It reminds of the tension for professional athletes between playing simply to win and playing to put on a good show for the audience. Of course, athletes have

It reminds of the tension for professional athletes between playing simply to win and playing to put on a good show for the audience. Of course, athletes have a more direct commercial relationship with their fans, so have a greater degree of responsibility to entertain them. For a jeopardy contestant who plays once, it seems reasonable that they play in whatever fashion they determine gives them they best chance of winning. But for a jeopardy contestant who wins consistently and plays a large number of shows, do they accrue any responsibility to be the equivalent of "a good sport" and put on a show for the fans -- who are, indirectly, paying for their continued winnings? I appreciate Arthur Chu's strategy and applaud him for his rational approach to the game. But, as a regular watcher, I definitely enjoy the game less when he's playing, because I find it harder to follow along with the questions. I don't necessarily think this is a Bad Thing, but I think it's worth exploring.