‘Jeopardy!’ Bosses Make Big Rule Change Decision
In a decision that is sure to make some Jeopardy! fans breathe a sigh of relief, producer Sarah Foss has revealed that a controversial rule change will no longer be happening.
The game show’s executive producer Mike Davies had previously suggested adding a cash bonus for contestants who swept an entire category of clues without jumping around the board. However, some fans felt that this would drastically affect the gameplay strategy.
On Monday’s (October 17) episode of the Inside Jeopardy! podcast, Foss confirmed that the cash bonus idea had been nixed, for now, at least. “We’re not doing anything at this point. There’s no [cash] bonus; nobody get upset,” she said.
Not only will the show not be adding the cash bonus idea, but it will also stop celebrating those who run a category. “We actually decided we’re not going to call out the running of a category,” Foss explained. “Not even top to bottom, but [only if it happens] within five clues. So in future episodes, you might see, if it’s… five for five, that’s when we’re gonna give applause and acknowledge running the category.”
Davies’ suggestion was to give something extra for contestants to play for, meaning they could walk away with cash prizes, even if they didn’t perform well in overall points. He said it wouldn’t change who wins or add to the players’ scores, as it would be a “separate cash bonus.”
“It might also give incentive to people who are trailing to go into a category and get something from the game beyond their second or third place [consolation] prize,” Davies stated on a previous edition of the Inside Jeopardy! podcast.
Many fans expressed concerns about the idea, with one user of the Jeopardy! Reddit forum writing, “I’d worry about the category running bonus creating perverse incentives to do something other than ‘win the game’.” Another fan added, “Please, no bonuses for sweeping categories. We don’t need to be making changes to the basic gameplay.”
Even former Jeopardy! champion Buzzy Cohen was hesitant, telling Davies, “It’s going to affect gameplay strategy, and I don’t know if that’s something you’re interested in doing.”
But, for now, Jeopardy! is staying just as it is.
Jeopardy!, Weeknights, Check your local listings
This… Is… Jeopardy!
Get absolutely everything about Jeopardy! in your inbox!
Conversation85 Comments
Please read the TV Insider Community Guidelines.
Comments are closed on this story.
-
G
Imagine if the higher ups at the show/studio exercised the same restraint with the unnecessary hiring of Mayim Bialik.
46 12
-
B
100% TRUE!
20 6
-
G
Actually, I like Mayim MUCH better than Ken pretending to be Alex. I guess we all have different tastes.
4 20
-
R
Jeopardy, unlike most game shows has always been a dignified contest of knowledge. There is nothing about Mayim Bialik's posturing and facial expressions that maintains that ambience.
10 1
-
-
-
J
Wow, I guess some people just can't let this issue go and move on.
6 11
-
G
Please let go of Mayim Bialik. When she’s hosting we don’t watch the show, can’t stand the woman ! Ken Jennings is the best
host !!!
23 8
-
G
My family and I like Mayim very much.
1 5
-
-
G
Buzzy is correct (as usual). A bonus for running a category would induce players to jump to the bottom row to eliminate that possibility, and split their concentration. IMO Davies is so intent on leaving his mark on Jeopardy that he's destroying what has made it so successful for decades. I'd be happy to see him exit and take Mayim Bialik with him.
34 5
-
D
Why would they choose any differently than they do now? Maybe they'd nab a clue in each category, but the values wouldn't matter. IMO it would cause challengers to ring in more often.
7
-
O
You just contradicted yourself. Ringing in more often CHANGES THE GAME! God I hate it when it ain't broke but someone comes in and thinks it needs fixing. Like they know better than what has worked for nearly 4 decades. Smh
3
-
-
-
G
I think Jeopardy should start letting the second and third place contestants keep the money they make during the game. And if they end up losing it all, at least let them leave with $1,000.00 minimum. I think that would be a very nice change.
47 19
-
B
As it is now, second gets $2000 and $1000 goes to third. I like your idea- I came in 2nd with $16,800!
1 8
-
P
What was your score going into FJ, and would you have wagered if you were to keep your money? If it would have been anything different - well that's why the rule is what it is.
1
-
-
P
I have shared the same thought for as long as I have been watching that show. Contestants come with a set of brains and leave robbed. I remember one show where the difference between the winner and second place was a dollar.
4 12
-
C
the common dollar difference for the winner is because that's how people bet in final- betting the minimum needed to win without risking more than they need to- it's not like the winning player only did .001% better
2
-
R
And the outcome of many sports can be a difference of a single point. You either win or lose, period.
11
-
P
Losers still get paid in sports
4
-
C
You go on the show aware of the rules and agree to participate. No one forces you to compete and it isn't your career as it is in sports. It's one appearance for a few hours.
4
-
G
Losers in Vegas don't. This is a contest of wits, not a job. It's a half hour where you bet on yourself and wagering is key.
3
-
-
-
-
O
That's why it's called a consolation prize. It isn't like Wheel of Fortune where you win as you go along and keep whatever you won per puzzle. Jeopardy is winner take all.
21 4
-
C
I agree with you
1
-
O
I agree, wheel let's all contestants keep what they earned, I always thought that jeopardy is not fair to the lovers, they should keep the money they earned not just 1k for 2nd and 2k for3rd
8 13
-
P
I thoroughly agree with allowing the contestants to keep the money they make during the game. It was not easy to get on the show so I’m sure the show could readily afford those measly amounts and it would make absolutely more sense.
I never thought it was fair to award only $1000 or $2000.
11
-
P
They used to do that on the original version - but then once people got a satisfactory amount of money, they would stop playing the game. They want players playing to win, not to achieve an acceptable amount of money and say "I'm good now."
1
-
-
G
I can't decide if I regard Mike Davies as a saboteur or simply an egotist.
26 1
-
B
Are they planning to script the whole show? Why is it a problem for Ken Jennings to say, 'You ran the category?'
20 1
-
B
I thought they already did.
1
-
-
O
They should bring back the buzzer indicating time is up for your answer. Ken has been criticized for saying time was up when some fans believed it was not. Go back to the buzzer and that way the host cannot be criticized for favoritism. Easy fix.
16
-
R
Give Davies and Bialik their walking papers and restore order and comfort to this most iconic of game shows.
17 2
-
P
And keep the Entitled Contestant?
7
-
-
R
Don't mess with success!
15
-
O
Jeopardy is as comforting as a favorite robe and slippers to most of us. Quit changing it!
14
-
G
I know one thing. Celebrity Jeopardy sucks!!!!All of the talking after each answer gets on my nerves as much as the hostess.
14 1
-
B
I refuse to watch it! 1. Bad Host!
By the way when that Bad host takes over for Ken I won’t be watching then either!
2. The Celebrity’s they do get(based on the shows prior seasons) are a sham. Most of them are clueless as to what’s going on, or how to play the game! 3. If I wanted to watch a bunch of celebrities desperately trying to answer simple questions with know comprehension of why there there. Other then act like There trying to earn money for a charity. And the only reason Jeopardy is doing the show. Both pathetic. Since Both could do it without making fools of themselves at the expense of viewers!
2
-
G
Spell much?
1
-
-
-
G
I DON'T CARE. QUIT WATCHING WHEN THEY PUT THAT WOMAN ON
16 8
-
D
Ken hosts all the daily episodes. Mayim is hosting certain tournaments, such as Celebrity Jeopardy.
5
-
R
Unfortunately, Mayim will be hosting daily episodes again in January.
13 3
-
B
That’s when I STOP Watching!!
1
-
-
B
As they told us before the season started.
1
-
-
J
Good for you. I guess some people can't "accept it and move on."
11
-
-
B
Don't agree with the bonus idea at all.
One thing I'd like to see changed: It used to be the rule in Double Jeopardy that the full name was required for a clue where the answer was a person. Somewhere along the way that rule was quietly dropped and contestants only have to say the last name. To me that's a cop-out. Can we get that rule reinstated?
8 1
-
R
When the surname isn't sufficient, the host requests more clarification. In most cases, one name is enough.
8 1
-
P
I remember when a contestant was incorrect because they gave the wrong complete name. I agree they should answer full names.
4 1
-
-
G
Soon they will want to reward anyone that answers all the most expensive questions in one game with a prize. Why amend the rules when the game has been very successful for years? The 2nd and 3rd place finishers should get some compensation but only if they finish with a 'plus' figure, a minus would get them nothing, making for a more competitive thought process throughout the game.
7
-
B
Mike Davies was a wrong choice as is Mayim Bialik.
3
-
B
I don't like the idea of any of that it was a perfect game. That's it's why it has lasted so long. It is still OK but I do miss the way Alex never chased the spot light. It was on the players.
3
-
O
when showing questions to home viewers, seeing the category would help foster better competition at home.
1
-
G
Also, many game shows only give 1K if the winners don't win the bonus round and since it's teams that gets split between the entire team of from 2 to 4 people.
-
G
I disagree. Suppose the the correct response is George Patton and the contestant says Gerald Patton. Just saying Patton is correct, if one isn't clear on the first name. IMO full names should be required only when several equally famous people share a surname (Bush, Roosevelt etc.).
1 1
-
O
Jeopardy has no appeal at all since Alex passed. I liked Ken Jennings as a host, but he got chumped into a part time host. I don't even watch anymore. I tried to find reruns of early episodes, but have been unsuccessful.
-
O
Have you tried Jeopardy Archive?
-
-
P
As impressive as it is to run a category, it would be even more impressive to go across the board, especially on the bottom row.
1 1
-
P
I agree. These contestants could work hard yet lose by $1 and get 2K or 1K doesn't seem fair to me. ! Let them keep what they earn. Also, I believe that a 5 day stay for the "Champion" would move the game along. One loses interest when the same person is playing for weeks on end.
1
-
O
First, don't try to fix something that is not broken.
Second, I would consider letting all contestants keep what they accumulated. If they bet it all on final question and miss, they get zero.
It takes all three players to make the show.
Kind of like un-paid college football players bringing in millions to the school and coaches.
2
-
C
To be fair, most of those unpaid football players are getting a free ride to university alongside students paying very high tuition. That is equivalent to being paid. They graduate college without the burden of student loans. And most of them wouldn't have gotten into college without an athletic scholarship.
10
-
P
They don't keep what they've accumulated so as to encourage them to play to win, not to say "I'm amassed enough - I'll stop playing to as not to risk losing it" (as happened on the original show).
As for athletes, we're now in the "NIL" era, or haven't you heard? (where they can profit of their "name, image and likeness")
4
-
-
P
I like Mayim better then Ken Jennings. Ken is more like a robot then a host.
1 6
-
G
Six blind men describing an elephant? To me. Ken is smooth, congenial and warm, whereas Mayim is brittle, posturing, fake and all about herself. Most loyal Jeopardy fans agreed with me in the polls, 80+% preferred Ken.
4
-
-
B
They need to make game fair to new players the 5 day + champions stomp the new players .
1 6
-
C
Are you suggesting that the best players should step aside to accommodate lesser wannbes? Isn't excellence the point?
4
-
-
P
Why are people constantly slandering Mayim? She is just as fine a host as Ken, and a huge fan of the game. I love to watch no matter who is hosting and it makes me sick that I constantly see negative comments about Mayim from people who don't even know the woman! Just what exactly are they finding fault with? She doesn't host any different than Ken! People are just downright cruel!!
6 11
-
O
Do some research. By her own admission, she never watched the show and was not a fan. One of her sons told her the job was opening up and she went after it. She is awful at it and seems phony and forced. While you're googling, look up her subway incident, her son's art piece and her views toward victims of sexual assault. She is repugnant.
10 1
-
P
Was Alex Trebek a fan/viewer of any previous version? I don't know how that matters. (Patrick Stewart was cast as a Star Trek captain without ever having seen the original series.)
7
-
R
Alex, like Ken, had experience on previous game shows. It's very telling that you totally overlook MB's reprehensible behavior, not to mention that she's bad at the hosting job.
7 1
-
B
It’s also telling that the dude is replying to a post that has nothing to do with the original statement. What does Alex have anything to do with the dislike of MB. Also the fact that Acting and Hosting or two completely different professions! Try staying on topic!
We don’t like her because the list is to long to list. Like the guy said look it up!!!!!!!!!!
1
-
-
-
-
P
She is supposed to be a neuroscientist. Why isn’t she working in that field trying to help mankind instead of hosting a game show to build up her ego and make millions of dollars? I prefer Ken and I don’t watch when she is on.
5 1
-
-
B
The basis behind the idea is sound and that is to supplement the parsimonious payments to second and last place. IMHO those should be increased to $10K and $5K.
6 13
-
P
What if the winner didn't get to one of those amounts?
10 2
-
O
Look at other game shows. On People Puzzler the first eliminated contestant only gets a year subscription to People magazine. $2K for second place seems plenty for a daytime, syndicated show.
16 1
-
P
People magazine: the anti-prize
-
-
-
C
how about requiring people to start at the top-most unanswered question in a category. It's anti-climatic how the lower ones are always last now. Or if not spread the daily doubles equally into the lesser-amounts to reduce the incentive to go for the highest ones first.
4 14
-
B
Sorry, Matt, I don't agree- let the players choose as they do now, using their own strategies. The change from one topic to the other is more interesting.
8 1
-
B
I do know that’s what Alex preferred! It’s definitely my preference! I don’t mind if its a few, put absolutely hate it when the bottom questions are the main focus before the top ones! I know when the top ones are the only ones left I feel like what’s the point of watching? Zero challenge left!
-
-
P
Ken Jennings has a conflict of interest. He should not be hosting this show. He's constantly making comments, suggestions, and innuendos to the player he favors, to a player while they are pondering their bet or mainly the player he feels could be a threat to his winning streak, record and legacy. He was instrumental in ending Amy Schneider's winning streak by making a comment to the challenger while he was pondering his bet putting him within striking distance to ultimately beat Amy.
3 14
-
R
How would Ken's comments affect whether any or all of the contestants knew the correct response? Do you disapprove of guidance counselors in schools?
11
-
R
And the host position should have gone to Buzzy Cohen, not to Ken or Mayim.
9 1
-
P
It should never have gone to any CONTESTANT. I don't know why people have this religious belief that the host should have been a contestant.
1 7
-
R
They don't. The producers presented an array of candidates and the fans picked favorites. Ken was already functioning off stage. Most of this conflict isn't about a contestant hosting, it's about a near consensus of disgust toward Mayim Bialik. Most loyal Jeopardy fans despise her.
7 1
-
-
-
B
Your delusional! Have you never heard Amy Schneider say that she would hole hard-idly endorse Ken as the Host! Why on earth would she do that if SHE felt the BS your claiming was true! Stop reading into crap that’s non existent and disparaging Ken!
1
-
-
D
I'd like to see changes like this, and I think it should be a bonus to their score, playable for Daily Doubles and Final Jeopardy. It would motivate challengers to be more aggressive in categories they favor, or to block the champ from earning a bonus.
13
-
R
I think everyone should stop reinventing a show that's been the highest rated game show for nearly 40 years.
13
-
-
O
“Do not stir the pot” seems to be the on going theme of the show. The bosses are so afraid to upset the “fans”.
Who cares??? The “fans” are not running the show! Some will threaten that they will not watch the show. SO?!?
5 18
-
O
Advertising $ based on ratings is driving that bus. Alienating the core audience is madness.
20
-
B
No viewers, No Show CLOWN!!!!
-
Watchlist Easy access to only the shows you care about — all in one simple place
Alerts Only important notifications — when a show is returning, when it becomes available to stream, and more.
Special Offers Exclusive products we release related to your favorite shows and streaming services