It’s my favorite two weeks of the Jeopardy! calendar: the Tournament of Champions! 15 past champions return to compete for $250,000!
Here are the quarterfinal matchups, some stats for each player, and my predictions!
Monday, November 6, 2017:
 Buzzy Cohen Los Angeles, California 206 correct, 36 incorrect 36.53% in first on buzzer (202/553) 13/18 on Daily Doubles (Net Earned: $21,600) 6/10 in Final Jeopardy! Average Coryat: $14,100 Low-Level Clues, Net: 12.2 per game High-Level Clues, Net: 4.6 per game |
 Hunter Appler Augusta, Georgia 162 correct, 16 incorrect 39.12% in first on buzzer (151/386) 6/9 on Daily Doubles (Net Earned: $5,700) 5/7 in Final Jeopardy! Average Coryat: $16,543 Low-Level Clues, Net: 14.3 per game High-Level Clues, Net: 6.1 per game |
 Pranjal Vachaspati Urbana, Illinois 165 correct, 37 incorrect 44.47% in first on buzzer (169/380) 12/14 on Daily Doubles (Net Earned: $34,810) 4/7 in Final Jeopardy! Average Coryat: $17,057 Low-Level Clues, Net: 10.1 per game High-Level Clues, Net: 8.0 per game |
| Prediction: Pranjal will get an early buzzer advantage and do well at the bottom of the board and cruise to a spot in the semi-finals. Buzzy will do well enough rebounding Pranjal’s low-value negs (most players neg more often at the bottom of the board. Pranjal usually negs at the top of it) to have enough money to salvage a Wild Card when he doubles through Final Jeopardy. |
Tuesday, November 7, 2017
 Tim Aten Vermilion, Ohio 141 correct, 11 incorrect 28.77% in first on buzzer (126/438) 6/8 on Daily Doubles (Net Earned: $5,000) 5/8 in Final Jeopardy Average Coryat: $12,150 Low-Level Clues, Net: 11.8 per game High-Level Clues, Net: 4.3 per game |
 Lilly Chin Decatur, Georgia 88 correct, 8 incorrect 35.84% in first on buzzer (81/226) 7/7 on Daily Doubles (Net Earned: $13,200) 3/4 in Final Jeopardy Average Coryat: $16,600 Low-Level Clues, Net: 13.5 per game High-Level Clues, Net: 6.0 per game |
 Jason Sterlacci Somerset, New Jersey 98 correct, 11 incorrect 40.35% in first on buzzer (92/228) 3/4 on Daily Doubles (Net Earned: $5,400) 2/4 in Final Jeopardy Average Coryat: $18,850 Low-Level Clues, Net: 14.0 per game High-Level Clues, Net: 7.8 per game |
| Prediction: If there is such a thing as “staying too clam”, it might be Tim. While he averages less than 1 unforced error a game, he might struggle to pick up both the low-level clues (thanks to Jason and Lilly having a buzzer advantage), and the more-prevalent high-level clues (His average of net 4.3 per game is lowest in the field.) If there’s a strangely difficult week of Final Jeopardy! clues, Tim might see the semifinals due to attrition elsewhere. Otherwise, I think Jason takes this one with Lilly doing just enough to claim the last wild card. |
Wednesday, November 8, 2017
 Austin Rogers New York, New York 334 correct, 43 incorrect 42.66% in first on buzzer (311/729) 22/27 on Daily Doubles (Net Earned: $109,500) 12/13 in Final Jeopardy Average Coryat: $18,185 Low-Level Clues, Net: 15.1 per game High-Level Clues, Net: 6.5 per game |
 Alan Lin Riverside, California 148 correct, 14 incorrect 35.37% in first on buzzer (139/393) 8/11 on Daily Doubles (Net Earned: $18,200) 5/7 in Final Jeopardy Average Coryat: $15,914 Low-Level Clues, Net: 12.1 per game High-Level Clues, Net: 6.6 per game |
 David Clemmons Fort Worth, Texas 77 correct, 9 incorrect 32.74% in first on buzzer (74/226) 2/4 on Daily Doubles (Net Earned: $1,000) 4/4 in Final Jeopardy Average Coryat: $13,900 Low-Level Clues, Net: 11.5 per game High-Level Clues, Net: 4.5 per game |
| Prediction: One of the biggest questions going into the Tournament of Champions: will Austin Rogers’ cavalier style of play translate well to the tougher clues often seen on Jeopardy’s biggest stage? Austin’s stellar record in Final Jeopardy should be enough to get him through even if the main game proves more difficult for the prohibitive tournament favorite. Alan, who does better at the bottom of the board than Austin does, should have enough success there to build enough of a bank to grab a wild card into the semifinals. |
Thursday, November 9, 2017
 Seth Wilson Nacogdoches, Texas 316 correct, 34 incorrect 41.26% in first on buzzer (295/715) 15/22 on Daily Doubles (Net Earned: $16,300) 9/13 in Final Jeopardy Average Coryat: $18,077 Low-Level Clues, Net: 14.4 per game High-Level Clues, Net: 6.9 per game |
 Lisa Schlitt Berwyn, Pennsylvania 151 correct, 19 incorrect 38.40% in first on buzzer (149/388) 7/10 on Daily Doubles (Net Earned: $11,700) 5/7 in Final Jeopardy Average Coryat: $14,657 Low-Level Clues, Net: 13.9 per game High-Level Clues, Net: 4.6 per game |
 Sam Deutsch Calabasas, California 68 correct, 7 incorrect 29.55% in first on buzzer (65/220) 1/1 on Daily Doubles (Net Earned: $2,000) 4/4 in Final Jeopardy Average Coryat: $11,200 Low-Level Clues, Net: 9.5 per game High-Level Clues, Net: 4.8 per game |
| Prediction: Against two very strong players in Seth and Lisa, I suspect that Sam is going to struggle to get much going in this quarterfinal. Seth is one of the stronger players in this field in terms of knowledge, and was certainly willing to use conservative betting tactics, which will serve him very well in this stage of the tournament. Lisa should be able to get a good score and do well enough to take one of the top two wild card spots. |
Friday, November 10, 2017
 Andrew Pau Amherst, Ohio 165 correct, 11 incorrect 37.37% in first on buzzer (148/396) 9/9 on Daily Doubles (Net Earned: $23,800) 4/7 in Final Jeopardy Average Coryat: $19,943 Low-Level Clues, Net: 13.4 per game High-Level Clues, Net: 8.4 per game |
 Justin Vossler Homer, New York 117 correct, 15 incorrect 32.46% in first on buzzer (111/342) 8/10 on Daily Doubles (Net Earned: $11,900) 3/6 in Final Jeopardy Average Coryat: $15,867 Low-Level Clues, Net: 10.2 per game High-Level Clues, Net: 6.8 per game |
 Jon Eisenman Los Angeles, California 131 correct, 18 incorrect 36.53% in first on buzzer (122/334) 6/11 on Daily Doubles (Net Earned: -$2,700) 4/6 in Final Jeopardy Average Coryat: $16,133 Low-Level Clues, Net: 12.5 per game High-Level Clues, Net: 6.0 per game |
| Prediction: I believe Andrew’s game is suited to the Tournament of Champions more than any other player. He showed an ability to completely dominate a game on the signalling device in his regular run, being the first player since Ken Jennings to run 4 categories in a single game, and his knowledge base should be able to handle tougher ToC clues without difficulty. Justin and Jon will take enough away from each other (and not pick off enough from Andrew) that both are unlikely to advance to the semifinals. |
In memory of Cindy Stowell, I’ll be donating $2 to the Cancer Research Institute for every item sold in November from our store!. Here are our top sellers; all prices are in US dollars!
Become a Supporter now! Make a monthly contribution to the site on Patreon!
Contestant photo credit: jeopardy.com
When commenting, please note that all comments on The Jeopardy! Fan must be in compliance with the Site Comment Policy.
Since the Final Jeopardy! questions play such a large role in determining the wildcards (let alone winners), and the betting strategy for the leaders might alter things (someone in first place with 14000 might not bet anything if the third place player has 6800, regardless of what 2nd place has), I’m going to just guess the leaders going into the Final Jeopardy round, and let Johnny Gilbert in his glory sort ’em all out:
Monday: Pranjal
Tuesday: Jason
Wednesday: Austin
Thursday: Seth
Friday: Justin
As a sidenote, I feel like the fact that contestants are accruing more knowledge of how to play the game might lead to a lot of early Daily Doubles, as people jump around the board. I’m guessing some aggressive Daily Double bets and maybe a game or two where all three contestants are sitting at around 12,000 headed into Final.
Cory,
I find your Friday prediction to be very intriguing.
If I were gambling, I don’t think I’d make the bet. Andrew’s awesome and I would say, for me, one of my Top 5 most likely to win. But I feel like I can’t only go by advanced statistics, right? Consider this my “12 seed upsets the 5 seed” pick. One happens every year.
Speaking of which, my top 5 most likely to win it all, which probably isn’t too different from yours:
Pranjal
Jason
Austin
Andrew
Seth
My predictions:
Monday- Pranjal Vachaspati
Tuesday- Jason Sterlacci
Wednesday- Austin Rogers
Thursday- Seth Wilson
Friday- Andrew Pau
Wild Cards: Hunter Appler, Lilly Chin, Alan Lin, David Clemmons
Andrew Pau wins the finals over Seth and Austin
Interesting thought on the finals composition. The only way that happens is if Buzzy does not advance to the semifinals, I figure. If Andrew, Buzzy, Seth, and Austin are all semifinalists, my guess will be that Austin, Seth, and Buzzy will headline each semifinal, as it were, which means Andrew has to play either Seth or Austin (he can’t play Buzzy until the final as the show keeps apart contestants in the ToC who have been together in the Green Room before.)
It’s true that Austin had a stellar record on FJ’s, but most of those FJ’s were pretty easy (as measured by how they polled on the J! board). I wouldn’t assume he’ll be as automatic on the tougher FJ’s that we’ll probably see in most of the TOC matches.
In my opinion, the JBoard Final Jeopardy! polls have reached a point where I believe it to be unrepresentative of the general difficulty of Final Jeopardy! clues, as I believe that the respondents of the poll are in the upper percentiles in terms of general show performance, and even a clue that would have polled in the single digits in a poll a few years ago would now poll much higher now on JBoard.
That may be true, but I think it’s reasonable to conclude that in general, a clue that polls in the 80s or 90s (percentile-wise) on J! board is easier than one that polls, say, in the 20s. If a clue is challenging to even the upper-percentile types on the board, that’s an indication that it’s more difficult than clues that most boardies solve successfully.
But I’m saying that because of the current composition of the poll voters, an FJ that would poll at 80% in the general population and an FJ that would poll at 65% in the general population, will still poll at 85-90% on JBoard, because there will always be a small number that miss a clue for whatever reason, and most of the respondents are now of a playing level that they able all able still to get that 65%er, thus making it seem like an 80%er, thus causing people to assume that FJs are, as a whole, easier, when they are truly not.