It would be nice to see everyone go to the end, but what would be nicer is if people took more risks, even if it means dealing later on! It is still more exciting than watching someone whimper out at the third offer, with a huge proveout to go! The only means of excitment I get out of those games is to laugh my way through the proveout if it goes according to plan (ie. the blues going) when I don't like the player, or they make a very cowardly deal, like todays one for example.

I would love to see people gamble all the way to the end, and I realise that will become very stale quickly. But the game will also become incredibly stale if people keep chickening out all the time!

I don't want people to go to the end regardless. I want people to win a lot of money, but take a good gamble first to get it, wether dealing or no dealing. Then every game is exciting. What we are seeing at the moment is the equivalent of someone betting 1p on the fact Noel will blab on about a player doing a wrong deal. Pathetic cowardness, people bailing out of games half finished.

It is great to see someone fullfil their targets but after all, if the viewer isn't satsfied with the programme, they will turn off. If enough people get sick of the same cowardice we saw in the past week, DoND could see a dramatic decrease in viewers, which eventually could lead to Deal or no deal's demise. If there is no deal or no deal, then people cannot win any money.

Hi, as you can see I am an almost virgin at posting on this site. I watch DOND most days on this forum (I am usually working when it is on live.) I would like to see someone take the 2nd offer (or preferably the first) when it is the highest offer they get it the entire game. Then I would like to hear (read) what all you knockers (no-dealers) would say then? Money is important when you have not got it (but when you do not need to have to work for it, or are being paid for by your parents then it does not matter !) My simplistic attitude to life is ' 10,000 is better than 1p.'
I would also like to moan about the quality of the English language on this forum. Can't anyone learn to spell? Definately (should be 'definitely) .. etc. etc.

Well, you had a few spaces in there that needn't be there, as well as missing out the £ sign.

But anyway, I would be literally fuming if someone took the first or second offer. To be honest, if someone took (Or tried to take) the first offer, Noel would probably say "Are you sure? Do you want the question again?"

Of course, if the banker offered double the mean to someone as the second offer, I would understand why they would take it.

Taking the first offer on the other hand has nothing to do with the money you need. Even after the worst opening round in the history of the show would still put you in the chance of winning up to £20,000. As far as I am concerned, if anyone takes the first offer they are doing it for a laugh, and to be famous (For all the wrong reasons...)

Taking the first offer with 18 boxes left to open is just spineless and idiotic. Even if you get a great opening offer for a *beep* board, there would be no reason to take it, it's basically saying "I can't be arsed to play the game I applied for."

There would be 17 left..

I liked Anne-Marie, and I'm the same as most on here, i dread third offer deals for the reaction on here!

I wouldnt have done what she did, but i dont think any the less of her for it. It's not cowardice, it's what she felt was right.

I don't want to turn this thread into yet another deal vs. no deal debate, but I suppose this thread is more appropriate than any other as it contained a third offer deal.



I thought the whole point of the show was that there is so much variety - cautious people, gamblers, people who get upset at missing out on money, people who don't, people who have a low target, people who have a high target and so on - personally I would find it very boring if everyone just no dealt until the fourth, fifth or sixth offer, or went to the end. And more often than not, after turning down some good offers, the game becomes a trainwreck and not only loses the "excitement" but also loses the potential "feel-good factor" that an OPW would bring.



Yes, which is why there is variety in the show - I know there have been 3 third-offer deals this week, but that is normally very rare! The phrase "chickening out" is harsh in this context.



If the opportunity of a lot of money (for the player, at least) comes up at the third offer, then why shouldn't they deal it? It's their show, not ours, not Endemol's (well it is, but the player's gameplay isn't theirs), not Noel's, not the studio audience's, not the other contestants' show and indeed not the show of the friends and family of the contestant - it's the player's show!



Harsh!



I think actually, it could work the other way that viewing figures could be damaged due to people not bothering with the first two parts of the show which contain the apparently "automatically no dealt" first, second and third offers.

"Cowardice" - you seem to be applying that label to anyone who deals early - could they not be called brave as they are going against the grain and dealing when most, if not all, people say they should go on? For the board, it may not be brave, but to possibly put up with a guilt trip from Noel, it is very brave!

I think the main problem is that the show has a lot of children watching - children who understandably (to a certain extent) don't know the real value of money (I look at Daniel123's earlier comment about £12,000 not being much earlier for evidence here) - so they would just want everyone to no deal because it's fun, I suppose. The show uses real, life-changing (to some people in some cases) money, not points. £12,000 is twelve thousand pounds, not twelve thousand points on a quiz show.

Since about December, each show follows a pattern, of either:

Option 1 - Deal early and get shouted at by Noel. Noel will only be happy when you have taken out all the remaining reds. The banker will inflate the proveout offers to give Noel something to throw at you and moan about. If it turns out it's an OPW, Noel will look shifty and never mention you ever again.

Option 2 - Go far into the game, win a lot and be treated like a hero by Noel.

Option 3 - Go far into the game, win a small amount (or peanuts) and get treated by a hero like Noel, even though you could have dealt at a much higher amount earlier, and you probably should have bailed out at some point later. Noel will mention you for days to come as being "true to yourself" and "having the courage to go on".

I think most games since winter can be put into one of these three options.

Pssh, this whole argument is silly. I can't believe some people treat £12,000 as a small sum of money... £12,000 is very big, and in some cases can be life-changing. If Anne-Marie needed the money, then she should be able to deal without all this horrible criticism. I mean, the show is mainly about winning money, and if she didn't want to risk it, fair-play to her. There's no need to get all worked up if she didn't do what you wanted. She didn't do what I wanted, but I still liked her and respected her for her decision.

Also, could someone do an average age comparison of the "no-dealers" in this topic (i.e. the people in this topic saying they dislike Anne-Marie for dealing at the third offer), and the "dealers" (i.e. the people who may or may not have done the same as Anne-Marie but respect her decision)? Just for... well, I'm just curious to be honest.

The average age of the people who have criticised Anne-Marie for her decision in this thread is 13.3, although I don't know the ages of SrWilson and lovethebanker.

The average age of the people who have praised Anne-Marie for her decision in this thread is 18.16.

I bet the producers were in his ear with "Three in a week, that's not good enough, you've got to give her some stick for this..."

Hmm, I wonder if this is indicative of anything... say, maybe, the younger members not appreciating money so much...

Er im 23 actually so im perfectly grown up and mature and I give my insite on the game and the decisions and I stick to them ... don't like em don't read em thankyou. .
I'm fair, I can understand cautious deals but I cannot see no logic behind dealing early when 1 its a low offer and theres clearly more money in the game as was the case with Anne Marie, and 2 there is clearly one more round in the game and its absolutly worth the risk since the chances of her missing all those blues was HIGHLY UNLIKELY. Theres cautious deals and then Cowarding out that was the latter.

Comparing audience numbers from different times of the year and shows with different timeslots is utterly meaningless.

DOND's share in the month up to Laura's game was 29% - in the month leading up to the start of this week the average is 28%. Far from thinking there's a problem to solve, I'm sure they will be thinking "If it ain't broke.."

I thought today's show was dull frankly but then that Gaz won £70,000 yesterday and it was unbelievable TV. They can't all be classics, that's the point of random, isn't it? It's always worth talking about that's why it's staying as popular as ever.

How is it cowarding out? Because she didn't want to lose £12,000? I don't think anybody would want to lose £12,000! I sure as hell wouldn't. If she really needed the money or really didn't want to take the risk, then it was good of her to deal at £12,000, even if she was going against a majority opinion. She wasn't pressured into something she wasn't comfortable doing. What if, hypothetically, her next three boxes were the top 3 on the board at the time. You wouldn't have classed as "chickening out" then!

I doubt it. I talk to a lot of older people, my Mother, Grandma, and people of similar ages and they would say that the two things that have put them off DOND is that the £250,000 has already been won and that there is so much cautiousness, no one is going for the big money any more.



They are brave in that context, but looking at the game, mostly cowardly. Of course, if I reckon the offer is high enough, then I will understand the decision. £12,000 was high, but with two of the power 5 left and some very nice backups there, it felt like there was so much more potential for an exciting game. It turns out there wasn't ever huge money in the game, but no matter how much £12,000 meant to me, I would be very annoyed at losing £24,000, and even the extra £3,000 in the box - the final round of Anne-Marie's game would have been so much more tense had she carried on! Even after losing the £100,000 she would still have gotten more by going to the end.



I wasn't aware so many children watch this show. Most of the first years at our school always complain how *beep* DOND is, because they don't understand it.



The bolded bit is correct, but if he is ever happy that the reds were taken out, how would he have a no deal bias?



If Anne-Marie decimated the board after her deal, I would still call her a 'chicken'. I base my opinions on what was on the board when she dealt, not what happened the following round. If she took out her 3 highest, I would have thought she was over-cautious or whatever, but just lucky that it went her way. It wasn't likely going to go her way, and it didn't.

Looking at the stats on Bother's Bar (which I've probably completely misinterpreted), there's a 43.6% chance of taking out one of the top two in the fourth round. Given that the offer almost certainly would have gone down, and definitely wouldn't have gone up (£15k my arse) if Anne-Marie had done that, I wouldn't say it was "clearly" the right decision to go on.

Under normal bank behaviour, 100k/15k/3 blues wouldn't even give a 12k offer, let alone 24k! (We'll ignore Madie before anyone points that out though)!

Welldone Anne-Marie! Enjoy £12,000

I felt it was a really bad time to deal and there was so much more money in it nuff said.

I am not going to keep arguining because arguining gets you nowhere and were all entitled to our opinions.

You watch there will be a game come sometime when I will applaud a deal and others will chin at me saying she should have gone on.

I am basing my opinions on my own personal choices on what I would do and what the general odds of the way each game goes are.

£12,000 is a fantastic amount of money..i would love that. So she went at the third offer..does it really matter that much? It was the time that felt right for her. I admit that i found Gaz's game better..but still. If you dont wanna see people deal at the 3rd offer then just simply dont watch.

Lol does anyone here seriously think one day someone will deal at the first or second offer?

To keep destroyed television sets at a minumum, I doubt they will let anyone take the first offer. Apparently Donna (3) tried this but she was forced to play on.

I can see someone taking the second offer. And failing miserabely.