You will always have people playing the game to grab the moment. There are a few people out there that would play to the end no matter what. Off the top of my head, I can think of three people however, that have actually done this. And two of those three are in the infamous 1p club; Dave and Fadil. The other one I had in mind was Morris.

But instead of defining anybody that is defiant with all the offers and plays to the end, a so-called 'Wakey-ist', I just thought you'd all want to know what even the toughest 'Wakey-ist' would call a good deal.

Three well-known 'Wakey-ist's, each with their own opinion of the game. Read them and see where they are coming from, and exactly how much you'd agree with them. I am no 'Wakey-ist', but I will be the first to admit that some of what they said actually made sense, (if not, definitely pushed to the boundary of acceptance!!! )


SrWilson:

Not been a stand-out character on the site for that long, only 'coming out' as such since Summer 2007. And then almost immediately made an impact on this site with his defiant mood for deals, but I think it's safe to say the one thing that racks him off greater than anybody else when relatives/friends influence the game, as usually it would encourage the player to deal.

His opinion is basically that as long as there are three amounts bigger, it is always worth playing on as only the worst luck would see you lose. And also, as long as there are three good boxes left in the game, the Banker will always feel like he can offer pretty much however much he feels like offering.

"I think personally, that the banker gives out derisory offers, especially recently. And yet with 3 amounts higher, they deal too, which in my opinion is stupid because it is a 2% chance your gonna hit them all."

The example he gave me was this. And bearing in mind the whole point of this discussion is about reckless gambles, hence the strength of the board in the example:

At Final Five:

£10
£1,000
£50,000
£75,000
£250,000

The way the Banker has been playing up until the Scrooge vs Santa twist, you would probably have gotten an offer of somewhere slightly less than the third highest amount in play, so let's suggest for this scenario that the offer was £47,000.

Steve said that he would think that anything under £50,000 was a no-brainer, but anything more than £50,000 would get him thinking, "however it would have to take something quite a bit higher than £50,000 to get me to say Deal".

And using the joke of a proveout offer of £71,000 in Toni's game recently, I asked him what he wuld have done if the offer was £71,000 with this board, and he said through gritted teeth he would actually have DEALT!!!

In all seriousness though, with anything that strong, and only the worst luck in the world to not win more than £47,000, you can now see his argument. Again note that we are only on about reckless gambling here as anything of a smaller margin would certainly mean a 'play to the end' situation.

And on a lighter note, he says for 'playing the game the right way', Orry is a recent favourite of his!!!

---------------


Coming up soon...what our second-youngest forum member has to say on 'big egos' and 'being a man of very few words'

...and then we hear from the man himself (if you call a 16 year old a man!!! ) as he reveals why he thinks playing to the end in a trainwreck game is on paper exactly the same as dealing too early.


Please note that the whole point of this thread is for you all to see the game through the eyes of a 'Wakeyist' and play it as a game rather that the money - please feel free to comment on anything said, but please remember that anything that is said that offends anybody is not done intentionally as the reason I wanted to put this up on here was so you could all see that just coz they are a 'Wakeyist' doesn't necessarily mean they will play to the end

About players who were Wakeyist, I think 50p Dennis springs to mind, he actually said after winning 50p that he was always going to play to the end no matter what, even if it meant turning down AMOs! I'm sure there are more, but he sprang to mind more than anyone!

Then of course we have the possibly "fake" Wakeyists such as Di... who seemed to want to chase the £250k, and then dealt at an offer much lower than her peak offer, only to find more in her box...

I just don't think Di had any idea what she was doing...

Charly and Orry said they were always going to the end as well.

Oh yes, and Barry as well - he said the banker could have offered 40k on his 50k/1k finish and he'd still have no-dealt!

In the case of Di, I think that even if she'd have been left with 50p and £250,000 she'd have No Dealt, but after the biggie went she decided that turning down £44,000 and winning 50p would be a bit rubbish. Basically, she was there for £250,000 and nothing else.

One thing that does bother me is when a contestant has easily made up their mind that they're dealing, but pretend they're not right until the very end. Made-up example:
"Your offer is £10,000"
"Rubbish. There's £250,000 in this box, this is a once in a lifetime opportunity! You're only here once, Noel, please ask me the question"
"£10,000, Deal or No Deal?"
"Deal"

It does work when the offer is really REALLY big - like Susan's £42,000 on 50p v £100,000, but when it's just an average offer then it feels a bit pointless. I suppose some contestants think that if they do it then the Banker will raise the offer, but even when he does it's only by a few grand - Joyce's £10,000 increase from £20k to £30k being a bizarre exception. It's easy to say "I'm playing to the end" but harder to do it, ditto if you think "I'm dealing at the first meaningful offer" as you might not get any during your game!

What about Lynne? She seemed determined to go to the end regardless (and had one of the few games where it actually paid off!)

I think we can put Triple-Swap Craig down as an example too.

There's also plenty of people who seem to become Wakeyists without necessarily wanting to. Look how many people said Deal in the sweep at Laura's final offer, and look how many of those went on to turn down incredibly generous offers in their own games. The Laura effect was frighteningly strong.

LOL Davey quoting the scenario from my encounter with the banker on the PC game !! I immediatly turned down that ghastly 47K and then... remind people what happened;) or just read my sig. lol my way = BIG CASH.

ps ive been here nearly a year now!

I would have been looking for about 55K on that board.

And on the subject of wakeyism I'm not sure there are many true wakeyists. It's hard to judge because some have had bad luck.

I mean perhaps Lynne, Khanny, Fin etc are true wakeyists but overall virtually noone is ever going to have an attitude as strong as wakey/basicasic IMO. I mean would ANY contestant actually ND 90K on blue vs 250K for instance.

Would 'player 14' be a 'fake wakeyist' then? NDing a large AMO then bailing out for 'only' 4.8K?

Yes... I think "Player 14" aka Madie could be described as a Wakeyist and possibly not one in the true "sense of the word" as he did a Di - took a huge gamble and then dealt a low offer to cut his losses! I think these are Wakeyists who don't like going home with nothing.

As I was writing my post, I only had early 2006 shows in my mind for some bizarre reasons...I can whole-heartedly agree on all of those who have been mentioned.

Yes. And that's without a biased host to prod them...

lol I know alot of people Hailed Deano as a hero - my Aussie friends thought he was so brave.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

I think back then Cookie, he was trying to hide his identity

This evening will come the second of three special guest speakers...the so-called GOD, daniel123!

I was specifically referring to our version (where there are too many targetists). We don't have many truly 'reckless gamblers' admittedly.

[quote="Big-Davey"]You will always have people playing the game to grab the moment. There are a few people out there that would play to the end no matter what. Off the top of my head, I can think of three people however, that have actually done this. And two of those three are in the infamous 1p club; Dave and Fadil. The other one I had in mind was Morris.

But instead of defining anybody that is defiant with all the offers and plays to the end, a so-called 'Wakey-ist', I just thought you'd all want to know what even the toughest 'Wakey-ist' would call a good deal.

Three well-known 'Wakey-ist's, each with their own opinion of the game. Read them and see where they are coming from, and exactly how much you'd agree with them. I am no 'Wakey-ist', but I will be the first to admit that some of what they said actually made sense, (if not, definitely pushed to the boundary of acceptance!!! ;) )


I think i was a Wakey-ist! all through my time as a contestant I always said as long as the 250k was still in play I would go on..........BUT! ..when you are in that crazy chair and the offer is 70k and the one and only higher offer is the 250k, a little fear is felt. It is a case of the devil on one shoulder and an angel on the other, do you gamble or not, and I am afraid the 70k was tooooo much to gamble, so does that make me a 'Wakey-ist'????
Patricia

I would define 'Wakeyist' as 'completely or almost completely unable to Deal', with Big-Davey trying to assert it's 'almost completely' and looking for exceptions. You aren't one - yes, you may have been different in the chair, but in the chair you also had Noel encouraging Wakeyism and in your case a rule change that greatly reduced the risks - and you should take that as a compliment, Patricia!