And here's how it went!

Returning contestant: Kate Miller!

Chosen case: 13!

The Board:

- .01¢
- $1
-
-
- $25
-
- $75
- $100
- $200
- $300
- $400
- $500
- $750
---------------
- $1,000
-
- $10,000
- $25,000
- $50,000
- $75,000
- $100,000
- $200,000
- $300,000
- $400,000
-
- $750,000
-

Round Two: Five Cases:

9: $750

5: $100

20: $10,000

23: $100,000

19: $400

Banker's offer: $46,000!

NO DEAL!

Round Three: Four Cases:

14: $1!!

22: $25,000

25: $400,000

15: $300,000

Now this next offer is a little creative. The Banker dispatches one of his models to present the offer to Kate!

The "Banker Babe" gives Kate a Deal or No Deal Credit Card! An appropriate gift for a shopper! If Kate says Deal, the card is hers. No Deal, and she must cut it half with scissors!

Kate has Howie check how much money is in the card. Howie runs it through a card scanner and it's revealed to contain...

Banker's offer: DECLINED!

Haha! Howie runs it through again and this time an actual figure shows up!

Banker's offer: $36,000!

NO DEAL!

And the card is indeed cut in half!

Round Four: Three Cases:

16: $1,000

18: .01¢!!!

12: $50,000

Banker's offer: $82,000!

NO DEAL!

24: $200,000

10: $500

The Final Six:

- $25
- $75
- $200
- $300
- $75,000
- $750,000

Banker's offer: $68,000!

NO DEAL!

Round Six: One Case:

4: $200

Banker's offer: $109,000!

















DEAL!

Kate has just secured herself a huge shopping spree with $109,000 now deposited into her account!

But before Kate can run to the shops, she must prove that she made the best deal possible! Lets find out in the infamous Proveout portion of the game!

Proveout: Case One:

















26: $300

Banker's offer: $198,000!
Dealt at: $109,000!

Proveout: Case Two:























6: $750,000!!

Excellent! Okay, Kate did go one deal too soon but she has still proven that she sold her Case 13 for far more that it was worth!

With that, the proveout is over and Case 13 is opened to show...

13: $75!

To prove it:

2: $75,000

8: $25

Game Summary:

Peak offer: $198,000
Case value: $75
Prize won: $109,000
Result: Technical Player Win (55-45)

While the malls of America brace for Kate, we've got a new contestant ready to force The Banker to go shopping for a silver suitcase!

Contestant: Cheryl Clark!

Chosen case: 8!

Round One: Six Cases:

1: $1,000,000!!!

5: $75

12: $25,000

16: $200,000

13: $500

20: $400

Banker's offer: $19,000!

NO DEAL!

Round Two: Five Cases:

19: $5,000

10: $10

18: $25

11: $750,000!!

6: $50

Banker's offer: $34,000!

NO DEAL!

Round Three: Four Cases:

7: $10,000

14: .01¢!!!

23: $500,000!

21: $100

Banker's offer: $45,000!

NO DEAL!

Round Four: Three Cases:

3: $750

9: $400,000

2: $1!!

Banker's offer: $33,000!

NO DEAL!

Round Five: Two Cases:

SUNDAY!

And there you have it!
-Joe R.

...DEAR HELL! The top amount left on the board has gone in every round so far in game 2!

I'd have done what Kate did, though if you'd told me that $199,000 would be the offer if I hit one from the left in the next case I would have said No Deal to $109,000!

Turned out fine really though - almost the definition of a typical game for the 26-case format, with the game of chicken at the end which the player exited slightly prematurely (but better that than $75!).

And with case 1 holding the million, all 26 cases have had a 7-figure amount at least once this season.

ANOTHER sixth offer deal? The sixth offer has to be one of the WORST stages of the game to deal (Mainly because the seventh offer is where the offers start getting close to the mean, and it seems like the last remaining largest amount never seems to go in Round Seven.). If you're going to play a safe wimp game, go at the fourth offer, not the sixth offer. Otherwise, play on until at least the seventh offer. The sixth offer should almost always be ND't (I think only the first offer and MAYBE the second offer are worse stages of the game to deal than the sixth offer.), if you're still playing at that point. And, ANOTHER game with four low side amounts and only two high side amounts and only one Power Seven amount in the Final Six? Aside from that, not too bad of a game, and well done on another six-digit win and TPW. I probably would've taken the $82K, and she won $109K, so well done!

The second game doesn't look all that promising. But, at least the big numbers atre are going slowly and the middle amounts are still there, so she could play on relatively safely with that board.

It does seem as though deals with five cases left never seem to work out! Perhaps that's a sign that the offers at five and six cases should be close to the mean? Would increase the incentive to reject the fourth offer too, not that these contestants need one.

If ever I will be a contestant in US deal or no deal I will probably choose case #1 as my case because it held 6 figure amounts most of the time and it is only chosen once in the entire season.


I am a case #1 fan!!!!!
go claudia....

I knew 1 million or any 6 figure amount is in case #1

Case 1 has only just had its first 7-figure amount of the season, and it rarely has big money so that might be a bit silly, though you could also get lucky.

In reply to KP:

What I was thinking was instead doing away with the five-box-stage offer and make contestants pick two cases at six-box just like at eight-box, and not start the one-case-at-a-time thing until four-box. Still only offer half of the mean or less at six-box. If the contestant can keep the highest remaining amount from six-box to four-box, then the banker makes an offer that's near the mean, often meaning that he/she can double his/her money or better by taking the 67% chance of having the remaining high amount survive while still risking losing big for the 33% of the time that it goes. This will make a tougher decision at six-box and might encourage dealing there, but the risk and courage gets awarded when it pays off.

Having said that, I think it is fine the way the way it is now. The banker has been pretty consistant about offering about half of the mean or less through the sixth offer and start offering near the mean at the seventh offer. It's just that contestants need to stop taking that sixth offer.

Of course, why sixth offer deals are one of my biggest dislikes anyway are: 1) Most of the most disasterous proveouts have came after sixth offer deals; 2) There is only a 20% chance of knocking out the highest amount and no chance to knock out both of the two highest amounts in Round Seven, and 3) The seventh offer is where the offers get close to the mean. \

Even in a one-case game, the sixth offer should not be dealt. With the offers starting to approach the mean at the seventh offer, he/she has about an 80% chance to double his/her money while only a 20% chance to lose everything. While still risky, it's odds on to play on. If the contestant happens to hit the landmine at Round Seven, then I'd say that he/she is unlucky, but at least played WITH the odds (unlike those who hit the landmine at Round Five), and just got unlucky.

And, the fact that so far this season that we have had twelve (!) sixth offer deals and only two (!) fourth offer (A much better time to deal, even if earlier) deals (six times less!) is really annoying me. That is a big reason why banker wins have far outnumbered player wins so far this season.

I will later post a stats post defending my dislikes about sixth offer deals just like I posted one defending my like about fourth offer deals.

Interesting. I think you could probably justify a variety of offer patterns in different ways, and contestants just have to play with the one that exists - which is a variant upon the Dutch original. (It's worth pointing out that a significant minority of contestants in that version Deal before the one-case-to-open rounds - and not just at the fourth offer either, over 15% of all contestants have taken the THIRD offer! Then again, that's at least partly because of the board, which has far bigger and far more detached top prizes than the ultra-stable US board - a fairer comparison would be with the $5m/$6m special game boards.)

The Swedish version, and recently the French version, have 24 boxes/cases, going 6-5-4-3-1-1-1-1 (so the two-case round is skipped). Personally I'd prefer 6-5-4-3-2-1-1 (so two one-case rounds are skipped instead).

Do anyone know how many do case #1 held the 1 million dollars from season 1 to present?

I hope at least one can answer this question

It had it 3 times in season 1, and once in season 2 (this episode).

Another thing you have to realize is that these people are playing for real money. Sure, it's easy, when you're on the sofa and not risking a dime, to say, "Go on! The stats say you have a great chance of avoiding the landmine and getting a bigger offer!" but when you're playing it for real and are being offered a sum that could realistically change your life, it's really hard to refuse, no matter how good the stats are. Some people don't care weather they beat The Banker or not, just as long as they get that huge payday.

Then again, if more contestants realized they're playing for real money, they wouldn't be so greedy! (Isn't that right, Brooks "$10" Leach?)

However, I wouldn't mind if KP or any of the many DoND statisticians we're sitting on the Supporter's Bench when it's my turn to play! I think all of us together could crush The Banker quite easily!

-Joe R.

Ultimately it comes down to applying the knowledge of probability to your own valuation of money.

At its simplest, at the final two, that means that if you have values x and y, with y being the bigger, if the offer is closer to y in terms of how much you could do with it you should Deal, and if it's closer to x you should No Deal. That principle can be extended to other rounds though it involves predicting the offers - a reasonable principle in the US version, not so across the Atlantic.

Where the majority of contestants fall down is in not applying the knowledge of probability. That way, they focus completely on either the offer - and thus Deal too soon - or on the remaining huge amount(s), and thus Deal too late (or more usually, not at all).

Sometimes you get reasonable strategies, such as 'keep going until you're out of safety nets' - but they can be too rigid and leave the player vulnerable. Witness LaKissa Bright's game for a perfect example.