You children shouldn't have sweets

Had the offer actually been a good one it would not be so bad, its just the fact the banker is throwing out really bad offers lately on good boards and they are getting snapped up and we then have to endure the proveout and see the 250K blown again and again or even the 100k and 75K ken.

Sorry, but like the £5k before it the £20k was a derisory offer with the 50k and 250k still in play, and the egg offer wasn't even doubled to 40k. Not even worth thinking about. People go on about respecting the banker's offers but respect works both ways and the last two days he's shown them no respect at all and they've just let him trample all over them.

EXACTLY my friend exactly!

£20,000 wasn't a bad offer on that board! And with chance to win more, you can't blame her for dealing.

OMG!

I come back to find the QM coming to the table again?!

I have a question for the show, what's the point of putting £250k on the board if at this rate, it's not going to be won again?

Is she the 25th person, I've lost count

Yep, that's the 25th time it's been on the table from the start, and only Laura has won it. Boxes 9, 11, 12 and 22 have all now brought it 3 times to the table.

It's like I said a while ago, it's coming to the table with alarming regularity

It's still unbelievable that only 1 out of 25 have won it, what is the show coming too?

It's coming to... no, it's at the stage where the banker has been offering mediocre money for boards that deserve a lot more and people just rolling over and accepting it, even applauding it afterwards. Jo Jo said she was happy with the 20k, but I don't believe her for a second. I reckon she's been kicking herself ever since that show was recorded.

I'll field this one with something more than 'exactly', as a Wakeyist would say.

1. It's how it always has been, a budget cut would just look cheap and would reduce the show's popularity for that reason
2. Someone might indeed win it, especially as Noel will probably start bullying people again tomorrow if he hasn't stopped anyway
3. Having the £250k on the board means more larger offers that add excitement throughout. Even Jo Jo turned down the first four of hers
4. Whatever the jackpot is, not everyone will want to gamble for it. And if it gets anywhere near that stage the game's probably become dull anyway

This is a game about massive economic decisions. With a 30% chance of losing almost everything, taking £20k plus a shot at a bonus £10k was by no means stupid. Granted, it was stingy relative to the mean, but on that board it can be. If you turn that down, given the meanness of the all-or-peanuts offers, you're almost certainly playing for your box. In which case make that a 60% chance of disaster.

Jo Jo, thanks to the twist, had a choice of two lotteries. One paid out £20,000 with probability 2/3 and £30,000 with probability 1/3. The other paid out may-as-well-be-zero with probability 3/10, an unpredictable choice of lotteries that would be less lucrative than this one with probability 3/10, an unpredictable choice of lotteries more lucrative than this one with probability 3/10, and the one she got - a £50,000/£250,000 coinflip which could be rejected for a certain £130,000 - with probability 1/10.

Given the complexity of the situation, and the substantial guaranteed amount (and the outside shot at more), I don't blame her for taking the safe option. Whether I would or not I'm not sure - blooming well hope not! - but it was certainly not cowardly. At most, overcautious - and goodness knows this economy would have been better off if more people had been overcautious in the last few years.

I've not seen it and I probably won't get to see the repeat. This egg thing sounds confusing as anything. I think it's for the best i don't read this thread again given the backlash there's going to be, and unlike yesterday I'm not really in the mood for an argument.

I probably would have got the QM today though.

I think this easter egg twist is rubbish. The bad eggs should lower the total by £10,000 and then the good eggs add £10,000 on the total. Obviously if the player has dealt in the region where removing 10k would be too much or impossible, the banker could change things. But the bad eggs should do more than just leave the total as it stands..

but for the game today Words fail me but anything basicasic posts I echo probably. I'm not posting a lot because this game today doesn't deserve my time for a long post. I might do a stats write up later.

It was pathetic.

Our board we are looking at today.

10p
£10 £50,000
£50 £250,000

Basic Stat everyone should know:
Odds of any particular finish (such as the worst/best case scenario) = 10%

Offer studies:
10p/£10 = £3
10p/£50 = £20
10p/£50,000 = £15,000
10p/£250,000 = £50,000 (Massive area here but nothing lower than £40,000 surely)
£10/£50 = £25
£10/£50,000 = £15,000
£10/£250,000 = £50,000
£50/£50,000 = £15,000
£50/£250,000 = £50,000
£50,000/£250,000 = £130,000

£3+£20+£25+3x£15,000+3x£50,000+£130,000 / 10 equals what the offer should have been, at around £32,504. None of those finish offers are terribly ludicrous as I think the 250k finishes would produce something higher than £50,000, surely.

So the offer should have been, at a push, £5,000 lower than £32,000. She was offered £20,000 and a stab at a slightly less unfair 'offer' with the eggs of £30,000. But that's a 33% chance. On the face of things she was offered £20,000 which was £12,000 lower than it should have been.

Since the £15,000's aren't really a siginificant drop and the offer may be higher, it's worth classifying as a STICK in effect.

10p/£10 = £3
10p/£50 = £20
10p/£50,000 = £15,000
10p/£250,000 = £50,000 (Massive area here but nothing lower than £40,000 surely)
£10/£50 = £25
£10/£50,000 = £15,000
£10/£250,000 = £50,000
£50/£50,000 = £15,000
£50/£250,000 = £50,000
£50,000/£250,000 = £130,000

Offer studies stats:
Chance of a trainwreck offer, 30% which is incredibly low. Out of 10 eggs you would expect 3 to be cracked for example. It's a very low chance of you picking a cracked egg. 30% is low.
Chance of 5 figure money at the minimum after a ND - 70%. Definately worth playing for.
Chance of £130,000 offer, 10%. But you are backed with the 70% chance of significant 5 figure sums if you don't keep both power 5 sums.
Chance of a significantly raised offer, 40%.
Chance of a significantly lowered offer, 30%

Which means it really wasn't smart to deal at all.

Good Lord, not another QM sellout. People seem to be allergic to winning big money on this show these days. Same thing happens on the US version all the time. If I've said it once, I've said it 1,000 times - if the Banker dangles the carrot far enough in front of the player (the carrot being the offer), they'll deal way too early and squander a chance at much more money. I'm no Wakeyist, but I probably would have played all the way. People will say that you can't get a good reward without taking a risk first. This game is a perfect example of that. I hope that someone manges to take home a high Power 5 amount (£50,000 - £250,000) by going the distance sometime soon. What this show needs is an exciting game with a powerhouse win. Many people are still wating for that game to happen.

I now understand why everyone's interest in this show is dwindling. The results of the games are becoming increasingly predictable and are following some sort of pattern. Chances are, if you're a regular or semi-regular DoND viewer, you'll have noticed that each game contains one or more of the following 13 elements:
1. Someone goes the distance and wins a blue amount.
2. Someone sells a Power 5 amount for a tiny fraction of that value. Noel then tries to rub it in as much as he possibly can, thus making the player feel like crap.
3. Someone actually manages to get an OPW or TPW.
4. Someone goes the distance and wins a medium red amount (£10,000, £15,000, or £20,000).
5. Someone deals for £26,000, and finds out that it wasn't the greatest idea.
6. Someone cries.
7. Someone who was a Wakeyist while on the wings ends up being the exact opposite in their game.
8. Someone plays, and their game is actually interesting and fun to watch because they're crazy, gutsy, off-the-wall, lovable, outrageous, etc.
9. Someone plays, and the result of the game is good. The problem? The game was downright boring, or the player was obnoxious in some way.
10. Someone plays, and the Banker keeps making offers based on a certain aspect of the player's back story (a recurring number, etc.).
11. Someone is offered the swap at 2-box, takes it, and either wins big or goes broke.
12. Someone is offered the swap at 2-box, refuses it, and either wins big or goes broke.
13. Someone plays their game with a specific box-choosing system.

I'm not suddenly going to turn and start agreeing with every wakeyist rant you make, but you do raise some fair points, in my opinion

The only thing I would say is 30% isn't massive, but high enough to be regarded as more than a "one in a million" chance.

For me today? If you're wondering If I hadn't taken £20k, (I'm about 70-30 in favour of a deal) I'd have got £250k

There's enough variation in those 13 to make for good fun, but that is a great comic list.

And dangling the carrot is the Banker's job. The game comes down to whether the players bite - and the excitement comes from thinking about whether they bite and whether you'd bite. Being told that taking a Deal is a hideous mistake at all times is ruinous to that, let alone the issue of promoting gambling.

Anyway, I digress. Yes, latheboult is right on most of the offers; £15,000 seems a tiny bit generous for blue/£50k but more than conceivable, and as £50k seems a tiny bit stingy I'll roll with both. £32,504 as the value of the 'No Deal' lottery. £23,333.33 was the value of the 'Deal' lottery (it was a lottery this time due to the twist). Therefore the 'risk premium' - the incentive to take the big gamble - is the gap between the two, roughly ten grand. Enough for some - ten quid would be enough for some here - but not for others. And, apparently, not for Jo Jo. Especially with the 30% chance of nearly nothing - and that is far more significant than latheboult makes out.

The idea of the egg twist reducing the value of the offer is mildly interesting, but I think the deflation of the initial offers today effectively does that anyway.

The Easter Eggs should be shoved as far up the Bankers rear as they can go. Desperate gimmick which adds nothing to the game whatsoever.

As soon as I saw we had a 'bingo biddy' on today I thought deal. And so did the Banker with some of the derisory offers that were made. She had a great board throughout but the Banker had her number. It was so predicatable it was beyond pitiful but we all knew the insulting £20k offer would get her out of the chair. So once again the £250k is squandered for the sake of a bit of bravery.

The show is beyond saving now. They should put a flock of sheep as contestants. They'd be braver and less stupid.

The Banker's bed must be sodden now the number of times he's wet himself laughing before going to sleep at night.

Well there's my summary of today's game right there

I think you'll find that the easter eggs are similar to the christmas presents that were on in 2007.

And I don't see how contestants can be stupid on a game show which consists of luck. It's not possible even if they tried. All I can say is that if you are convinced that No Dealing is the way forward, then I'd like to see your game on the show as you crash to a blue finish and wish you gave the offers more though... As someone else said...



In my opinion, undoubtly, that was the best post that this forum has ever seen. I'd be more comfortable trusting my gut reactions, and taking a decent offer, rather than playing Russian roulette with what is left on the board and then winning peanuts.

Fairness to basicasic, he would indeed not care much. And his posts are hysterical, easily the most flair of any of the Wakeyists.

Yes, a flock of sheep would be more risk-taking. Including a metaphorical lot. They'd sheepishly obey Noel.