James Holzhauer
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: James Holzhauer

  1. #1
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Akirasho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,166

    James Holzhauer

    … "gutsier" than Austin Rogers?


  2. #2
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: JCavilia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    14,675
    I looooove Jeopardy, and I have been enjoying this guy so much. He obviously knows stuff, and has great buzzer reflexes, but his betting is unreal. He went "true daily double" with $29,000 on one play! Last night he got his fifth win the day after the record. In the first round he hit the first Daily Double and bet his entire $12,000, and lost it to go back to zero, and still won the game with $54,000. He has over $298,000 in five games. That's double Ken Jennings's average (but of course, Jennings won 74 games, so there's a long way to go).

    He was a math major, and makes his living betting on sports.
    "None of us knows for sure what's out there; that's why we keep looking. Keep your faith; travel hopefully. The universe will surprise you, constantly." The 13th Doctor.

  3. #3
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Akirasho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,166
    Quote Originally Posted by JCavilia View Post
    I looooove Jeopardy, and I have been enjoying this guy so much. He obviously knows stuff, and has great buzzer reflexes, but his betting is unreal. He went "true daily double" with $29,000 on one play! Last night he got his fifth win the day after the record. In the first round he hit the first Daily Double and bet his entire $12,000, and lost it to go back to zero, and still won the game with $54,000. He has over $298,000 in five games. That's double Ken Jennings's average (but of course, Jennings won 74 games, so there's a long way to go).

    He was a math major, and makes his living betting on sports.
    … his "showmanship" by gesturing as if pushing his chips in the pot is both disturbing and awesome.

    You're right. His buzzer reflex makes some of his opponents look like they're desperately shooting blanks at a charging lion.

  4. #4
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Akirasho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,166
    Last night, he went to $0.00 on a Daily Double and was still uncatchable in Final Jeopardy.

  5. #5
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    819
    The breadth of his knowledge is pretty impressive. I haven't noticed any weaknesses yet. When there are two well-known options to a question he sometimes mixes them up (for instance, if the question was about an electrolyte and the answer is potassium, he might answer sodium instead), indicating a lack of deep knowledge. This is not a knock, it's impossible to have deep knowledge of every subject.

    It seems likely that he's done some extensive studying to cover weaknesses, and, obviously, he's done an incredible job. He probably has a very good memory, and is able to integrate new knowledge with things he already knows. He probably had a pretty wide knowledge base originally.

    He is quick, and quick thinking, and wagers sensibly - which is not something most people do. Most people are far too conservative. It's a bit easier for him, since he's generally so much better than the other players, but his gambling background probably is also an advantage because he fully understands that he's playing with house money.

    His games are definitely fun to watch.

  6. #6
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Akirasho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,166
    Quote Originally Posted by D&MsDad View Post
    It's a bit easier for him, since he's generally so much better than the other players, but his gambling background probably is also an advantage because he fully understands that he's playing with house money.

    His games are definitely fun to watch.
    Your comments seem accurate. While rare, it is odd when he flubs a "gimmie". His wagering style does indicate "nothing to lose" and indeed, with most past players at this level, betting is often conservative in an attempt to maintain a recoverable reserve!

    I'm not great at math but I've always liked the strategy of attacking big money answers first, thus sucking comebacks out of your opponents! He was free and clear so early in Double Jeopardy last night that the last 15-20 answers were anticlimactic and the other players sensed this.

    Makes you wonder how many houses ban him in Vegas.

  7. #7
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    819
    Quote Originally Posted by Akirasho View Post
    I'm not great at math but I've always liked the strategy of attacking big money answers first, thus sucking comebacks out of your opponents! He was free and clear so early in Double Jeopardy last night that the last 15-20 answers were anticlimactic and the other players sensed this.

    Makes you wonder how many houses ban him in Vegas.
    Going for the big money questions first is a great strategy. When you control the choice, it makes sense to go for the big money. If you're like JH, you have a great chance to answer the question and make more money than if you'd chosen a lower value question. Also, if the round ends and there are clues left on the board, they are the lower value clues so you maximize the amount you've made.

    There is some downside: in the first round, the daily double is often in the higher money questions (this is less true in the double jeopardy round, but at least one of the daily doubles is usually in a big money question), so if you hit it you may have less to wager. Also, if it is a "fun" category with a particular way of thinking required to arrive at the answer, then you don't have a chance to figure out the rubric with an easier example. For viewers it is a little less entertaining when players go to the high value questions first, because you miss the build up from easier to harder questions.

    If there is a category you're weak in, when you have control of the board it makes sense to go for the higher dollar amounts in that category as well, so that, if a daily double is hidden there, you either hit it (and wager small), or if someone else hits it they have less accumulated money to wager.

    Wagering strategy is something that Jeopardy contestants are notoriously bad at.

    Remember the ... contestant (I'll be polite) who had exactly double the amount of money accumulated by the 2nd place player, and in final jeopardy he wagered $1 and lost when he got the answer wrong and the 2nd place contestant got it right and beat him by $1? I was yelling imprecations at the TV for a couple of minutes. The ... contestant had just bet $12,000 (or whatever it was) to win $1. If he had bet nothing he was guaranteed to win $12,000 (or whatever it was). He deserved to lose. Idiot. (I didn't say that.)

    Unfortunately, JH is always so far ahead that his wagers in final jeopardy don't matter. It is always a surprise (and a pleasure) when a game comes along where the 2nd and/or 3rd place going into final jeopardy are still in it and make an intelligent wager. This happens about once every three weeks - maybe even less frequently. The strategy for the player in first place going into final jeopardy is obvious, but the strategies for 2nd/3rd place are not, so most people just wager dumb.




    ------------

  8. #8
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    819
    So, wagering strategy in Final Jeopardy: here’s an example.

    Say the contestants going into Final have $10,000, $8,000 and $5,000

    Player #1 wagers enough to beat Player #2 if #2 wagers everything. So, Player #1 wagers $6,001

    Player #2 has to make two assumptions: (a) Player #1 will wager the smart amount (see above – this isn’t always the case, sometimes Player #1 will wager less if they’re not confident in the category, but this is not common); (b) Player #1 will get the answer wrong. Player #2 cannot win if Player #1 wagers as above and gets the answer right, so obviously he has to bet based on the scenario where Player #1 gets the answer wrong.
    If Player #1 gets it wrong, he’ll be down to $3,999. So, Player #2 can wager anything between $0 and $4,000. BUT, Player #2 also has to consider Player #3. The maximum Player #3 can win is $10,000. So, the correct wager for Player #2 is $2,001. #2 wins if he answers correctly, if #1 gets the answer wrong; and regardless if #3 gets the answer right or wrong. #2 also wins if everyone gets the answer wrong.

    Player #3 has to wager based on (a) Player #1 and Player #2 will get the answer wrong; (b) Player #1 will wager $6,001; (c) Player #2 will wager $0 (the maximum amount Player #2 could have if they answer wrong). In this scenario, #1 will have $3,999; #2 will have $8,000; so Player #3 could wager $3,001 to win by $1, but #3 might as well wager everything since he can only win if #1 and #2 are wrong and he is right, so #3 might as well maximize his potential winnings. It doesn’t make sense to play for 2nd place because the difference in $ winnings between 2nd and 3rd place isn’t significant in comparison to the potential winnings for first place. (There are scenarios where Player #3 can make a smart wager that matters, for example if the gap between the players is smaller and #3 could wager less, answer incorrectly and still win if #1 and #2 wager as expected and get the answer wrong.)

    In actual games, in the scenario above Player #2 normally wagers something like $7,999 or a similar stupid amount, and sometimes loses a game he could have won by wagering intelligently. Player #3 will also commonly wager everything but $1.

Similar Threads

  1. Rick James found dead...Biatch
    By thatsmybush in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-09-2004, 08:10 AM
  2. Beware of James Winchester!!
    By crunchyfrog in forum Classifieds Feedback - Scam Warnings
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-28-2004, 02:59 PM
  3. James D. Keller PerformanceBicycleParts
    By yetibetti in forum Classifieds Feedback - Scam Warnings
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-14-2004, 05:04 PM
  4. Clark James Fraud?
    By gary_harper in forum Classifieds Feedback - Scam Warnings
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-25-2004, 05:18 AM
  5. What happened to Henry James Lugs
    By pappy_d in forum General Cycling Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-06-2004, 04:48 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT ROADBIKEREVIEW

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.