If she made the decision she did under quite remarkable pressure not to, of course it was the right decision!

Six five-figure wins out of those six is quite an impressive feat even if the biggest was twenty grand.

Chivers? Oh come off it H, don't start drooling again!

I agree 100% and you'll probably notice that we've not complained in anyway. Not me as a friend of Clares or clare in person. I defended Clare a couple of times earlier, but I didn't need inside knowledge to see that. It was an opinion based on what has been aired. For example, when I defended Clare regarding making people to go on all the time, I can think of many situations, all that were aired, that would back up my claims. Many other people agreed. And for Clare to be impolite or rude. It wasn't just me who argued that point, many people who didn't see the shows in the studio disagreed with those comments.

You won't get any complaints by me if someone speaks badly of a player. It's an open forum and anyone has the right to voice their opinion, but I will give my opinion if I disagree, which is my right also. we certainly won't complain about it, and haven't.

hi Dan i agree with all you have said

but it remains for us at least harder to pass comment on people who are great buddys

but just to add I love your presence on the board and others who have an input too but I still want to add its like a lovely club that you are all lucky to belong too and as outsiders are only giving our opinions as I am sure "from your post" you appreciate

I don't want to see a forum where people are afraid to give their honest opinions, but I do want to see a forum where those opinions are expressed in a friendly and respectful manner.

It's not what you say, but the way that you say it!

Mr al I do agree with you entirely

I think we have to remember these people playing are just like me and you and as I said the decision should be respected

but we are all allowed to comment although i do agree some over react a little in the heat of the moment

I most certainly did make the right decision for me Dan. I couldnt gamble with £15k - and i have had not one regret since. Ive never ever had that kind of money in one go!!!! haha...its been great too!

It was thinking of my family and what i wanted to do with the money that helped me to deal - to be honest, im surprised i turned down 12,500!! hahahaha

Well done on the £15,000, Clare Louise!!

You're great, Clare-Louise

I've been looking forward to your game for ages and you certainly didn't disappoint.

Well done on that £15k, you've been one of the BEST contestants in recent times in my opinion!!!!!

Enjoy the dosh

Hi Clare.

Just a quick message now to say I enjoyed today's show. Thought you came across really well and should have no regrets dealing when you did.

Enjoy the money xxx

Rhona

Personally, I'd much rather watch someone fun and entertaining make a potentially cautious deal than someone dull/boring/obnoxious making the perfect deal. On that basis, well done Clare-Louise! Hope you enjoy the 15k.

OK, now that all the unpleasantness has been cleared up, can someone please explain the paper, scissors, rock business?!

I'll let Dan explain! He'll do it better than me!

Well I hope nothing I have said or done has stopped you from airing your honest opinions. I can only speak for myself (and it appears clare is of the same opinion), but I'm happy for anyone to question anything that me or my firends have said or done on the show. I went on TV, so I made a decision to be judged by the viewers. I have no problem with people voicing their opinions, and infact, I encourage it.

Well it looks like that is sorted.

The paper scissor rock thing was nothing really, but at 8 box, I could see clare wanted to have a Deal justified, so I said that the chance she would get rid of the £250k in the next round was greater than the chance we could have a game of paper, scissor, rock and it would be a tie*. We then had a game of paper scissor rock and both displayed paper, giving a little laugh and a few woos from the crowd. It was just a little way to clear Clares mind and give her a realistic understanding of just how likely it was that the big one would go.

This got cut and I've got to admit that I am a little dissapointed with the way things are being edited to be honest. I have noticed that all of my advice is getting edited to get rid of all the maths and stats. The amount of time, I will say something like, "I think theres another round in it", but it has missed my reasoning beforehand. I'm starting to get KP-like opinions on the way the show is put together and the programmes agenda. I think that giving Clare, Alfonso and Ash some defensive advice on the necklace usage (which the player in question would get the most out of) didn't really fit into the producers idea for the story.

I remember questioning the validity of offering a low offer due to the "ladder" that was appearing. I raised this as a silly excuse to lower an offer that people are allowing to be truth, but it was a falacy. They cut all my reasoning for my comment and just left the end bit on about the offer being a falacy, which in that isolated context, didn't really make sense.

I guess it is just the nature of TV and it isn't really a big gripe, but it has been disappointing that some of my favorite bits of advice have been cut.



*As it happens, the line wasn't completely true because it suggests that the choice we have in paper, scissor, rock is truly random, but as humans, we struggle to do random. I had a good idea that Clare would go for paper because it is generally what most people do in an impromptu game of PSR. Try it, and if you catch the other player unaware and unable to strategise, paper will come out more than 1 in 3. This is because we are generally always going to avoid the rock, because that is the same hand position you would have in the "1....2....3" part of the game and too simplistic. Scissors would be more common, but being the most complex of the 3 hand signals, is often avoided, leaving the hand which is a middle ground between the 3 and will usually be the first choice for most people.

The ladder falacy was a theory I had which was cut from the show. The banker said that the amount of money was good, (I think it was Barbs game), but there was a terrible ladder appearing and the banker asked what I thought. All that bit was aired.

I then said that the "ladder" thing is something the banker invented to allow him to offer low offers, my reasoning is: -

I think the board was (I can't be bothered to check, but it was along these lines):

10k

20k

50k

100k

250k

My argument was that people often care too much about the physical layout of the amounts and not the actual sums of money. I then went to say that from £10k, it goes up 100%....150%.....100%....150% and that the money is actually distributed really well. Each big amount has a backup that is fairly close to it. Just my opinion, but I think they cut it because they didn't like one of the shows terms "money ladder" to be tarnished.

Well Clare-Louise your game has been discussed at length

I saw up to the first break and had to go out and didn't get a chance to watch it last night but as I went to bed I sneaked a look at the forum and saw your show thread had 8 pages

So when I could not get off to sleep and I kept wondering how your game had ended

And that is why I was watching your game at 2am this morning

I will admit to being disappointed when you dealt and the next box was blue, however had that box been the £250k it would have been a different story.

£15k is a lot of money for most people and I am very happy for you

Enjoy the money

Here's my view:

That was a really good game. Clare, you were lovely and brilliant! You've been a vital part of the wings in the recent shows and it was good to see you go away with a sum of money that you are happy with.

I don't blame you for dealing at all. To me, having the frame of mind of going home with a decent sum but not regretting it if you could have got more is a great way of thinking. The board could have easily swung the other way.

So well done Clare! Hope to hear more from you on here!

To be honest, Dan, I'm quite surprised that they even chose you to be a contestant. There have been quite a few 'spiritualists' (for want of a better description) chosen play the game, who use things like superstition and 'feelings' and 'belief' to help make their decisions, but very few who use the cold, hard logic of mathematics. At least, very few who have overtly based their whole strategy on it like you have.

I really like the rock-paper-scissors analogy too. Obviously somebody like me would love for them to include more stuff like that in the edit, but I think that the producers generally like to keep 'the facts' hidden. They don't want people coming along and spoiling everybody's fun by proving everybody's superstitions wrong by being all logical.

A ladder is merely visually interesting, and a red ladder implies a board with reasonable stability. A £10k/£20k/£50k/£100k/four blues board isn't that wildly different to a £10k/£35k/£50k/£75k/four blues board in terms of value (I'd want about £13k on each) - the former's a bit less stable but has a bit more money on it - but it looks interesting, and eye-catching configurations can often get picked up on by the Banker as an excuse for unlikely offers (here, either £15k+ or four figures) as he declares the position to be stronger or weaker than it is. Players must be aware of this, although having said that such unlikely offers are quite likely to produce fairly clear-cut decisions.



Every time I read through the text commentary - because my telly's stopped working and I've half given up with the show anyway - I keep reading variations of 'Daniel says No Deal', and can't remember the last time the text commentary implied you were endorsing a Deal. The obvious intention there is to create the impression of 'smart contestants say No Deal'.



Knew it would happen, I'm afraid. It's not just me:



Weaver went on to spectacularly describe the show as seen on television as "Noel Edmonds giving a 45-minute illustrated lecture on the merits of gambling, even when the illustrations completely contradict his message".



Indeed.

I'm glad you've shown the courage to speak out like this on here, even if you're mincing your words a little. You've revealed more than enough to illustrate that, unfortunately, I was more than a little bit right all along. It is the nature of TV - and to be quite honest I believe it should be a big gripe.

I have to say, i was disappointed it was cut too. It was fun during a tense time on my game, and we did get a good reaction from the audience, but it was also Dan's way of putting the board into context for me a little bit. Im certainly no mathmatician, and Dan was crucial. He knew that money was a good amount for me, and helped me to rationalise my thoughts. It is a pity it was edited out, and a lot of other stuff he says, cos he really did play a crucial role in my game as my maths brain and my mate.

Im looking forward to your game Dan! ...and the 28th!