Maud has said what I was going to here so I've quoted her...also, how on earth can you call someone greedy for dealing at £10,000 so they can take a group of children to Disneyland!! Greedy would be if she had no dealt the £10,000 saying it was enough to take them but not enough for her!

I really do not get some people on here sometimes, you seem to want contestants to gamble every game and not realise that Endemol have to cater for the masses and that some people actually prefer the games like today. Both types of games are obviously going to happen so maybe you could accept that there will be games which you won't enjoy and which the emotional people among us will love and vice versa

What an excellent post.

I have to say, I love these threads. Say what you like about people here, they can't ever be accused of not having conviction in their own unique opinions!

Today's show was, as Cazzie rightly says, a really good show for real viewers. A lovely person who it was easy to care about who took a big risk for her - lost out but went home with high hopes. Great. But few people here will ever enjoy shows like these - and fair enough, that's their prerogative- but the truth is it's shows like this which have given the show such a long contract with channel 4. Normal people love them enough to happily watch them daily while hoping for the next thriller.

SrWilson I think is one of those people who don't care about the theme of the game just how he wants somebody to win alot of money and do what he wants them to do and when they don't do what he wants them to do he goes into a tantrum.......I agree....pathetic

Joanne was a woman who wanted to take her children to Disneyland because she cared for her Downs Syndrome boy and wanted to make him happy. And I like contestants who think the same way. When somebody says they want to do something for their family that is moving...when somebody dosen't give a toss about their families lives you just want them to go away with nowt.

She wasn't greedy, most people would do the same. Well Done Joanne On 10k

I think the reason members like SrWilson and basicasic consider it greedy dealing 10k regardless is because these targetists don't seem to care that the ir board is immaculate, strong and stable, as long as they are offered their target (money for a trip to disneyland) they take the offer regardless of the board being excellent. This is greedy, as they've come on the show, done naff all, not read the board at all, and somehow think it's fine to nab a trip to disneyland in the meantime. I'd like to see a little more effort gone into a player's winnings to be quite frank.

Okay, when the player goes for it I would see why it's also classed as greediness. But at least if they win something, a hell of a lot of effort has gone into winning it. The show of present seems to be 'the quickest way on planet earth to win yourself a few grand' - hey, even with sums of up to £250,000 pounds available to be won, some people unbelievably settle for that few grand. Greedy barstewards.

I suppose the banker's gamble is being used more often than not on the blue/35k finishes because the expected offer on that finish represents the average 10-20k deals we get these days. It would be a refreshment for someone to go for it.

She was the most greediest person I've seen. Yes, she had a son with Downs Syndrome, I hate to say it, but life goes on, and I think that she should've considered the £10k atr least, and there'd be half this squabble.

I think the point that most people missed at the beginning of the show is that she wanted money to take her 4 kids on holiday to Disney World, which they hadn't been able to do before. If £10k was enough for her to be happy to do that, then fair play. At least she had made her mind up (unlike some players last week).

Interesting twist to the banker's gamble - which confused me when I watched the show but luckily having 4OD means I could rewatch it. Given my no swap policy, I have no idea what I would do if the banker made a banker's gamble on 2 boxes where I felt the risk was justified but said I had to swap.

Her deal and her board weren't too dissimilar to Sal's from a few weeks ago. You said you enjoyed that game. So you're basing the greed of a player purely on the speed with which they ask for the question?

We don't know if she'd have dealt 10k if it were offered earlier in the game - she dealt at 5 box when the board could have gone either way and at an offer which a lot of people would have taken. Dealing at 5 box for £10k is far from uncommon so to pick her out as the "most greediest person (sic)" is a bit harsh.....

Give it a rest.... How can a person who wanted to treat their WHOLE family to a holiday be labelled greedy. She never singled out that the idea of using the money was to make it up somehow for her son having downs syndrome, as already said she wanted to take her whole family of 6 I believe it was.

The only squabble is from the resident No Dealers who aren't getting the type of show they yearn for every game.

N-W: I was ultimately trying to get at the fact that she didn't consider going on, even with the odds left.

Ultimately, what us Wakeyists want is a big percentage of gamblers, with a few targetists/early dealers to make the gambling side of things exciting still. Who'd agree on that?

Once in a while you get a show where the player takes a reasonably justifiable deal and provides a fairly feel-good show, and it gets totally ripped apart on here by certain members... today's show is one of those.

It wasn't anything overly exciting or awe inspiring, but it was a reasonable show and Joanne was alright, I thought. I was expecting her to deal the rather poor 8-box offer of £5,000 and I was surprised she no dealt. I think the "resident no-dealers" should be thankful she had a stab at playing on when clearly she was close to dealing at 8-box.

The ending confused me somewhat with the banker's gamble which included a swap, when I didn't hear Joanne make any reference to wanting to swap (unless of course I missed a reference to a swap earlier on).

She was happy with the 10k and the studio was in danger of getting flooded (with all the tears)

Good luck and enjoy your hols...

Aitch,

Why on earth are you getting so worked up about something that hasn't actually happened?? I doubt such a scenario would ever come about and if it did probably the majority of people would advise taking the gamble...

I'd have carried on but Joanne was clearly a nervous wreck for most of the game and I thought it was really nice to see her so relieved that she'd got to where she wanted to be and grateful for the money. If she'd ended up with a blue it would have been a hell of a lot more depressing...

i saw the end of the show today and i thought here we go another sob story as everyone was crying. when she took the 10k i couldnt believe it. you get one chance of been on the show and she had a fairly good board.
Im ashamed to admit it but i laugh now when people have a large no in there box and theyve dealt at a bad offer. granted 10k is alot of money and i wouldnt say no to it but 35k is more and id of been more gutted at not going on like ive always i would.
come on edemol, pull up your socks and get decent contestants like you used to in the 1st year. gamblers or you may as well ask each contestant who goes on, how much theyd deal at and just give them that target. at least we wouldnt hear sob storys as we have over the last few weeks. its not a charity its a game show. get a grip/. im losing it with the sjhow and i never thought i would but if theyre not careful no one will watch the show. theres enough sadness in the world look at china without having a gameshow giving sadness out. it needs to have humour.

Spot on Flamed. To see someone blubbing because £5000 wasn't enough fair turned my stomach.

And thinking about the earthquake and cyclone victims and the millions starving children in the world make these sob-stories appear exactly what they are. Gratuitous and pathetic.

I despair- First we had Jimbo's weak cop out at £10,000 on a board that begged to be played further. Then we got Monday's travesty where Heldy's bravery wasn't rewarded to the extent it really should- then yesterday Emjay took a reasonable enough deal but the board was asking for more once again.

But today- today really took the biscuit. Not only did whatever her name was cry at every available moment over the most trivial of things, she then went and dealt a feeble offer of £10,000 on a, in my opinion, brilliant board. Ok- I can empathise with what she needed to money for but she could've at least considered the offer... and I doubt editing played any major part in what we saw to be honest.

Same old format as ever- if she'd gambled and then accepted the £10,000 on the £5/£35,000 finish then I'd have fully respected the decision because at least she showed a degree of "game playing" (considering every offer she had up until the final 2 was a simple no deal).

I don't know- we need to stop seeing all of these whingebags with their sob stories and, instead, we need to start seeing a few more gamblers- not to the January 2007 extent but a mix is desperately needed.

I'm not going to go overboard but i didn't like the show either - the tears were slighlty depressing and it seemed a bit flat TBH.

I agree with Basic and flamed

Sob story after sob story don't contestants think it's time to put the past behind them and focus more on what they're doing...playing Deal or no Deal. I think it's best to have positivity instead of despair. 4.15pm you're in a jovial mood feeling pleased but then a contestant tells a tragic past which really puts a damper on your day. Okay I've been through some tragic pasts before but I don't go on national television and tell it to 3 million odd viewers. It's best to keep it to yourself.

i would classify 'greed' similarly....and at no point did it come to mind at this deal, in this game. the behaviour of angela (' i didnt come here for that!') and jo last week, where nothing is good enough (esp in the case of jo-the banker was exceedingly good to her??). that to me sums up failure to read the board, resulting in shooting-in-foot because of apparent greed....thats my perception of greed in the game anyway.

bankers gamble was a waste in this show, completely. it wasnt the easiest game to watch by any means, but i was happy for her. she got what she wanted, and there's plenty of people who dont!

I was going to watch this on More4 but got sidetracked by an old episode of Gladiators on Challenge... looks like I made the right decision!

You certainly did, this was Hidious!