I think it was to be honest. I can understand that the money was just too much for Richard and Colleen to turn down, but I can't see why you'd be that desperate to take £6,600 when it was such a *beep* offer and you'd turned down more already.

OK if coleen took out the 100k and the 250k in the next round she wouldof stillgot about 20k wouldnt she

2 Points well made H.

If only Bunny and Tommii's were on I would run for the hills. I am in fact sick of people who are OTT and interrupt. Charles and Clive are two of my favourite contestants EVER. If the show was of constant wannabes I would turn off in an instant.

Your other quote on whether the production team think whether they should have gone on is valid too, because they looked good at the audition. Just look at all those Big Brother audition tapes where the idiots say when I get in the house I am going to do this that and the other, and they are the most boring people once they go in, because they are really nothing. I think it is great to have a mix. Just look at Marysia, a quiet and quite timid well mannered woman I imagine. She had had a very bad year, and really thought she must get on with life after being in such a long relationship that ended in sadness. She got a new job, and as she said at the end had one of the best experiences of her life being on the show and making so many friends. She deserves a try, and I thought she played brilliantly.

Yet of course people like her don't have the approval of many of the posters here.

I read these posts daily, and often whilst I am watching the game on catch up later, and I Imagine that most of the very verbal posters who say the player should go on, or are wasting their opportunity must be young, and don't work or are students. I am sick of the "I would have done this, I would have done that posts" every day. (Waits for backlash about having an opinion).

What alot of you don't do is look at the player and imagine where they are in their life, what has happened in their life, what they expect out of the rest of their life. Money goes such along way to making questions like that alot easier.

Again with Marysia for example, she all through all the episodes came across shy, and quiet. How do you suddenly expect a woman perhaps 60 plus to go right through to the end with a board such as she had. She showed very little bravado all through the game, worrying about whether to go. Why then suddenly think that she is some confident 25 year old confident alpha male who is "going right thru to the end innit"

Please look at the player in future, try and get into their mindset before posting such bullish responses. Or the other option is go on the show yourself, play like you say you would, win big, let me know the dates your show goes on in the spoilers, then I can avoid it like the plague.

I, for one, knew she couldn't be such a player.

Even accounting for all that it was a poor deal, though. And for one reason and one reason alone. The first offer was both a larger sum of money and more generous. I have little objection to players like Marysia - and probably more objection to the 'alpha males' you describe. I just think it was poor gameplay even considering that. Good gameplay for someone as cautious as Marysia would have been a first-offer Deal. It'd have got her perilously close to an OPW as it turned out, too! (Except not, because he'd then have offered £26,000 at five-box or something stupid... and then a Banker's Gamble at two-box.)

I used to be very tolerant about players circumstances but my patience snapped at the end of last year because people stopped gambling and variety went down the drain. I respect the value of money but 6.6K isn't that much in gameplay terms especially in the context of the board - worth slightly more than double . Pehaps these players do have bad current circumstances and I'm sorry if they do but there needs to be a decent amount of people who will go for the big money.

This pretty much sums up the mood of the forum, I think. (Discounting the original Wakeyists.) Once, most of the forum railed against the Wakeyism, certainly in its unchecked variety. But in the episodes filmed since the Northern Rock crumbling, and especially the ones filmed amidst the backdrop of rapidly rising food and fuel prices, almost everyone's played safe, and almost everyone here's been frustrated to some extent. Even me, and I was a bastion of anti-Wakeyism.

Interesting, isn't it?

It shows how the forum goes in "waves". In Gary's game of May 2006, several forum members were saying how he was greedy and should've dealt. Certain regular today's show contributors at the time said how he was not greedy; he was just playing the game. Then about six months later, the mood of the forum seemed to change and become more pro-dealing... and lately, as you say, it's become more pro-gambling (and can anyone be blamed for taking that attitude after some of the poor deals we've witnessed recently!).

I don't buy the "people have bad circumstances" thing because if they were that bad they'd take the first offer, which no one has ever done. If £6,600 meant that much to her she'd have gone earlier.

Not neccessarily, because no matter what the opening offer there's always going to be the potential of considerably more money, it's not until the halfway stage that for most players the odds really start to come into play

I think Trickey's right (Hope you don't mind me calling you Trickey i can't remember your full name ) it's all very well saying whay you think a player should do but personal circumstances are always going to play a factor in anyone's game.
Marysia is on a widow's pension - possibly only recieves the State pension - we don't know what sort of savings she has, how well off she is anythng, that money may not seem like much compared to the potential of the board but it is real money.

I'm all for taking a punt or a gamble on the board, but i think every player should first ask themselves the serious question of whether they would be prepared to face the worst case scenario. If they can't it's time to call it a day

I think she wanted to take it but knew she would be hung drawn and quartered for doing so and rightfully so too!

I thought she worked in a computer shop? she said she started there after her husband and mother died. so she's either on a state pension or she's working. Besides, she struck me as not exactly being down on her uppers. As I posted somewhere else earlier, she reminded me a lot of my own Mum, and one of those ways was when she showed the pic of her son taking her abroad on holiday. My mum was never well off on her pension, but she never wanted for anything either, so I think all the talk about being on a pension is a bit OTT. Plus, remember she's a Fifer! She could be sitting with a million in the bank and genuinely feel skint!!

She seemed like a very nice lady, and deserved her winnings whatever else we want to say about her. And point well made by those above about there needing to be a good variety. One Bunney was more than enough, thanks very much.

I don't know, because it didn't happen...

If you take that hideously flawed logic, then dealing £1,000 on a 1p/10p/50p/£1/£250,000 board is a good move because there's only 1 amount higher. The offer was dreadful and should've been rejected without a second thought.

There was only one box higher than Michael's £1,000 when he dealt....that was a really good deal wasn't it?