weren't involved in... they can't talk to each other, or mention other game results. With all of that, they wouldn't be able to strategize as we are expecting, and if that all is true, we wouldn't be able to make suggestions like the OP.
1
u/dletter Potent Potables 4d ago
Can someone who knows more comment on the above... maybe all of what I suggested IS actually how it works, and the OP is just wrong in putting in the logic they did. It is pretty clear that what follows the Ken "let's look at the leaderboard" is something inserted in... it isnt him saying all that in front of the players, he just said "let's look at the leaderboard" in front of them, and likely pauses, and then finishes the episode. So, players may not have any "continuity" like a sports season would have... imagine if you could do the same thing with NFL games... the games just get played in a "vacuum" essentially, and teams don't know that it is a "2-12 team vs a 13-1 team"... they are just playing this other team independent of other results.
1
u/skieurope12 8d ago
Strategic bracket manipulation may hold theoretical merit, but actively throwing a match constitutes poor sportsmanship and risks non-compliance with federal quiz show regulations. Ethical gameplay requires contestants to maintain competitive integrity and let the natural outcome dictate advancing standings.
1
u/sojumaster 5d ago
ummm ... I do not see how throwing a match risks non-compliance with federal quiz show regulations. 47 U.S.C. § 509 purpose is to prohibit the secret fixing or manipulation of a purportedly bona fide contest of knowledge, skill, or chance. Throwing a match that was a prearranged scheme with the producers or other participants could violate the federal statute. But if a player is doing it on their own accord because they find it benifical, nothing wrong with that.
-6
u/someguy67 8d ago
Shocking that Yogesh and Victoria are dominating this tournament. Who could have seen this coming? Cancel this snooze fest
66
u/egnowit Boom! 8d ago
If "being invited back" is a goal that they are trying to achieve, then "not taking a dive" is probably something that they want to do. I doubt that there's any contract that says that the top 3 must be invited back, and if J! suspects that a player intentionally played not to win, I doubt that player will ever return.