It wasn't accepted the whole of last season, so sometime in 2010.

Cheryl, I think.

I don't mind the Banker's Gamble, but I'd rather it be restricted to the occasional appearance, and not be used all the time, like it appeared to be in 2009 and 2010.

I quite like the Banker's Gamble being used when it's absolutely appropriate for the board, and this was very much one of those times.

Obviously with the twist and my box-opening system I'd have had a different game altogether, but for me that was a string of tricky decisions from 8-box onwards, and though I think the stability would have lured me on to 2-box, the leap at the squashdown bonus offer certainly made a Deal look viable. Good work from the Banker.

You call a £1k increase a leap?!




But it was a cautious deal...

I'll say it once again... I actually agree with Mark to some extent that Alex should have been a lot more brave.

He only had to open ONE MORE BOX to get another offer... and then there were THREE bigger than that £17k...

(I've put "one more box" and "three" in all capitals for emphasis.)

During this twist, in most scenarios, the player ought to make sure they use the necklace before they deal (although there are exceptions to this).

Enjoyed this game because I don't think there was a straightforward decision to be made all game (even the BG was arguable although it's not a gamble I would have taken).

Nice job again by the production staff with the 80s graphics.

Well, last year we had the Shield of Destiny instead of a necklace.

And Charlotte dealt before using it... and on a strong board, too.

Needless to say, she missed out on a lot more money...

I accept the deal at the time was rather cautious but I reckon with such a tiny blue as the kicker you'd have to have been a fairly big gambler to have taken the banker's gamble (i'd have dealt at that point). It's not as thought it was declined when the amount to gamble was less than 10% of the large amount as it had been in come cases (Alicem Cheryl, Bel). I reckon most would have been more annoyed to have gone with nothing than to have sold the £100k box for £21k.

I prefer this twist to the santa/scrooge etc one as it gives the advantage to the player with no risk of giving the banker an advantage (although I see the point that the banker looking inside your box isn't always a bad thing).

It probably cos I love the 80's I know, but this has to be my favourite themed deal they have done so far.

Well the production team have excelled themselves yet again with the costume design and the graphics. I get a big thrill just seeing that old Channel 4 logo

A cautious deal, perhaps certainly it was worth punting for one more box after the necklace, maybe even going to two box but not gambling on a £5 /£100k coin flip, don't blame him for turning down the Banker's gamble

Well I blame him as the Banker gave him a MASSIVE lifeline which he clearly couldn't see.

In hindsight, yes, he should have taken the 'lifeline'. But, for all he knew at the time, he could have had £5 in the box. And that would have probably been more heartbreaking than what actually happened.