After probably 20 solid years of watching Jeopardy, as an adult and on my own volition, I'm going to retire my habit for the time being. I don't know how long I'll step away, but this is where I'm at with the show.
James Holzhauer's run of 32 winning games and his strategy was what myself and likely many others imagined for themselves if they ever got on the show. I talked about it for years, but never thought I'd live to see it happen. Start at the bottom, work up, find the daily doubles, wager half to two thirds of your bankroll and keep winning.
In 2014, Arthur Chu had a similar but different strategy and everybody hated him for it because he upset the sleepy-paced apple cart. I think most of us who take Jeopardy and Trivia seriously admired him. Chu is considered, publicly, Jeopardy's Most Hated Contestant. Just ... wow. Imagine that.
Some people didn't like James Holzhauer's approach either as it resembled a "buzz saw" (per Trebek) which chewed through unsuspecting contestants and made the game look one-sided. The problem with the criticism was that his knowledge bank was likely the best the show had seen in over a decade. The betting strategy was just a choice of gameplay. Being prepared on that level deserves nothing but admiration. He won because of his knowledge and buzzer skill. He made the money he did based on his wagering strategy.
As a side-note, because I'm a writer, by game 9, I had considered that he might have been cheating and that there was an elaborate system at play and we were all being duped. How could someone have that much knowledge, across a library of disciplines and recall it all that quickly. It felt too good to be true. 
Obviously, this was absurd and a Dickensian fever dream of sorts, but it seemed plausible that someone from Vegas, who was connected to high-stakes gambling would be the kind of person to be out front pulling it off. Especially with that much money on the line nightly. 70k to 120k is quite the incentive to pull off a master hack / long con. But the hard truth was that he had a firm grasp of the knowledge and knew the realm in which Jeopardy's questions are centered and played strong. Running a perfect game before him sounded almost ludicrous, and people would not have believed it had they not seen it confirmed. James Holzhauer did it over 15 times.
Towards the end, it looked like Jeopardy was trying hard to unseat him. The questions by game 25 had gone outside of the usual realm of information / answers and the contestants we're increasingly 'data analysts', 'librarians', etc. and less of the usual run-of-the-mill players that show up hoping to get on. Fair play to Jeopardy if that was their interior, administrative strategy in dealing with Holzhauer. If not -- it sure looked that way to most long-time viewers whether they were ready to admit it or not. Some people are still arguing against this notion online, but the question is, if it didn't occur as it appeared, why are you pushing back so hard to avoid analyzing what was seen? Yes, we all know the setup and game rules and how they run the show. That's common knowledge. Zero points for stating the obvious. I doubt we'll ever know because it would take a Jeopardy Executive beIN interviewed about how they reacted to having someone like James Holzhauer.
I also DON'T believe the common refrain about Jeopardy contestants all being the 'best of the best.'
Yes, there is a list of the best active trivia players on that circuit. Yes, they do have it and know who's who, but there isn't enough living specialists to provide 3 per night for 9 months straight, year after year. 
Example: I did the online try out and killed it. They literally called me on the regular to come in and join the contestants pool in the audience. I'd never do well on TV as theory vs. reality is an entirely different matter, plus I have facial / body dysmorphia, so seeing myself on TV would just be too painful to watch. I'd never go live. 
This illustrates my point that not all these people are top tier, nor need to be in order to get on. Some people just have a dream and decide to show up. If they are lucky enough to go through the randomized lottery, which Jeopardy says occurs, then they've gotten to the mountaintop and are ecstatic. Fair play and we'll done.
But as a side point to consider, a friend of mine pointed out that the NBA suffers the same fate with having so many great players spread out over so many teams. Even with as much interest, finding truly remarkable players is difficult.

Some people complained that Holzhauer broke Jeopardy with his game play. On some level they're right. He exposed the show's weaknesses and illustrated what can happen when you get past your innate fear of losing and practice real risk, especially with money. He gave the public a master class in business leadership that no one was expecting. This can't be stated enough. 
Alex Trebek was once asked what he didn't like about the game and he stated that he "found it frustrating when contestants didn't wager enough or understand how to bet. They had nothing to lose and everything to gain." This ignorance of wagering is seated in fear and the show's truly most frustrating aspect.
The game isn't broken, it just got finally played to completion. It was like everybody before him made it to the Boss Level, including Jennings, who grinded out 74 games and stopped just short. But Holzhauer, like the character Parzival / Wade Watts in the film 'Ready Player One,' who got to the end, forcing a reboot and reconsideration of the whole system. When this happens, most players get up, stretch, enjoy the feeling of completion ... and move to something else. The challenge has been met and bested.
So what's going to happen next season? Will more players like James show up to play and practice the same strategy? That's likely a real concern for the show. The show show will cost the network much more money to keep on the air if so without any guaranteed ratings to boost ad revenue. Will they make a few rule adjustments going forward? Will they cap the number of games a person can play consecutively? 
I tried watching a few nights back but it looks like a bunch of headlight-struck tourists showing up as also-rans, which just feels goofy. That was my experience. 
Maybe you felt something similar or even opposite.

Final Note / Edit: 

Because people might read this far and wide and not have the context of knowing me in real life, let me state that I love Jeopardy and everything about it. I love what James Holzhauer has brought to the game and his high-level of performance and competitiveness. He should be celebrated. I very much enjoyed and rooted for Arthur Chu. To date, if I had to rank my favourite players, obviously James takes first as we've all witnessed what happened. Julia Collins and Austin Rogers tie for a close 2nd place. Much respect to the other players as they are all magnificent in their own right, including Watson.

Steffan Piper  (6.8.2019)