Poor show by Jenny, didn't expect her to lose again, got off to a good start but then the wheels fell off. Well done team.
The Chase (ITV) (Part 4)
86 of 368
Originally Posted by Ex Pat:
“Shocking display by Jenny!!!
Ireland is a country in the UK?”
“Shocking display by Jenny!!!
Ireland is a country in the UK?”
She got so many easy questions wrong.
Neither the team nor the Chaser deserved to win.
The Chaser not getting Hugh Hefner was horrific - she seems far too quick to pass, rather than giving herself thinking time - but I think the team giving 'Southern Ireland' as a country of the U.K. was even worse.
The Chaser not getting Hugh Hefner was horrific - she seems far too quick to pass, rather than giving herself thinking time - but I think the team giving 'Southern Ireland' as a country of the U.K. was even worse.
And yet another loss for the Vixen.... blimey. She's got to start bucking her ideas up otherwise the future contestants will start praying to go against her as the Chaser.
Terrible. Terrible. Terrible.
I don't understand how she managed to become a Chaser. I wouldn't mind so much if she had a good personality but she doesn't even have that. Boring and not very bright (in Chaser terms).
I don't understand how she managed to become a Chaser. I wouldn't mind so much if she had a good personality but she doesn't even have that. Boring and not very bright (in Chaser terms).
How can a royal flush in poker, beat a straight flush, when a royal flush is a straight flush? That's like saying four aces beats four of a kind.
Originally Posted by richie4eva:
“Jenny back to losing ways
7-6”
“Jenny back to losing ways
7-6”
She's losing nearly half her games. That's not good. But remember they've got them all in the can, so can decide what order to show them in. So is there some reason why they're showing such a bad run for her? Does it not get any better?
To get her win/loss record up to something approaching the others she'd need to win about eight out of her next ten. And that seems unlikely. I mean the target was only sixteen today and she didn't get close to it.
There are questions she's getting wrong that somebody of a Chaser's standard just shouldn't be. For example:
"Which English King succeeded William II?" She thought about it and said Richard I.
A top class quizzer (which Chasers are supposed to be) should know English Monarchs inside out. Has she never learned the old "Willie, Willie, Henry, Steve" rhyme that gives you them all in order? The answer to the question's in the first line - Henry I.
We will see how her next half a dozen or so games go.
It does seem that she is some way off the pace of the others at the moment, but it might change, you never know.
Originally Posted by Groundhogal:
“How can a royal flush in poker, beat a straight flush, when a royal flush is a straight flush? That's like saying four aces beats four of a kind.”
“How can a royal flush in poker, beat a straight flush, when a royal flush is a straight flush? That's like saying four aces beats four of a kind.”
Yes, it's a bit of an academic distinction. The royal flush has always been considered a separate hand in all the poker books, when as you say it's really just the highest possible straight flush.
Originally Posted by 2shy2007:
“That was a weird question in TP earlier, I would have thought it was little old ladies!”
“That was a weird question in TP earlier, I would have thought it was little old ladies!”
Me too!
While I think the 'Ireland' answer was simply rushed, I was most surprised to learn that Jenny, a professional quizzer, doesn't know the English/British monarchs from 1066 onwards, inside-out. That's the basics!
10h, Jh, Qh, Kh, Ah (Royal Flush) would defeat a 5c, 6c, 7c, 8c, 9c (Straight Flush), for instance, as they are classed differently.
Originally Posted by Groundhogal:
“How can a royal flush in poker, beat a straight flush, when a royal flush is a straight flush? That's like saying four aces beats four of a kind.”
“How can a royal flush in poker, beat a straight flush, when a royal flush is a straight flush? That's like saying four aces beats four of a kind.”
10h, Jh, Qh, Kh, Ah (Royal Flush) would defeat a 5c, 6c, 7c, 8c, 9c (Straight Flush), for instance, as they are classed differently.
Its weird that Jenny's first few shows were amazing - she seemed unbeatable - and since then she's played pretty badly. I hope its just down to initial nerves, and maybe these shows were recorded before the others? Hopefully she will settle down, I do like her and think she's a potentially good addition to the show, but today's show was a bit of a disaster all round. I thought the team made a mess of the final chase and had blown it, but essentially won by not being as bad as the chaser!
Yeah the Richard 1 answer was a shocker for a chaser.........Monarchs and US presidents are usually standard fare for top quizzers on TV !
Originally Posted by 2shy2007:
“LOL Winchester!”
“LOL Winchester!”
Well, technically, I suppose you could break up the clods of earth by firing a rifle into them?
Originally Posted by Groundhogal:
“How can a royal flush in poker, beat a straight flush, when a royal flush is a straight flush? That's like saying four aces beats four of a kind.”
“How can a royal flush in poker, beat a straight flush, when a royal flush is a straight flush? That's like saying four aces beats four of a kind.”
Originally Posted by TheDevil666:
“10h, Jh, Qh, Kh, Ah (Royal Flush) would defeat a 5c, 6c, 7c, 8c, 9c (Straight Flush), for instance, as they are classed differently.”
“10h, Jh, Qh, Kh, Ah (Royal Flush) would defeat a 5c, 6c, 7c, 8c, 9c (Straight Flush), for instance, as they are classed differently.”
They aren't classed differently, though - "royal flush" is simply a colloquial name for an ace-high straight flush. I can understand why people might want a special name for an unbeatable high hand, but listing them as separate hand types has always irritated me. A king-high straight flush beats a queen-high straight flush, but we don't list those separately.
This doesn't look good. Chasers are expected to know the British Monarchs off the top of their head, like it's the alphabet or the times tables.
There were several questions I knew which Jenny didn't. Now that to me looks worrying.
There was also the question where she was asked which decade Richard Branson set up Virgin Records. She said the 1960s. Now that's poor.
Jenny CAN be good. But it seems that it depends on how lucky she is when it comes to what questions she is asked. Now that time has gone on you start to see how limited a sphere of knowledge she has compared to the other chasers. It makes me have new-found respect for Shaun who I previously felt was the weakest chaser.
I do like her and really hope that she gets back to winning ways.
There were several questions I knew which Jenny didn't. Now that to me looks worrying.
There was also the question where she was asked which decade Richard Branson set up Virgin Records. She said the 1960s. Now that's poor.
Jenny CAN be good. But it seems that it depends on how lucky she is when it comes to what questions she is asked. Now that time has gone on you start to see how limited a sphere of knowledge she has compared to the other chasers. It makes me have new-found respect for Shaun who I previously felt was the weakest chaser.
I do like her and really hope that she gets back to winning ways.
Originally Posted by Rogana Josh:
“She's the only Chaser I cannot take to. I just do not find her likeable.”
“She's the only Chaser I cannot take to. I just do not find her likeable.”
She has a conceited and arrogant air about her. Totally misplaced because she is not up to the job on this show.
Originally Posted by stewartb:
“Well, technically, I suppose you could break up the clods of earth by firing a rifle into them?
They aren't classed differently, though - "royal flush" is simply a colloquial name for an ace-high straight flush. I can understand why people might want a special name for an unbeatable high hand, but listing them as separate hand types has always irritated me. A king-high straight flush beats a queen-high straight flush, but we don't list those separately.”
“Well, technically, I suppose you could break up the clods of earth by firing a rifle into them?
They aren't classed differently, though - "royal flush" is simply a colloquial name for an ace-high straight flush. I can understand why people might want a special name for an unbeatable high hand, but listing them as separate hand types has always irritated me. A king-high straight flush beats a queen-high straight flush, but we don't list those separately.”
As a former professional poker player - who has played enough hands to have had around 10 royal flushes, which believe me is an awful lot of poker - I feel reasonably qualified to comment on this discussion.
Officially royal flush and straight flush are listed separately in terms of hand classification, despite a royal flush being a type of straight flush. This works well as it means there is one unique hand - the royal flush - at the top of hand classifications. It also means there are ten different possible hands which is a nice round number.
Originally Posted by Tejas:
“Its weird that Jenny's first few shows were amazing - she seemed unbeatable - and since then she's played pretty badly. I hope its just down to initial nerves, and maybe these shows were recorded before the others? Hopefully she will settle down, I do like her and think she's a potentially good addition to the show, but today's show was a bit of a disaster all round. I thought the team made a mess of the final chase and had blown it, but essentially won by not being as bad as the chaser!”
“Its weird that Jenny's first few shows were amazing - she seemed unbeatable - and since then she's played pretty badly. I hope its just down to initial nerves, and maybe these shows were recorded before the others? Hopefully she will settle down, I do like her and think she's a potentially good addition to the show, but today's show was a bit of a disaster all round. I thought the team made a mess of the final chase and had blown it, but essentially won by not being as bad as the chaser!”
yeah, not good by Jenny
even more so that the contestants really under-performed as well !
how many times do we see a contestant buzzing in and then realizing that they can't recall the answer.
Australian soaps: it's pretty much either Neighbours or Home & Away - there really is no excuse to pass on this Q !!
heck - I even guessed the Athens one
Given that we know they don't show the programmes in the order they were filmed, it is hard to know what narrative they are trying to create for Jenny.
Is it...
Show some good ones, show her sucking, show some good ones and her redemption to be an all conquering quizzing machine
or
Show some good ones, realise there are no other good ones, show her doing nothing but sucking from thereon in
Is it...
Show some good ones, show her sucking, show some good ones and her redemption to be an all conquering quizzing machine
or
Show some good ones, realise there are no other good ones, show her doing nothing but sucking from thereon in
Originally Posted by Tejas:
“Its weird that Jenny's first few shows were amazing - she seemed unbeatable - and since then she's played pretty badly.”
“Its weird that Jenny's first few shows were amazing - she seemed unbeatable - and since then she's played pretty badly.”
Yes. Initially she was very impressive, not just her knowledge but ice cool under pressure - I think I posted something to that effect.
What made her so bad yesterday was the contestants were pitiful and even a mediocre performance by Jenny would have comfortably won. Interesting to see how she performs in the future. If it's more of the same I can't see her making it to a second series.
May have been mentioned already but Jen said on Twitter that her 12th Feb show was a very early one, don't know if that gives any clue to the order they've been showing her shows.
How many shows in a series? I'm interested to know how many more shows Jenny may have left
How many shows in a series? I'm interested to know how many more shows Jenny may have left
Originally Posted by johnny_t:
“Given that we know they don't show the programmes in the order they were filmed, it is hard to know what narrative they are trying to create for Jenny.
Is it...
Show some good ones, show her sucking, show some good ones and her redemption to be an all conquering quizzing machine
or
Show some good ones, realise there are no other good ones, show her doing nothing but sucking from thereon in”
“Given that we know they don't show the programmes in the order they were filmed, it is hard to know what narrative they are trying to create for Jenny.
Is it...
Show some good ones, show her sucking, show some good ones and her redemption to be an all conquering quizzing machine
or
Show some good ones, realise there are no other good ones, show her doing nothing but sucking from thereon in”
I hope it's the former, but I suspect it may be the latter. They've been showing her losses without mercy. I can't see why they'd show 3 losses in a clump when they could have interspersed them through her earlier winning streak, unless all she has left are more losses to come.
4 out of her last 5 games have been losses, and the one win was a struggle to catch 9. Furthermore, it's been implied that her 21-step win was an early game due to her variant of costume. (She confirmed that her earlier appearances had a different dress on Twitter - less leopard print) So even that is looking more and more like a lucky fluke!
86 of 368
