Baggarly's Jeopardy! run ends on day four

827081.jpg

Baggarly's Jeopardy! run ends on day four

CSNBayArea.com Giants Insider Andrew Baggarly returned to Jeopardy on Wednesday night as the three-time defending-champion after his second impressive comeback on Tuesday.

Baggarly held a slim lead throughout most of the competition, but dropped into second heading in to Final Jeopardy. Still, he had a chance to win with a correct answer.

Below is every question that Baggarly attempted to answer, both the correct responses and the incorrect ones...

Trebek: During prohibition this Budweiser maker brewed non-alcoholic beer and also made "Bevo," a non-alcoholic cereal beverage.
Baggarly: What is Anheuser-Busch?

Trebek: "La cerveza mas fina" is written on this Mexican brand's "Extra" bottles.
Baggarly: What is Corona?

Trebek: In 1784 this Irish brewery was granted water rights to its nearby channel for 8,975 years; is that a record?
Baggarly: What is Guinness?

Trebek: In the '60s: Brian Wilson and Dennis Wilson.
Baggarly: What are the Beach Boys?

Trebek: On October 2, 1871 this Mormon leader was arrested for practicing Polygamy.
Baggarly: Who is Brigham Young?

At the first break, Baggarly had a narrow lead with 2,200 to Doug's 2,000. Sue was in third place with 800.

Trebek: Andy Baggarly is our champion. He is a journalist. After the San Francisco Giants won the World Series in 2010, you wrote a book about them.
Baggarly: I did. I locked myself in a room--I was Eugene, OR at the time and I pumped out about 100,000 words in three weeks. There were one-million people, the biggest civic event in San Francisco history, for the victory parade. So I see an audience for material when it's in front of me.
Trebek: And how did the book sell?
Baggarly: Very well. Giants fans are still over the moon about that World Series. But they want to get back.

Trebek: Whelks are these animals whose name is from the Greek for "Stomach foot."
Baggarly: What are gastropods?

Trebek: Shelly's "Ode to the West Wind" asks, "If winter comes, can" this "be far behind?"
Baggarly: What is spring?

Trebek: Featuring pricing guides and reviews of the latest cars and trucks: MT.
Baggarly: What is Motor Trend?

Trebek: Hey, y'all, for food, home and travel from Texas to Florida and the states in between: SL.
Baggarly: What is Southern Living?

Trebek: Eat, drink and be merry: F&W.
Baggarly: What is Food and Wine?

Trebek: This Lord Protector's "Return from Ireland" occasioned an ode by Andrew Marvell.
Baggarly: Who is Cromwell?

After round one, Baggarly retained a slim 400 lead on Doug, 5,800 to 5,200. Sue was trailing with 3,400.

BAGGARLY'S JEOPARDY! TRANSCRIPTS: Day One -- Day Two -- Day Three

Trebek: In football it's the boundary between the teams prior to the snap of the ball.
Baggarly: What's the line of scrimmage?

Video question: Mangroves are widely used in costal recaimation, with their tolerance of saltwater, and arching roots that trap soil, they're idea for helping shoreline resist this process, for Latin for "to gnaw."
Baggarly: What is erosion?

Trebek: This name of a 22,500-acre lake near Nashville is also Andrew Jackson's nickname.
Baggarly: What is "Old Hickory?"

Video question: Because the majestic sare tree connected the Earth and the Heavens in the mythology of this Central-American people, the Sabre is still sacred to their descendants.
Baggarly: What are the Mayans?

Trebek: Derived from the Arabic Sawahil, meaning "of the coasts," it's a language on the African continent.
Baggarly: What is Swahili?

Trebek: This "maternal" term comes from the Arabic for "resin" and might be heard when talking about King Tut.
Baggarly: What is Mummy?

Trebek: We've hit bottom with this five-letter word from the Arabic for "opposite the Zenith."
Baggarly: What is Nadir?

DAILY BOUBLE: At this point, Baggarly was hanging on to a slim lead as the competition had tightened up. Andy was out front with 11,800, Doug was close behind with 11,200, and Sue was closing fast with 8,600.

Baggarly wagered 1,200.

Trebek: Hertha Pauli's 1942 biography of this man was subtitled "Dynamite King, Architect of Peace."
Baggarly: Who is (Alfred) Nobel?

Trebek: Similes, metaphors and personification, for example.
Baggarly: What are figures of speach?

Trebek: As seen on a map, this island lies between England and Ireland, and about 20 miles south of Scotland.
Baggarly: What is the Isle of White? (incorrect)

Had Baggarly answered that question correctly, he would have taken the lead heading into Final Jeopardy. Instead, he stayed in second place with 12,200, just 200 ahead of Doug with 12,000. Sue had surged into the lead with 15,200.

FINAL JEOPARY CATEGORY: New Olympic sports.

Trebek: This sport introduced in summer 2000 plays out over a raised area 16.5 feet long and 9.5 feet wide.

- Doug wagered 10,000 and correctly answered "What is trampoline?" to finish with 22,000.
- A visibly upset Andy Baggarly wagered 11,801 but incorrectly answered "What is sumo wrestling?" to drop to 399.
- Sue had wagered 9,201, but also gave and incorrect answer: "What is fencing?" to drop to 5,999.

So the Jeopardy! saga ended for Andy Baggarly. Three wins, 61 correct answers, 60,402 total winnings. The newsroom was cheering for you. Congratulations!

President Obama pardons Giants legend Willie McCovey

President Obama pardons Giants legend Willie McCovey

President Barack Obama pardoned Giants Hall of Famer Willie McCovey on Tuesday.

McCovey, along with Dodgers Hall of Fame outfielder Duke Snider, pleaded guilty to tax fraud in July of 1995. The crime came from not reporting income McCovey earned from signing autographs and appearing at sports memorabilia shows. 

McCovey previously pleaded guilty to not listing $70,000 he made from 1988-90, according to the San Jose Mercury News.

The 79-year-old McCovey was one of 64 people who received pardons from President Obama Tuesday as his final days in office wind down.

Hall of Fame voters' biggest issue: Do they work for the job or the sport?

Hall of Fame voters' biggest issue: Do they work for the job or the sport?

With Jeff Bagwell and Tim Raines, and maybe even Trevor Hoffman about to be voted into the Baseball Hall of Fame, we have re-entered the hellish debates about who should vote, and why they should vote, and whether needles are good or bad and whether both are trumped by cashing the checks those needles made possible and why being transparent about their votes is good and why being transparent about their votes is actually bad.
 
In other words, the Hall of Fame isn’t actually about players any more. It’s about the voters.
 
The Danes call this “rampant narcissism.”
 
We have danced around this central fact for years now, hiding behind debates about performance enhancing drugs and the profiting thereof, voting limits and their degree of strangling artificiality, and the new writers vs. the old veterans, and who should be vilified, justifiably or otherwise, by whom.
 
Yay hatred by proxy!
 
But the process arguments ultimately aren’t the central point here. The argument is really about something more basic.
 
Are voter/journalists supposed to help enhance the mythology of the sport, or dispassionately tell its story? Who are they working for when they vote?

To that end, every vote tells a story well beyond the names checked off or the blank ballots submitted. One man, Ryan Thibodaux (@NotMrTibbs, to you), has been invaluable in delving into the voting minutiae from the growing number of voters who release their opinions early. But, and he’ll admit this if you strike him often enough, that’s still a process discussion, and the core of the debate is found elsewhere.
 
Baseball writers are like football writers and basketball writers and hockey writers and curling writers and blah-blah-blah-de-blah-blah, in that they are prone to love the sports they cover beyond their journalistic mandate. That’s probably true of most journalists in most fields, but baseball has the Hall of Fame outlet to allow this internal debate to play itself out before our faces.
 
So the question becomes whether their votes are the representation of dispassionate analysis, or a defense of the mythos of the sport and the concept of the Hall itself. Boiled down to its essence, who are the voters defending here, the sanctity of the myth, or the ugliness of the reality?
 
The answer, as it usually is, is, “Depends on who you talk to.”
 
Hall of Fame debates usually lump all voters into one amorphous blob, a level of lazy and stupid thinking that should in a more perfect world be punishable by death. Okay, we kid. Life on a Louisiana prison farm, with parole after 25 years.
 
In fact, voters cover a fairly wide swath of opinion, and for whatever perceived shortcomings they might have, there are enough of them (about 450) to be a fairly accurate measure of the diaspora of baseball opinion across social, cultural, sporting and chronological lines.
 
But the argument about whether an individual voter feels more responsible to the job he or she is paid to do or to the game he or she covers as part of that job remains largely unconsidered, or at the very least masked by other considerations.
 
This manifests itself all the way down to the hot-pocket word “cheating.” Baseball is about cheating, and about honor. It’s about racism, and trying to overcome it. It’s about greed, and selflessness. It’s a sport, and it’s a business. It’s America, in all its glorious and hideous manifestations. To employ “cheating” as a word is in itself dishonest, and given that everyone got rich off the PED era and kept all the money they made makes PED use a de facto workplace condition approved by management and labor.
 
That may be unsavory, and it certainly is illegal without a proper doctor’s prescription, but because by their inaction the owners decided not to punish it (and in fact chose to reward it with contracts and extensions for users even after testing was instituted), it isn’t “cheating.”
 
And even if that argument doesn’t heat your rec room, it isn’t the role of the writer to punish it. It is the role of the writer to reveal it by journalism means, but that’s where the journalist’s role ends. The people who ran baseball took the journalism, acknowledged it, and did nothing until it ramped up detection and did little other than blame the union for a failing that both sides share equally.
 
So in the end, Raines’ votes or Barry Bonds’ votes or Curt Schilling’s votes or Edgar Martinez’ votes are fun to debate, but they aren’t the issue. It’s whether the voters think when they sit down and confront their ballot every year who exactly they’re working for – the job, or the sport.
 
And yes, I vote. Voted for the maximum 10. You’ll find out tomorrow the contents of my ballot. Then you can make that a process story, too.