Chris, I don't know if you're the right person to answer this, but I've read a lot of recent articles about Watson, only a few of which seem to show much understanding of Jeopardy strategy. One thing that's been bugging me is the people who think they could beat Watson just by selecting the categories that they expect Watson to be weaker in. For example, Stephen Baker wrote this article
in which he said that his strategy was to "feast on" the shorter and more humorous clues.
But assuming that all clues on the board will be played, as was the case in all of Watson's matches, does it really matter whether the human-friendly clues are found early or late in the game, or who selects them? It seems like Baker's strategy would at best allow him to be more competitive early in the game before inevitably being trounced later in the game on the computer-friendly clues. I guess there's some bragging value in saying "I had Watson worried for a while" instead of "I was never close, but I held my own toward the end."
My question applies mainly after the Daily Doubles have been found. Since all three players made finding DDs their top priority, they tended to be found early. And it's not obvious to me that the humans should necessarily hunt for DDs in the human-friendly categories. Depending on the relative scores at the time, it might make more sense for humans to seek DDs in Watson's favorite categories, to prevent him from using them to jump to an insurmountable lead.
Of course, Daily Doubles are most valuable when you have a substantial amount available to wager, so there is a case to be made for trying to build up one's score before seeking DDs. But that approach carries a much higher risk of allowing your opponent to find the DD before you do.