It seems at the moment that the Banker is offering lower amounts than he has done in the past, but do you think they're currently too low?

We all know the Banker varies his offers depending on the situation and it's his job to try and offer enough to make the player Deal, which despite his lower than average offers has got a number of players out of the chair with a modest sum of money. In which case why should he feel the need to offer more when what he is offering is being taken? This of course could back-fire on the Banker if the player goes all the way to the end and they have a high amount in their box.

For me personally I think that the Banker is not being very generous with his offers at the moment and have seen some rather low offers on very strong boards but perhaps thats a new tactic from the Banker forcing people to either Deal with a lowish amount or go on and hopefully destroy the board?

I think that the opening offers are good and they should stay like that.

But the end offers are far to low, the banker is trying to buy the box for as little as possible, but theyre just far to low! like Theareas's game when she was left with 1p, 10p, £10, £100,000 and £250,000 and the banker offered £26,000. That was far far to low i would expect say £40,000. So the offers are very low at the moment.

It always seems to be that the offers are either too high or too low...

Anyway, they're about right at the moment as they give the player a real challenge at times - for example, Theresa's £26k offer would be a tough one - compared to if the offer was really low, e.g. £13k (most would no deal) or really high, e.g. £52k (most would probably deal).

The proveout offers aren't too bad at the moment, either.

They are a tad low overall, but it seems to go in cycles and that makes it interesting.

some of them are but some of them have been fine.

The 10K offer was bang on in Peter's game and there have been a lot
of low offers that have been dealt so the banker has played well.

I would like to see more 'rewarding courage' offers near the end though to encourage calcualted risk taking.

My real problem with low offers is when a contestant's board has gone a bit wrong and the banker kicks them in the face. e.g. lee's £575 offer on 10p vs 3K. I'd like to see humane get outs.

Apart from those situations lowish offers on good/excellent boards can be refreshing.

It's hard to say, coz some of the offers recently have been brilliant, especially during the latter stages of Hallowe'en week.

And even if it was proveout, Steff's £444.44 offer was way over the average!!!

I think the offers have been fairly spot on generally. However, I thought Ajay's 2 box offer of £19,500 was a little on the low side, I'd have expected about £23,000. Chris B had a really low 2 box offer too, I can't remember the exact figures, but I remember it was low.

£15,000 three times, the third was against 1p though - but yeah ITA, especially compared to Donna's huge offer with 10p and £75,000

These offers aren't a million miles removed from the Spring 2006 pattern, and that's no bad thing. Slightly higher offers late on, maybe. But we've had far worse offer patterns.

I like the current offers. Forces people to think very carefully about grabbing the money and running. If they do they know they've been bought cheap.

My only quibble would be that people who have had absolutely no chance of any decent offers during their game because of shocking luck should get a respectable get-out offer towards the end instead of getting their noses rubbed in it.

That's true actually the only game mucked up due to low offers was Helen B's.
The low offers (for now) have mainly created a talking point without any bad results really.

I believe the offers are fair. If I am the banker I may offer such amounts basing on the contestant's emotional stand and of course on how he play his game.

He's doing what he did in May, June and a bit of July. Offering amounts that are closer to, and mostly lower than, the FD (Fair Deal). Which is the sort of stuff that i love in the first half of the game. But the offers will need to be a little higher for the 2nd half, the business end of the game. Take for instance Steff's £25,000, where it should have been £30-£40k (in fact the banker could even have pushed £60,000, but that is taking it a bit close to the mean). So the offers are pretty abysmal at the business end at the moment, but lower offers definitely suit the 1st half better.

And that's about as normal as a stat-obsessed maniac can put it.

I voted (or didn't since the poll's coled now) for Yes the offers are low at the moment.

Hes being so low lately because he knows this current bunch he can seemingly get them all cheaplyadd the fact they bring targets - makes life so much easier for the banker.

It is stupid some of the offers are ridiculus for the board but as long as he keeps getting away with it hes going to keep doing it!

Why on earth would he offer £30-40K, let alone £60k when he can get the player out for £25k?

The fact that people are dealing these 'low' offers actually means they aren't low at all in actual fact and he's judged things spot on.

Yep, they're too low. We need an increase.

Yes, they are too *beep* low. For example, the offer Steff took on Saturday was less than half the mean!

The only offers that seem a bit low to me are those at 2-box...apart from that the rest are fine.

I think people are taking earlier offers that seem low becuase they are expecting the 2-box offer on red v blue to be insulting, so are getting out before it comes to it. Other that thaa, I think the banker is playing it very well recently, Ajay's last offer for instance was perfectly pitched in giving him an agonising decision, he got Michael to deal a terribly low offer and Mary to no-deal a very good one.

Charly's game is the only one I can think of recently where he's got it completely wrong, most other games have had me thinking "I really wouldn't know what to do here" - which is a great sign.

I think the inverse generosity v board strength is pretty good at the moment too - Tony's offers from 11-box to 5-box were fairly good for a poor board!

I think that sums it up quite well. The offers are only "too low" if people are hardly ever dealing. We are seeing more people no-dealing to the end compared to in the past, but they're still just about in the minority.

There is a problem with bad games though, in that the player is rarely offered an exit route. Very few will be like Michael last week and deal a ridiculously low offer out of desperation. When the big amounts go early, like today, it's generally become simply a long drawn out revealing of what's in the box.

But I suppose target-driven players are difficult to pitch offers for. They will deal poor offers on good boards, and no-deal good offers on bad boards! Suggestion to Noel - throw that book on the fire. Targets make for crap games, encourage people to play the board even if they're not statisticians.

I don't think a lot of other players would have had an offer as low as £1k on Michael's board, it was just appropriate for him, but I think 90% of players would have just brushed it aside without thinking. Something like 4k - 5k on that board would give me quite an agonising decision, but not as low as that!