[KLUG Members] GJ followup (was Meeting Notes)

[Peter Buxton]

On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 10:13:56AM -0500, Robert G. Brown was only escaped
   alone to tell thee:

> I'll tell ya, Adam, it was a sight to see over at Team A (aka "The
> ex-chairs"), I knew a bunch of answers, but Peter was ON that paddle!
> He was also quite smooth about jumping as soon as he knew the answer,
> and very few of them tailed away and nicked the outside corner....

Doh! I'm blushing!

And thanks for all the kudos, but if you think I'm competitive at Geek
Jeopardy, invite me over to your house for a game of Trivial Pursuit.
It gets ugly. ;-)

> On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 09:30:49 -0500, Adam Williams <adam@morrison-ind.com> wrote:
>
> > Actually more 1024/2048 questions were answer in jest without
> > pushing the button than were actually attempted.  Sigh.
>
> I think by that time the scores were so heavily negative that no one
> wanted to take a flyewr on a 104/2048 question, unless they KNEW the
> answer. We were all several lengths back, and it was a long way to go
> for a first down.

That's true. One problem is that TV's Jeopardy scales geometrically, but
ours scales exponentially. For the one, if you answer all the questions
in a column and miss only the last, you get 1000. In ours you get -4.
That's a killer problem, and contributes to a lack of nerve.

If C == column position:

TV Double Jeopardy, C * 200:

 200
 400
 600
 800
----
2000 - 1000 = 1000

Geek Double Jeopardy, 2**(C + 1):

    4
    8
   16
   32
   64
  128
  256
  512
 1024 
-----
 2044 - 2048 = -4

-- 
Rah! My re-tox weekend has been declared
a success! -- James Coates, 29 Oct 2001.