This all leads to a fundamental question - what makes one 'worthy' of victory or otherwise on this show? Is it, as the producers seem to think, having a sob story, with the opportunity of big money in a short space of time being a sort of compensation for personal tragedy? Is it the courage to turn down large sums of money in pursuit of more? Is it an understanding of the game and its mathematical foundations? Is it just being entertaining for 45 minutes on Channel 4?

As long as that is unclear, there will always be games where some people cheer the player to the rafters while others await the crash. And I suspect Channel 4/Endemol wouldn't have it any other way.

It's hard to define because had anyone else but Joe played his game the way he did (turning down offers that were almost the mean), I'd have called them a more than averagely reckless gambler but had Joe had Daimon's game, with his age and situation, I'd have probably thought him unlucky with his final gamble rather than what I thought about Daimon today.

Daimon was a great contestant who took the disappointing result really well.

Personally I'd have gone at 8 box, or dealt for £7,500. It certainly makes it entertaining when
the stake are raised like that!

I'm guessing that if Daimon had dealt at £7,500 or won £10,000 the banker's gamble of double or nothing
with 2 eggs to find the good egg would have still happened. On the evidence of the last 2 shows, someone might win nothing on the Sunday and/or Monday show as well!

Only just seen this game......would have probably gone at the £12,500 offer at 8 box with a board having a £17k mean (and also the chance of doubling to £25k)

Dreadfully unlucky finish......but cant help feeling if he had got the £10k in his box the banker would have offered the egg gamble to double to £20k....would he have gone for it....probably having said he came with nothing anyway.

I don't quite understand why people say negative comments about a gamble which doesn't pay off, if fact I find it annoying especially if the same people say well done to a risky gamble that pays off.
It's all pot luck. I have mentioned before how contestants suddenly become unpopular if a gamble doesn't pay off. All I will say is that if the contestants are happy with their decisions and prepared to deal with the consequences that let them do. I don't even criticise the contestants that deal when the odds are in their favour and they find out that they had a big amount in their box and regret it afterwards even though I wouldn't do it and even respect their decisions.
The world would be a better place if people said positive comments about people rather than negative ones.
I liked Daimon very much and he wanted to gamble and was happy with his decision, I would have done the same. The comments would have been very different if he had won the £100,000.

Agreed, as I pointed out earlier.

Most of the comments would've been different if he'd won £100,000.

Maybe it's to my shame, or maybe it's not, that mine wouldn't have been. I'd have been very, very unhappy if he'd won £100,000, especially as I dread to think what offers he'd have turned down at five-box and two-box to get there.

Depends how he had won the £100k. For example, if he had ended with a £50k/£100k finish, had £50k in his box and the same egg gamble had been offered for £100k, I probably would have commented that risking £50k to win £100k even with the odds in your favour, probably would have been an above-averagely reckless gamble.

Well Daimon I enjoyed your game for the entertainment factor alone

You played your game as you wanted to and that should be the answer to all the comments here

Please don't be upset about what has been said

It was lovely to have that quick chat with you

Even worse than i thought then.