Arthur Chu, a 30-year-old Ohio insurance compliance analyst, who does freelance voiceovers, has been using a geeky type of Jeopardy! game theory win.But his unorthodox methods have made him a polarizing figure in the minds of Jeopardy! viewers.Arthur first appeared on the show on Tuesday, and has won three times in a row.He is quick and confident with his answers but he has received a mixed reception from viewers with some sites such as Philly.com are calling him a 'hero', whilst others blogs like BarStool describe him as a 'mad genius'.Before appearing on the show, Arthur claims he studied the mechanics of the gameshow that has been running for 30 years.'I decided pretty early on, you know, I'm not going to be able to learn all the things I don't know in terms of actual knowledge,' he says.'You only get a month between when they call you and when you have to go out for the show. So I said, 'What's the strategy that'll serve me best on the show?' It seems that people don't actually think about the strategy of the game itself as much as they do about the knowledge.''I quickly found stories about former champions like Roger Craig and David Madden and Chuck Forrest who've bucked the 'tradition' of starting at the top of each category and slowly going down and achieved great success in the game.''There's no logical reason to do that -- if you are able to take your opponents by surprise and keep them guessing and on their toes about what the next clue is going to be, you gain a major advantage over them. One of the few parts of the game you actually have any control over is your power to select the next question after answering a question correctly,' he told MailOnline.Arthur has been tweeting his performance each night on his Twitter account @arthur_effect and through Facebook.Arthur's in-game strategy involved him jumping all over the board searching for the all-important Daily Doubles, where the contestant can decide how much to wager from a minimum of $5 up to the maximum amount they have accumulated in their bank.Typically, contestants choose a single category and progressively move from the lowest amount up to the highest, giving viewers an easy-to-understand escalation of difficulty.However, because Arthur is finding the hidden Daily Doubles, which are normally located within the three highest-paying rungs in the categories, it  means rather than building up in difficulty, he ends up starting with the most difficult questions.After a couple of the most difficult high-stakes questions have been answered, he moves over to another category.It can be a frustrating watch because it doesn't allow the viewer to get into each subject matter and viewers aren't given enough to time to get in a rhythm or fully comprehend the new subject area but Arthur defends accusations that he is being 'unsportmanlike.''Being unsportsmanlike is calling your opponents names or refusing to shake their hands. It shouldn't apply to playing the game as hard as you can and trying to win as hard as you can, within the confines of the rules. 'Not giving my opponents a chance to answer', to me, is just like not giving your opponents the chance to shoot in basketball or not letting them get within range of the goal in soccer. It's not 'unsportsmanlike', it's playing defense,' he told MailOnline.On Wednesday, Arthur managed to find all three of the game's Daily Doubles.At one point he lost everything as he wagered all his money on a Daily Double, but then he won even more with another massive wager on another Daily Double.Contestants are hesitant to go for the all-or-nothing approach, but Arthur appears to be happy taking such calculated risks.On one Daily Double, he wagered just $5. The category was sports and was a topic he knew nothing about.Contestants often avoid topics they unsure on, Arthur was playing tactically: if he lost, the most it would cost him was $5, and either way, it would take the Daily Double out of play for everyone else in the game.Host Alex Trebek and the audience giggled when the question came, Arthur immediately blurted out 'I don't know.'It wasn't a waste of a Daily Double, as he kept that question out of the hands of the other contestants. Winning in Jeopardy just means beating the other two, and his strategy made that possible.Other haters online dislike  Arthur for his incessant buzzer-clicking but Arthur defends his gameplay.'There's no logical reason for most people to play the game the way they do it - start at the top of one category and then go all the way down until you finish it,' Arthur says.'The only control you have in the game is the ability to pick where the next question is gonna be. If you have that advantage and you jump around the board, you can put the other players off their game. That's your advantage, and you don't just want to give that up for nothing.'He also plays at a blindingly quick pace, often talking over Alex Trebek's words to get to the next question.Of course, this too is also a matter of strategy. The more questions he can get to before the time runs out, the more money he can win - but it isn't the most endearing style of play.'I've been accused of being way too competitive and ruthless in my game play, and yet my betting to tie rather than beat my opponents has been treated as somehow being equally offensive for being a sign of 'weakness'. At some point it just seems like people don't really have any logic to the 'code of conduct' they expect for Jeopardy other than disliking what they find unfamiliar, and I can't really sympathize with that.On Wednesday, Jeopardy! ended in a rare tie. In Final Jeopardy, the leading contestant typically wagers $1 more than double of the 2nd place contestant.If both answer correctly, then the person in the lead wins by an extra dollar. But Arthur did not add the $1, wagering enough so that if he and fellow contestant Carolyn both answered correctly, they would tie and both walk away with a handsome cash out.She ended up getting a big payday and both moved onto the next round.(dailymail.co.uk)ANN.Az