I believe the guest host charity gets more money depending on the final results? If so, Matt left lots of money on the table for a charity? I may not be understanding how it all works so feel free to correct me on any of this.
James set so many single day records because he typically had runaway games (couldn’t be caught) and he pretty much always risked as much as he could in Final Jeopardy without risking a loss if he got the final wrong. Matt bets big when he can but not necessarily precise max bets.
If I have $5k going into the final and you have $15k, you can bet $4,999 with no risk of losing if you get it wrong and I get it right. If I have $1k and you have $25k going into the final, you can risk $22,999 with no risk of losing.
So far, $2,747,026 has been donated by the show to the various charities. $401,600 of that total has been donated during Matt’s 11 games. Looking at his first 10 games (2 weeks of shows), total donated to charities was $392,400. Highest total for any guest host in terms of charity contributions was about $270,000 (also for 2 weeks). Had Matt gotten the last question right, charities would have gotten $74,000 more they they have to date. Charities during Matt’s run have done better than any other charities during the guest host runs.
Matt is a great champion and sounds local to you? How does that work with the charities? I guess I thought that what he did today might have affected David Faber’s charities, not the others?
Each guest host picks a charity for his week/2 weeks. However much is earned by all 3 contestants is given to that charity (so champs’ money and $1000 for last place and $2000 for second).
Yes, when Matt bet and lost today, David Faber’s charity lost too, but it is never really the charity’s until the champ wins it. Just like the 2nd and 3rd place people may rack up $20k and $21k, but the charity only gets $1000 and $2000 if the champ earns more and wins.
This is Faber’s charity.
I believe that CNBC has supported Robin Hood through the years. It has a big Wall St following.
So, Matt knew he was playing for Faber’s charity specifically when he essentially bet it all? I’m still confused then about why he would do that? I do wonder if I must be misunderstanding how all that works.
Who is the new Jeopardy host?
New Jeopardy! host: reports (fox8.com)
He does that all the time and usually wins. Last night his luck ran out.
3 Likes
Matt went to a high school that is essentially down the road from me. So in a sense he is local. But my interest in Jeopardy goes way beyond having a local champ (Arthur Chu–another long time but somewhat unpopular champ–was also local).
In terms of the charities, I understand that the amounts won by the contestants (including $2k and $1k for second and third place) during each guest hosts time on the show (2 weeks for early hosts and 1 week for most recent ones) are donated to that guest host’s chosen charity. So whatever was won last week with LeVar for his charity does not impact what is won this week for Faber’s charity. My point wasn’t charity specific. Just looking at what has been given to the charities during Matt’s current run.
As someone else noted, the charities aren’t entitled to anything. They don’t receive anything until the check is received. And until then, the money isn’t theirs so there is nothing for the charties to lose.
And I don’t think the contestants are necesarily thinking about the charities when playing the game. They are making wagers that they think give them the best chance to win and win as much as possible for themselves. There are betting strategies for Final Jeopardy (such as if in the lead, up by $x dollars and other contestants having $y and $z dollars, bet $b dollars). I expect most contestants know those rules though likely not all of them. And in the heat of the moment, I am sure its easy to forget them.
Last week, Matt had $44k going into final in a runaway game (he couldn’t be caught unless he pulled a Cliff Clavin). He bet $30k (a lot of money for LeVar’s charity to “lose” just like last night but a somewhat smaller bet). Difference is Matt got the question last week right and ended up with $74k. He has gotten most final questions correct. Expect he was confident he would do so again (and was looking to win $80k on the show last night which I believe would be a record high, non-James game total). Had he gotten last night’s question correct with that wager, he would have been in 4th place in regular season winnings. And would have passed former champs on the winnings list who had 19 and 20 wins. Doubt he was thinking about all of that though.
Sometimes in runaway games, contestants risk small amounts (at least smaller amounts than what they could have risked without risking losing the game if they get the answer wrong). Expect that some of it is not feeling comfortable with the category. Or not wanting to bet big and lose. Or even not wanting to do the math (or risking getting the math wrong). On the kid/teen tournament many years ago, a contestant famously risked nothing on the second day final question but answered something to the effect of “some guy but I just won the tournament.” He hadn’t done the math. One of the other contestants had enough money (that day plus what he had from the day before) to overtake him. But that other contestant got the final question wrong. Had he gotten it right, the answer of “I just won the tournament” would have been famous for a very different reason.
Post-James, many contestants play the game more aggressively than was the norm even 10 years ago. I think it makes the games more interesting.
The champios wins and keeps whatever they win. The charity gets the same amount. So the champ is not “playing for” a charity.
-
580 days visited
-
5.7k posts read
-
958 posts created
…and I’m finally right about something!
4 Likes
I have to brag on myself that I got last night’s question right by simple deduction. My husband was saying French and I said no, Penn. Dutch, lots of Germans emigrated to PA. I came from some of them.
The middle guy who wrote Dutch thought that the Pennsylvania Dutch spoke Dutch. In that case Dutch is a corruption of Deutsche which is German for…German.
2 Likes
Since it became public that Richards is in the front-runner to be the permanent host, stories have surfaced that paint him in a less than favorable light.
One related to discrimination charges against him (and others) while he was involved with The Price is Right.
Another involves whether his guest host spot was an emergency or planned.
There will always be people who try to tear others down.
My guess is that the leak about Mike Richards being named permanent host is a red herring to keep the gossipers distracted while they negotiate with the real permanent host.
1 Like
I don’t think so. I think they found out by this experiment that it’s the unknown who did the best. My favorites were Mike Richards and David from this week. Even voices, didn’t bring anything to the gig so it was all about the contestants and the clues.
Boy, not loving Joe Buck.
1 Like
I actually thought Joe Buck did fine , especially for a first outing. David was very good, very polished.
Thinking Matt is going to be around for awhile!
1 Like
I liked Joe Buck too. These hosts don’t have much to work with these past couple weeks, the winner answers almost every single question.
Joe Buck’s voice is very clear and easy to understand. He was very quick with his answers. He did well with with the pronunciations.
But this is what he does for a living, except that sports move, Jeopardy is a fixed set.
Whether or not you like Joe Buck’s personality probably colors how you view him.
1 Like