I hated that twist!

It brings back horrible memories of Wakey (I think, but it could have been Wilson) saying the contestant should lose money if they dealt and it was a bad move.

Then again she should have been a bit more savvy with the banker, she did show her hands a bit too easily!

That was indeed Wakey's advice unless I'm very much mistaken. Should I find the post? Must I find the post?

Yes! For old time's sake!

It was before my time here anyway so come on!

It seems a while since a player has dealt 2 deals to early and it's now December 9th since the QM came to the table.

It's been December 9th since the quarter-million came to the table for quite a few weeks now.

Touché. Serves me right for not working out how many shows it's been since December 9th.

I think the banker's special gamble is here to stay now for better or worse. Although it adds interest to early deal games,
paradoxically and ironically it could lead to more early deals as contestants know they have a greater chance to increase their winnings after taking out the insurance of a safe deal.

Yes, at first I thought the banker was just trying to punish those who take early deals, but actually it could encourage earlier deals!!

I've just tried under one of his many profiles and I got so wound up looking at the posts (how on earth was I this tolerant 2 years ago not to post stuff that would have got me banned????), I gave up.

You know what they say James, life begins at 30!

I think my precise reason is "I didn't want to get banned"!

I think i was as surprised as Laura when her name got called today, she was unlucky really in that she failed to find the £250k after dealing, but i think it would have been worse had it been in her box all along.
£15k wasn't a bad offer for the board at the time she dealt and if was enough to recure her a deposit on her own home then she was right to go for it.

With regards to the 'Banker's special gamble' it was certainly a surprise twist and i can fully understand why she took it but i really wanted someone to point out to her that the odds were 2 to 1 against.

The banker seems to have a fixation with 3 box twists recently.

It was a bit of a weird twist that rendered the actual amounts left as irrelevant, and reduced it merely to a game of roulette with £2,500, with virtually the same odds as betting on a 'third' segment.

At that stage for me, the £12,500 secure wasn't the important bit, it was basically a straight odds bet decision with the £2,500, but Laura placed more emphasis on the money safe, and it was easy to be caught out by the banker's sudden trick, although she did leave herself open to some kind of twist by mentioning the £20k.

I think if someone had said was she willing to gamble £2,500 on a 1 in 3 chance of £7,500, she'd have thought differently, whereas instead they said "£12,500 is still a decent sum to go away with" which wasn't really the key question of the gamble for me.

Anyway, it'll be interesting to see if that encourages earlier deals, and indeed whether we'll be seeing more of the twist in the future, although I can't see it being weighted to the player's advantage too often if at all.