NO, I HAVEN'T GOTTEN THE CALL YET, BUT ... If you were selected to appear on Jeopardy!, on what subjects would you focus your preparation? (For me: classical music and opera, British monarchs, and Final Jeopardy! wagering strategy.)
Wagering strategy, yes, but it's not all that complicated. Definitely things you can memorize. World & provincial capitals, dates US presidents served, Oscar winners in the major categories, current world leaders, etc. It's difficult to get a good feel for a more amorphous field like history, literature, or classical music -- the kind of feel you need to be able to make an educated guess in those categories -- in the time between the call and the taping, but you can memorize an astonishing amount of discrete facts in a few months with good use of flashcards (especially if you use a program with spaced repetition).
Also, I think "what should I study between the call and the taping?" and "what should I learn if I want to appear on Jeopardy in the future?" have different answers. You can give yourself a crash course in music or European history or whatever your biggest weakness is if you've just tried out or if you want to try out in a year or two. It's just not the best use of time for someone who has a taping date two months out, IMO.
That's part of the audition process -- I had to write down five one-line teasers as to stories I'd tell Alex, and delivered two of them to the casting coordinator.
(Yeah: for those who don't know b/c I think I only put it on Facebook, I did the in-person audition early this month. I thought it went well.)
I've got the countries and presidents down, but I'd have to get capitals and vice presidents.
I don't know what I'd do about sports, my worst category. Maybe just memorize team names and their cities as a good foundations for guesses.
British monarchs (actually European monarchs in general) is a good call. They seem to come up a lot.
And Fred App's thing, too. I think it's the #1 thing that contributed to Ken Jennings's success. As he says, most contestants are going to know most of the answers, so buzzer timing is big.
I will be on someday. I just need to learn more stuff first.
First, I'd re-read "Prisoner of Trebekistan". Lots of good advice in there, and it's just a terrific read. One bit of advice from the book: Find out when the show is airing, and if that coincides with any special date or event.
I would definitely need to read up on some US history (of course, I'm Canadian, so I haven't been learning about it since grade school). I'd especially have to read up on the Supreme Court judges, because whenever I think of Supreme Court judges, the first thing that comes into my mind is "Mmmmm... burger." And that likely wouldn't get me very far.
I'd also, in whatever subjects I'm looking at, keep an eye out for anomalies... "The first" this, "The most" that, "The only" this, etc.
I might also be tempted to do some data analysis and data mining on the j-archive. But then again, I'm a database guy.
The recent "Final Jeopardy" is about the development of Watson, and notes that they found certain key things that repeatedly came up--Capitols, Presidents and other major world leaders--and those were the first things Watson "learned." It's a worthwhile read.
In my one year of College Bowl, we'd never competed before and drove from Memphis to Blacksburg in one day (that's about a 12 hour drive). In that drive, we focused on two things--Norse Mythology (which was one of our "weird gaps") and playing "Rip The Almanac," which was going through the most recent World Almanac and covering as much as we could in question form (capitals, countries, major news events, exports, etc.).
When I did the in-person audition in NYC a couple years ago, they gave you a Jeopardy ballpoint pen with which you could do just that. (I passed the audition stage -- everyone there did. But I did not get the taping call in the 18-month period thereafter, so I guess I didn't wow them with my Stories for Alex. And, to bury the lede a bit, I got the e-mail about two weeks ago inviting me to the DC auditions in late May.)
What Fred said -- you definitely want to learn specific topics, but you also want to work on this. The buzzer is what killed me in my games: there were lots of answers that I knew but was beaten to the buzzer on (including one about a professor I'd had!).
Also, Adam C., work on refining your Stories for Alex into catchy, pithy teaser sentences, and then nice tight several sentence versions to flesh out each of the teasers. It's really worth working on those before the auditions - show them to your friends, and edit them like you would something at work.
yep, according to my friend who was on last fall, it's all about the buzzer timing. (though I have to say, she got royally screwed with the category mix. the show before or the show after, and she totally could have won. )
Just to be a little of a devil's advocate here: I think your basic choice is whether to fill in the gaps where you're weakest, or build up the areas where you're strongest. Most people seem to choose the latter, which does seem more intuitive. But I'd argue you're better off building on your strengths.
Here's why: If you're filling in gaps, you're most likely going from little knowledge in that area to a serviceable amount of knowledge. But unless it's a really obscure topic, one of your two competitors probably has greater than a serviceable knowledge, and will beat you in that category anyway. Maybe you'll get a couple hundred dollars out of it. So why not work on the categories where you can dominate, rack up several thousand dollars, and hope that you get lucky enough to have a few them of them on the board?
Of course, even if you have dominant knowledge, you're still going to have to learn how to ring in first ...
Yeah good call. There are usually several categories on a given board where I get the first four clues fairly easily but the $1000 or $2000 clue is just out of my reach. I'd get much more bang for my buck making sure I'm more likely to get those expensive clues than compete for smaller change in categories where other players will be much more confident no matter how much I cram.
<p>For me, among other things, I'm going to want to brush up on categories like Movies/Academy Awards, Sports Championships -- things that I used to know cold, but since having kids I have fallen behind on them. (Example: Sitting here today, I could not tell you the last 10 Super Bowl champs or Best Pic winners off the top of my head; 30-year-old me could have rattled off all previous SB champs, and certainly all Best Pic winners since 1970, without taking a breath.) I'd need to brush up my Shakespeare, as well as Fine Art. I would only need to do a minor amount of refresher work on Presidents or the Animal Kingdom, because my kids talk about these subjects in great detail ALL THE TIME. Probably should playing a LOT of Sporcle games to hone History, Geography, World Capitals, etc. </p><p> </p><p>The online test made me realize that I'm totally effed on classical music/composers -- I think I'd just have to rely on my memories of my college music appreciation class, or on word association within the clue (e.g., "Polish composer" is probably going to be Chopin). </p>
It's funny, I used to be that way with World Series winners -- could rattle them off 1903-present without a pause. But for me, I think it was studying for my history Ph.D. exams that pushed that, along with a ton of other stuff, right out of my brain. I just had so many timelines in my head for so many different areas that I lost a lot of sports knowledge. It's kind of sad. The only trivia-related benefit (other than general U.S. history knowledge) is that the presidents and their dates in office are probably etched in my brain permanently at this point; I doubt I could forget them if I tried.
It's the sesquicentennial of the Civil War right now, so maybe some CW facts? Which slave states didn't secede, who were the president & vp of the CSA, etc.
Reaction time, and knowing how to tease the 'question' out of the 'answer' are what's key to success on this show.
Much else is up to the luck of the draw (if you beat the odds and get cast, then you might get cast against the next Ken Jennings, or two weak players, and you might get a bunch of categories outside your ken, or right up your alley).
It's a general knowledge show, better to be shallow and wide, rather than narrow and deep (unlike College Bowl, and Academic Decathlon, which expect deep, yet largely esoteric, knowledge). Playing any of the available video game versions probably would be helpful, both due to helping with reaction, and offering the whole Gladwellian repetition thing.
But, given that there are between 300-400 people who make it on the show each year, and many thousands who pass the auditon process, keep any preparation in perspective (first time I passed, I was ready and waiting, but having been in the contestant pool for most of the past decade, I'm a bit less expectant that I'll be getting a call from the producers, but good luck).
I commented before but there was a glitch and it got lost. thoughts: read An Incomplete Education. great for filling gaps and for reinforcing strengths, and it's funny. Read How to Get on Jepardy! and Win. and Trebekistan. review you mustvknow areas. anything to do with presidents (order, dates, famous also-rans, first lady names), geography (capitols, borders, largest few in population and area, largest islands). add to your strengths: if you're good at literature and drama, review Tonys and Pulitzers and Nobels. look on the Jeopardy boards for the list of Pavlovian Jeopardy! questions
I posted that from my phone, and you can really tell . . . oy. So I both agree and disagree with Fred App's approach. I agree because it's true that you're going to remember things more that build on areas you already know, but I don't think it's worth trying to learn lots of minutiae about areas you know if that takes away from filling in areas that are more likely to be asked about (so don't try to learn every single Tony winner in every category, even from really obscure plays, at the expense of learning basic geography or details about the presidents; learning major Tony winners could be useful, though). I disagree because I made a point to learn some info that has never stuck with me before (visual geography, i.e. what borders what, and some basic sports info, such as what baseball teamss are in what state, noting that there are four in CA), and I was able to buzz in on some questions on things I'd learned, even though the harder questions in that category would go to people who knew more about them to begin with. But, for example, I knew that I was unlikely to retain info on names of paintings or operas, and so while I spent a little time reviewing art and operas, it was very small compared to my overall review time.
I think I'd use my Trivial Pursuit strategy -- pray that we all keep landing on pink until time ends the game and I'm the only one with a wedge.
ReplyDeleteWagering strategy, yes, but it's not all that complicated. Definitely things you can memorize. World & provincial capitals, dates US presidents served, Oscar winners in the major categories, current world leaders, etc. It's difficult to get a good feel for a more amorphous field like history, literature, or classical music -- the kind of feel you need to be able to make an educated guess in those categories -- in the time between the call and the taping, but you can memorize an astonishing amount of discrete facts in a few months with good use of flashcards (especially if you use a program with spaced repetition).
ReplyDeleteAlso, I think "what should I study between the call and the taping?" and "what should I learn if I want to appear on Jeopardy in the future?" have different answers. You can give yourself a crash course in music or European history or whatever your biggest weakness is if you've just tried out or if you want to try out in a year or two. It's just not the best use of time for someone who has a taping date two months out, IMO.
ReplyDeleteI think I'd focus on having a non-lame, non-embarrassing story to tell Alex/the producers during the contestant-banter section of the show.
ReplyDeleteI think I'd spend at least an hour a day on some kind of exercise to improve my reflexes and my ability to press a little button.
ReplyDeleteThat's part of the audition process -- I had to write down five one-line teasers as to stories I'd tell Alex, and delivered two of them to the casting coordinator.
ReplyDelete(Yeah: for those who don't know b/c I think I only put it on Facebook, I did the in-person audition early this month. I thought it went well.)
I've got the countries and presidents down, but I'd have to get capitals and vice presidents.
ReplyDeleteI don't know what I'd do about sports, my worst category. Maybe just memorize team names and their cities as a good foundations for guesses.
British monarchs (actually European monarchs in general) is a good call. They seem to come up a lot.
And Fred App's thing, too. I think it's the #1 thing that contributed to Ken Jennings's success. As he says, most contestants are going to know most of the answers, so buzzer timing is big.
I will be on someday. I just need to learn more stuff first.
First, I'd re-read "Prisoner of Trebekistan". Lots of good advice in there, and it's just a terrific read. One bit of advice from the book: Find out when the show is airing, and if that coincides with any special date or event.
ReplyDeleteI would definitely need to read up on some US history (of course, I'm Canadian, so I haven't been learning about it since grade school). I'd especially have to read up on the Supreme Court judges, because whenever I think of Supreme Court judges, the first thing that comes into my mind is "Mmmmm... burger." And that likely wouldn't get me very far.
I'd also, in whatever subjects I'm looking at, keep an eye out for anomalies... "The first" this, "The most" that, "The only" this, etc.
I might also be tempted to do some data analysis and data mining on the j-archive. But then again, I'm a database guy.
The recent "Final Jeopardy" is about the development of Watson, and notes that they found certain key things that repeatedly came up--Capitols, Presidents and other major world leaders--and those were the first things Watson "learned." It's a worthwhile read.
ReplyDeleteIn my one year of College Bowl, we'd never competed before and drove from Memphis to Blacksburg in one day (that's about a 12 hour drive). In that drive, we focused on two things--Norse Mythology (which was one of our "weird gaps") and playing "Rip The Almanac," which was going through the most recent World Almanac and covering as much as we could in question form (capitals, countries, major news events, exports, etc.).
When I did the in-person audition in NYC a couple years ago, they gave you a Jeopardy ballpoint pen with which you could do just that. (I passed the audition stage -- everyone there did. But I did not get the taping call in the 18-month period thereafter, so I guess I didn't wow them with my Stories for Alex. And, to bury the lede a bit, I got the e-mail about two weeks ago inviting me to the DC auditions in late May.)
ReplyDeleteWhat Fred said -- you definitely want to learn specific topics, but you also want to work on this. The buzzer is what killed me in my games: there were lots of answers that I knew but was beaten to the buzzer on (including one about a professor I'd had!).
ReplyDeleteAlso, Adam C., work on refining your Stories for Alex into catchy, pithy teaser sentences, and then nice tight several sentence versions to flesh out each of the teasers. It's really worth working on those before the auditions - show them to your friends, and edit them like you would something at work.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Genevieve - I'll be working on 'em!
ReplyDeleteyep, according to my friend who was on last fall, it's all about the buzzer timing. (though I have to say, she got royally screwed with the category mix. the show before or the show after, and she totally could have won. )
ReplyDeleteJust to be a little of a devil's advocate here: I think your basic choice is whether to fill in the gaps where you're weakest, or build up the areas where you're strongest. Most people seem to choose the latter, which does seem more intuitive. But I'd argue you're better off building on your strengths.
ReplyDeleteHere's why: If you're filling in gaps, you're most likely going from little knowledge in that area to a serviceable amount of knowledge. But unless it's a really obscure topic, one of your two competitors probably has greater than a serviceable knowledge, and will beat you in that category anyway. Maybe you'll get a couple hundred dollars out of it. So why not work on the categories where you can dominate, rack up several thousand dollars, and hope that you get lucky enough to have a few them of them on the board?
Of course, even if you have dominant knowledge, you're still going to have to learn how to ring in first ...
Civil Servants, Stamps From Around The World, Mothers And Sons, Beer, Bar Trivia, And Celibacy
ReplyDeleteAlso, people who have never been in my kitchen.
(Admittedly, the joke loses a little given that they actually used that board for a Tournament of Champions round.)
ReplyDeleteYeah good call. There are usually several categories on a given board where I get the first four clues fairly easily but the $1000 or $2000 clue is just out of my reach. I'd get much more bang for my buck making sure I'm more likely to get those expensive clues than compete for smaller change in categories where other players will be much more confident no matter how much I cram.
ReplyDeleteAnd are you willing to share those one-liners with the rest of us? :)
ReplyDelete<p>For me, among other things, I'm going to want to brush up on categories like Movies/Academy Awards, Sports Championships -- things that I used to know cold, but since having kids I have fallen behind on them. (Example: Sitting here today, I could not tell you the last 10 Super Bowl champs or Best Pic winners off the top of my head; 30-year-old me could have rattled off all previous SB champs, and certainly all Best Pic winners since 1970, without taking a breath.) I'd need to brush up my Shakespeare, as well as Fine Art. I would only need to do a minor amount of refresher work on Presidents or the Animal Kingdom, because my kids talk about these subjects in great detail ALL THE TIME. Probably should playing a LOT of Sporcle games to hone History, Geography, World Capitals, etc.
ReplyDelete</p><p>
</p><p>The online test made me realize that I'm totally effed on classical music/composers -- I think I'd just have to rely on my memories of my college music appreciation class, or on word association within the clue (e.g., "Polish composer" is probably going to be Chopin).
</p>
I am horrified no one has suggested:
ReplyDeleteFoods that start with "Q"
I suggest that you brush up on Swords.
ReplyDeleteIt's funny, I used to be that way with World Series winners -- could rattle them off 1903-present without a pause. But for me, I think it was studying for my history Ph.D. exams that pushed that, along with a ton of other stuff, right out of my brain. I just had so many timelines in my head for so many different areas that I lost a lot of sports knowledge. It's kind of sad. The only trivia-related benefit (other than general U.S. history knowledge) is that the presidents and their dates in office are probably etched in my brain permanently at this point; I doubt I could forget them if I tried.
ReplyDeleteHere's the board for Cliff's categories, used 5/10/2005: http://www.j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=310
ReplyDeleteGeography, especially lakes and rivers in Africa.
ReplyDeleteBonne audition!
And Kate, thanks for reminding me of my favorite Jeoprady contestant, Rosie Perez. Quince! Quinoa! Quiche!
It's the sesquicentennial of the Civil War right now, so maybe some CW facts? Which slave states didn't secede, who were the president & vp of the CSA, etc.
ReplyDeleteReaction time, and knowing how to tease the 'question' out of the 'answer' are what's key to success on this show.
ReplyDeleteMuch else is up to the luck of the draw (if you beat the odds and get cast, then you might get cast against the next Ken Jennings, or two weak players, and you might get a bunch of categories outside your ken, or right up your alley).
It's a general knowledge show, better to be shallow and wide, rather than narrow and deep (unlike College Bowl, and Academic Decathlon, which expect deep, yet largely esoteric, knowledge). Playing any of the available video game versions probably would be helpful, both due to helping with reaction, and offering the whole Gladwellian repetition thing.
But, given that there are between 300-400 people who make it on the show each year, and many thousands who pass the auditon process, keep any preparation in perspective (first time I passed, I was ready and waiting, but having been in the contestant pool for most of the past decade, I'm a bit less expectant that I'll be getting a call from the producers, but good luck).
I commented before but there was a glitch and it got lost. thoughts: read An Incomplete Education. great for filling gaps and for reinforcing strengths, and it's funny. Read How to Get on Jepardy! and Win. and Trebekistan. review you mustvknow areas. anything to do with presidents (order, dates, famous also-rans, first lady names), geography (capitols, borders, largest few in population and area, largest islands). add to your strengths: if you're good at literature and drama, review Tonys and Pulitzers and Nobels. look on the Jeopardy boards for the list of Pavlovian Jeopardy! questions
ReplyDeleteI posted that from my phone, and you can really tell . . . oy.
ReplyDeleteSo I both agree and disagree with Fred App's approach. I agree because it's true that you're going to remember things more that build on areas you already know, but I don't think it's worth trying to learn lots of minutiae about areas you know if that takes away from filling in areas that are more likely to be asked about (so don't try to learn every single Tony winner in every category, even from really obscure plays, at the expense of learning basic geography or details about the presidents; learning major Tony winners could be useful, though). I disagree because I made a point to learn some info that has never stuck with me before (visual geography, i.e. what borders what, and some basic sports info, such as what baseball teamss are in what state, noting that there are four in CA), and I was able to buzz in on some questions on things I'd learned, even though the harder questions in that category would go to people who knew more about them to begin with. But, for example, I knew that I was unlikely to retain info on names of paintings or operas, and so while I spent a little time reviewing art and operas, it was very small compared to my overall review time.
Fandexes were helpful, especially on presidents and the states - they seemed to have the most relevant, most likely to be asked about info. We had a couple already because my son liked to read them in the car, and I bought a few more.
http://www.amazon.com/Presidents-Fandex-Family-Field-Guides/dp/0761112030/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1303835645&sr=8-2