Yet AGAIN, another player once again blew it BIG time.

I would have offered the follwing:

15K

20K

30K

50K

65K

165K

I would like more moderate calculated gamblers on the show though. Not reckless gamblers from the february/March 2007 era nor overcautious people from the June era who deal rubbish offers. There must be people in the middle
and the offers should be in the middle as well.

i wish people would play the board and the offers though and deal when they're stupidly generous and no deal when they're derisory.

I thought the offers were quite low for her game board.. shame thatsome people cant be a bit braver and just go for it.

£45,000 is nice money tho!

Danielllll

No, I don't have a problem with them being too high in the sense that players get nice sums of money and the games are more interesting, but when the proveout offers became too extreme it annoyed me. Nowadays the proveout offers still don't seem honest because they seem too low! The banker isn't reading the board or the players very well anymore.


Although, I suppose the memory of Steve would have been very influential today so maybe they were low due to that. Still no need to be that low!

I agree, it's frustrating people don't go for it with such a strong board and rubbish offers but at the end of the day 45K is a lot of money so I hope she's happy.

Now, I never personally attack players' gameplay, but that was clearly a bad decision as soon as it was made. She had 60% that there would be more in her box, and she only had to find the 10p to be guaranteed £20k anyway! Such a low offer for the board, and not worth considering in my book. Not so for everyone - my dad sitting next to me said 'deal' at £31k!

I'm sure she's happy with £45k (of course it's a lot of money), but that really was a wasted opportunity on a brilliant board, especially given how many players recently have gone all the way to the end to get a low amount of money.

i agree i'm usually really annoyed when someone deals in that position with 3 power 5s higher than the offer. I would be looking at about 60 -70K to deal there. She had a 60% chance of more so she should have gone for it.

To be fair to her though if she was happy with 45k then good for her. It's nice to see players win a decent sum of money I guess.
i was relieved she didn't have the QM.

Let me get this right, the lady won 45k?

Well good on her, regardless of what she had in her box

45k is a dream to some people

Blimey, I'm a bit surprised at some of the reactions here and in the chatroom...SHE WON FORTY FIVE *beep* THOUSAND POUNDS. There's absolutely no way I'd have turned that down either - I'd be infinitely more gutted to turn that down and win 10p than I would be with what actually happened. And I can't really believe that the majority of people wouldn't feel the same. You can't just think in terms of the odds all the time...£45k is just too much to lose in my book and clearly Kathleen felt the same. I think her decision was completely justified by the fact that she didn't really seem to give a *beep* about the ending.

So yes, I thought that was an awesome game! Kathleen was a legend, had one of the best boards ever, still had a *beep* huge win in my eyes, and she's also usurped Lucy as the biggest ever winner in E9! Oh and Carol had the £250k! Hurrah!

So she had a 40% chance to be guaranteed less than half what was on offer - doesn't sound like she was that dumb to turn it down!

So it's a "bad decision" and " wasted opportunity", but you're not one to attack someone's gameplay - hate to see you when you do!

How can an offer be too low if the player Deals? It cannot be too low if it is accepted, by definition!

£45,000 was a brilliant offer because she dealt it. I can't understand why you all continue to compare this board with that board - "oh it proves those offers were wrong" etc etc It proves no such thing.

The offers are based on the player in the chair. The players earlier in the year got high offers because they were all gambling in the slipstream of Laura's big win. They are all terrified now as the Banker is on the up; so they will sell for less. The decisions are no easier; the circumstances and personalities playing have simply changed.

I liked this games, but I thought the offers were very low. Well done Kathleen for winning £45,000 and enjoy the money

I would INFINITELY prefer to have had Kathleen's game than Steve's, regardless of the box contents! I knew 45k was quite poor for the board she had, but 10p was still there, and if she'd kept that with the 20k, she'd have been offered something like 10% of what she turned down - which would have been horrible! And it was a lot better than Donna's ending at least! I guess all the blue wins there have been recently influenced her, I mean even I've been saying deal to offers in the "What would you have done" thread that I wouldn't have a month ago!

I just wish someone like Khanny could have had a board/game like that!

I would have no-dealt the 45k simply becuase it was impossible to take out all the reds, though I would have been feeling that I HAD to deal the 2-box offer if the 10p stayed in play, which may have been difficult to resist if it had been a low offer with the 20k or 50k as its partner!

I forgot that she usurped Lucy in all of that - I was actually annoyed about Lucy taking over from Pennie!!

With these offers she would have dealt possibly at the third and certainly at the fourth offer.

How would that have given a better game than the one we had?

I'm not sure you know what you are criticising here. Kathleen would have won life changing money if she had gone all the way. Your offers would guarantee that didn't happen and ended live play earlier to boot. Today's offers gave her a chance, but were just high enough to make her quit. That is the essence of what the game should be.

I'm not criticising kathleen just the banker's offers as i thought they were unfair. it's not her fault she recieved low offers. 39K has been dealt on that board before and was the right decision so if players deal for a lot of money ie. 45K that's fine I guess. I just thought the offers were mean, that's all. it was probably not as bad a deal as it looked as she could have easily ended up with a differnt finish. It would be churlish to assume a lot of people would go all the way on 20K vs 100k for example.

I guess i get too sucked in sometimes and think too much about odds than
what is right for the player. if 45K was right for her regardless of the board that's fine because it's a lot of money.

Well done kathleen on 45K!

Firstly, great to see a big game with a big win.

Secondly, I completely agree with Will, I'd have gone to the end today and I'm a 'serial dealer' too, but also great to see Kathleen is a happy and wealthy person.

Thirdly, alexandercbrown has nailed it again. Of course Endemol want No Deals; if they didn't, Noel's 'courage' soliloquies would have gone the way of the blue chants. Also, moderate players taking calculated risks are precisely what we need. Eric was one - I can't name another in recent memory.

No, I couldn't bear to lose 45k either. But I'd know that only a very unlikely sequence of events would have made that possible - at worst, I'd have won about 6k (which is what I'd expect on 10p/Rock, and I'd take it), there was a 90% chance of a sum of money I could still do an awful lot with, and a 50% chance of a clearly higher offer (60%, if 10p/QM would have been higher - and I'd have been horrified if it wasn't). The 20% chance of an offer well into six figures, combined with the 10% chance of a 50k/100k finish where I'd turn down anything shy of an AMO and the 10% chance of the Morris/Bunney finish where I'd most likely be looking for six figures to Deal... that would have done it.

It was basically Gaz's board with a different blue, and I was thinking about Gaz's board last week thinking that my tipping point on it would be about 60k. I stand by that.

I know you're not criticising Kathleen; the point I'm making is that "low "offers simply make it easier to win what's in your box. Which 50% of the time is a red amount. I just think people always go after the offers if they don't like the way a game played out. In fact, today's offers gave her a great chance to win. If you like big winners, there was nothing wrong with the offers!

But more importantly she dealt. That means the offers were not too low. They were just right. They clearly would have been too low if you were in the chair, but then The Banker would probably know that!

I think most people would know, looking back on my previous posts, that I usually see the player's side when they deal early. I always analyse the board, and if there's a big number then a large gap, I'll see that the board is volatile, and it's worth dealing in situations like that. I understand the value of money, and I do understand that £45k would be a lot to turn down - as I said, I'm sure Kathleen is happy with the money, and it's a hell of a lot more than many people win.

However, today's board was too good to be true, and the 60% chance of having more than the offer in the box (and 80% of having at least £20k in the box) was clearly enough to warrant going on. I always note when there's a game that could go either way, but this board was weighted towards the higher numbers. £45k wasn't nearly enough for me to consider dealing in that situation.

As I say, I don't attack peoples' gameplay - I think I give quite a balanced viewpoint of the game, in comparison with some posters on here, but this game (even with the £45k win) was still a disappointment. It could have been so much more.

I agree 100%. Croftrock misunderstood me. of course I like to see big finishes now and again but they should be created through fair and testing offers not manipulation. It's good in a way that Kathleen dealt the 45K as it tested her but we're sliding back into march 06 here!

I'm also worried that if they misread players with these rubbish offers we'll get a silly big finish.

On what possible basis do we "need" moderation? It's an entertainment show. I love to see big winners, but I also find the big losers amazingly moving shows - in the same way that I like the odd weepy movie!

Eric's show, in pure gameplay terms, far less entertaining than these recent games. It was fine; but not great. Moderation produces moderate entertainment.

Also, what exactly do you expect Noel to say.? He has to big up the bravery so that it's dramatic. The players aren't listening; he says the same thing every show. They aren't brain dead. "must ...comply... with ...beardy.. presenter's... wishes..". It's big money and they'll do what they want. What he says is irrelevant.