I had the same thought! That didn’t make sense to me.

I believe in a circle every point would have the same radius. If two shapes had the same diameter but different radii then one would be an oval rather than a circle I believe. It’s been a long time since I took geometry tho.

No. In a circle, d=2r. Always.

When I first heard the question (before the answer) I interpreted it as - When comparing 2 different circles, if their radii or their diameter are equal then the 2 circles are equal. It wasn’t about comparing the radius and diameter of a single circle.

Y’all are overthinking the clue, which was: “According to Euclid equal circles are those for which either of these 2 measurements are equal–makes sense.” No interpretation or geometric proof was necessary. It was simply “according to Euclid…”

I think what threw me (and I suspect the math teacher as well) was “either.” Had they said “are those for which these 2 measurements…” or “are those for which both of these 2 measurements…” I think the math teacher would have gotten it right (he would have said both not just radius).

To me, when it can be either one or both (or neither), it makes sense to say “either.” But definitionally, it cannot be either; it must be both. Which is why its weird to me to include either. But if Euclid did, then that would be the explanation. I blame him.

It went a step further though because after the math teacher only said radius, the defending champ said diameter and circumference. There is not either there either, is there? If the diameter of two circles is the same, their circumference must be the same (by formula). You can’t have circles with the same radii but different circumferences or diameters.

I must be suffering from Mattea withdrawal, because last night’s (May 13) show was a another snoozefest. THREE low energy players: math teacher champ, woman with British accent, and very very laid back third player. With all three of them, there was a noticeable silence between being called on to answer and actually answering. The only exception was when the eventual champion ran a category based on TV.

No rhythm or cadence to the game at all. And again, leaving clues on the board as a result.

AND–the British lady answered a clue from “DC Tourism” category with “What is the Eiffel Tower?”. UGH.

I totally agree about the caliber of last night’s players. Makes me wonder how they even got past the in-person audition. Maybe they’re not doing that because of COVID? If so, that’s a shame because the in-person audition is where the personality of the contestant really affects the final selection process.

Matt was like that from day one. He explained that if he was comfortable with a category he would immediately buzz in and then search his brain for the answer, which he almost always came up with in time.

Maybe it was the contestants’ pause, followed by Bialik’s pause before confirming a correct response, is what got to me. Ken is much quicker at acknowledging a correct reply.

I’ve noticed that. Another reason for Ken to be permanent host!

Amen brother!! Preaching to the choir.

Yep, I’m on Team Ken, too. Seems like the obvious choice.

ANYONE but Mayim Bialik please. Anyone at all. That voice grates worse than nails on a chalkboard. Every time that commercial comes on where’s she hawking some drug, my family and I cover our ears. Would never buy it just because of who is hawking it. As for Jeopardy, it makes me angry that I’m deprived of a fave TV program on the days she hosts. Loved Anderson Cooper and a few others too but really, anyone would be better than this gasbag.

I like both Mayim and Ken. Sorry you have to miss out when Mayim is hosting….

Process made me realize I like the show itself, its format, contestants, etc. more than I do the host (including Alex). So I am fine with either host. Would like continuity though to avoid the host being too noticeable (takes a little time getting used to Ken, and then Mayim starts and need to get used to her hosting, then Ken comes back and it starts over).