thats great

Exactly. When there are no tied scores before final you should just cover the person in second like Kelton should have done $7,601 and Greg should have done $501.

Well, it’s either one of 3 things: 1.) they want to risk losing in order to double everything. 2.) they leave it all up to chance. 3.) they might be a little to cocky & think they have the right answer until they don’t.

⁠@@ddrdanganvloger2187 if he bet $501, he would have won no matter what.

fun tis a game

@@ddrdanganvloger2187 I'll chalk it up to the show being new and that thought process didn't cross his mind, but also that he didn't think he could possibly be wrong. Plus he had his winnings from the previous day that were already guaranteed.

They made a good choice dumping Bialik, though.

Episode 2

9/11/84.

They all wound up with Brad's score in the end.

@@danielkohler9857 this is such a clever comment hahaha well done brother

@@yaomung3 I guess you could say in that first clip, the contestants came back around, full circle. They started with 0 and they ended with 0.

I think maybe in the Art Fleming days back in the 1960s/1970s that might have happened, although records are limited

If that ever happens on the current run, they need to invite an audience member to play what would have been the final jeopardy clue for $1000. I know, reminiscent of Who wants to be a Millionaire, but I say never leave one on the table.

A few times that actually happened.

😅 I just love this show, no matter who is hosting.

​@@elchoroad despite Ken jennings hosting, this is still the trebek era

This ain't the first time we have all three in the toilet. And two in the toilet.

Same with Tom Kunzen

I was coming in to mention this, since I was the guy who missed the Daily Double and ended up at 0! Kevin was a hell of a player!

Tough shit. That's their problem, not mine.

He says it - Jan 1st 1901 This is from the Jeopardy Website but I still don’t understand it: The Final Jeopardy! category is "The Calendar" and the clue was "Calendar date with which the 20th century began"; the correct response was "What is January 1, 1901?" All three contestants had an incorrect response of, "What is January 1, 1900?” That was actually the first day of the last year of the 19th century, as years begin with a 1 and not a 0. This would later lead to confusion during the Y2K era, when people confused 2000 as the first year of the 21st century, when in reality, 2001 would be the first year.

@@KeepAnEyeOnDan the problem with the clue is it's not worded well. In traditional year numbering, that reasoning is correct. In modern year numbering, the year known as 1 BC in traditional numbering is known as 0, 2 BC is known as -1.

I’m sure Alex is honored to see Ken at his post. As we learned from Meet the Robinsons, keep moving forward.

Personally I don't think it's the same without Art Flemming (I'm showing my age here, but he was an excellent, enthusiastic host!).

Alex is dearly missed he is definitely an old friend

@@boisegameshowguy Originally in 2004 Ken Jennings was a contestant on Jeopardy

I like Ken but he is definitely not Trebek

And there was another one at 0 on June 12, 1998.

There were also 2 other 3-way ties at $0 in tournament games.

No I don't

Yes, betting less than their all $ is smarter cause when you get wrong, you still had money. Your target in final round most important, avoid lost all money.

If any player has $0 or any negative amount after both rounds they are disqualified from final jeopardy.

@@victorsandoval1298 And for the singer player to be declare champions, they will had at least $1 at the end of the Final Jeopardy Otherwise, they will count as lose and will going home on a consolation price

Allegedly it happened once in the 1970s Art Fleming version

If that WERE to happen I believe their would not BE a Final Jeopardy round and the next show would be of 3 new players.

Bum bum bum bum hmmmmmmmm😢😢😢

Even Mayim Bialik

Agree. There a major difference of getting $1 and $0 in this show. Having $1 left mean you still can win, while having $0 left mean you lose immediately, regardless of other player.

no, they don't deserve that

They should at least be given cab fare to get home.

@@andrewbomkamp3708 Contestants don't all end up with zero because every person was incompetent and therefore doesn't "deserve" to return. Typically, the only time this happens is due to a Final Jeopardy question that is practically impossible to answer within the 30 seconds they have to think & consider their choices (this video is a prime example). That's the fault of those who choose the questions for the show, not the contestants. Therefore, I don't think contestants who have proven they belong by doing reasonably (or very) well up to the last question should all be punished for the occasional "dud" question that pops up. I say let them all return for one more show under these unusual circumstances.

​@@brianarbenz1329 losers always get consolation prizes I believe

@@tomriddle8933 Ah yes, the lovely parting gifts (the euphemism for "consolation prize.")

The other players ended up in the negative by the end of double jeopardy

Exactly! He deserved to lose for being greedy. Or if he was really confident in the category, he should do $9499 to save $1 if the other contestants bet everything. Same with Kelton’s wager.

It was also the second episode ever and strategy wasn’t anywhere close to as refined as it is today

There's no year 0, so the 1st century began in year 1, then since every century is exactly 100 years, the 2nd century began in year 101, then the 3rd in year 201, and so on Meaning the 19th century began in 1801, the 20th century in 1901, the 21st century in 2001, etc

@@CaptainJZH I'm surprised this wasn't a hotter debate but I agree with your and the show's interpretation of the correct response.

21st century didn't actually start in 2000, the real first day of the 21st century/3rd millennium was January 1, 2001, even though culturally everyone made a bigger deal about the year 2000. With centuries you don't start counting with zero; in the modern Gregorian calendar, the date goes from December 31, 1 BC right to January 1, 1 AD, skipping any potential "year zero" So the 1st century began with year 1, and since a century is 100 years, the 2nd century began with year 101, the 3rd century with year 201, etc. Therefore the 20th century, being 1900 years after year 1, began with 1901, and the 21st century began with 2001.

@@CaptainJZH Why do decades start with year zero then? No one says that a song from 1990 was from the 80s for example.

Because there's a difference between what the average person thinks is part of a decade/century/etc and what the actual calendar indicates. The 1990s cannot possibly begin with 1990 because each decade is 10 years long so if you go back to the first decade at the start of the 1st century, because of the lack of any year 0 between the BC era and the AD era, it began with year 1, and then the next decade began 10 years later with year 11. Fast forward to the modern day and the 1900s began with 1901, the 1910s with 1911, the 1920s with 1921, etc.

@@CaptainJZH I guess it just highlights the dangers of programming in Fortran. The world is stuck with a non-sensical artifact in the calendar because legacy coders didn't realize how unintuitive it is to start a counting system at 1.

Why?

@@BlueManIan the new one has some lady as a host. It’s ruining what Jeopardy represented.

I think they shouldn't.

@@BlueManIan Ken Jennings and though I'm not a fan of Mayim Bialik, are both doing an excellent job. The last thing Alex Trebek wanted was for Jeopardy! to die with him. They are ensuring it does not.

@@TraumaER What's that? Male supremacy?

There's no "year 0" however so every century starts at the -01 year not the -00 year Like December 31, 1 BC went straight to January 1, 1 AD

No, it doesn’t

No, the answer of Jan 1, 1901 is correct. But that was extraordinarily hard for someone to get correct with the pressure of being on national television and with only 30 seconds to think and come up with an answer.

It was still 16 years before the start of the 2000s, so people were not being inundated with the Y2K information. Gosh that seems like eons ago.

quite pedantic tho, trick question imo