James1978 wrote:
I'd say it was a game with one big decision at 8-box and it went wrong (similar to Pip really in that the big decision went wrong the other way). I'd agree that the £9,500 was dealable (and I'd have dealt it thinking the banker would offer something like 3k next time if one of the biggies went), but at least it happened by being brave rather than being forced on. And also it was nowhere near as bad a no-deal as we would have seen just under two years ago, I remember Theresa turnign down 21k on a similar board and crashing (21k, seriously!!!).
In the days when 10k would have been offered on 100k/4 blues or 75k/orange/3 blues then £9,500 there would have seemed stingy.
So I really hate all the "she deserved to win a blue" comments. It was risky but I was really hoping it paid off for her, sadly not to be.
Fair point. Theresa's was on completely another level!! I'm sure Sarah wouldn't have been THAT stupid and I wish she was playing then (although she may have dealt for sub-£10k at 11-box instead?!? She wouldn't have won a blue, put it that way!)
It was a situation where turning it down probably meant playing to the end. I don't think she realised that. The only bad decision on DoND is an ill-informed one, and in my opinion that was an ill-informed decision (although for someone with a different approach to risk a ND would be understandable if they thought 'right, it's a 25% chance of winning £75,000 or more, I'm prepared to go home with a blue, ND'. alexandercbrown might think that!)
Totally agreed with Simon F - he reminds me of another quote from the early days of BB - 'it's funny that in a game with only one decision to make none of the contestants seem to even consider the one thing they have to go on - mathematical probability'.
Guess I've got so used to criticising bad Deals lately that criticising a bad No Deal gives me feelings of nostalgia or something!
FAQ
Posted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:22 am Author: Moxx of Balhoom Post subject: Re: 11/01 Sarah
