http://kotaku.com/meet-the-man-who-hacked-jeopardy-1516792430

Ignoring the somewhat sensational headline, is anyone here willing to put the time into quantifying what sort of statistical advantage he's giving himself? State your assumptions.

I think this is a two part question, though. The first would be much harder, related to the Daily Double hunt he does.

The more accessible question is his 'bet-to-tie' strategy discussed near the end.

The hunt for the Daily Double definitely makes sense, as long as he (or whoever) can handle the added difficulty of jumping around the board.  If it makes it harder on himself then it wouldn't be beneficial.  From what I've read he uses this more as a not-to-lose strategy rather than a to-win strategy.

The 'bet-to-tie' strategy is again more of a strategy to make it to the next game and not necessarily to win or obtain the most money from a single game.  This seems like a viable strategy but probably would be different if he was playing to win.

Compared to Risk-life, I'd relate it to 'turtling' to stay alive versus extending yourself to collect more bonuses.  (This analogy may break down easily, I haven't given it complete thought.)

Dude is good at trivia, and he employs a strategy to survive a game and win a bunch.  I say: "Why haven't the uber smart people who came before him been applying strategies to win?" If they haven't their kinda dumb. I don't see how using a strategy is undermining the game show at all...

I'd love to hear Ken Jenning's take on this strategy.  Speaking of - have any of you read his 'maphead' book?  Great read if you love maps.