Deal or No Deal

[Coldicote]

I don't understand 'Deal or No Deal'. Selecting a small figure seems to attract more applause than the large sums. What actually is the object of the game and how is it supposed to be played?

[grasscarp]

The object of the game is to get as much money as possible. The contestant has selected a box at random and you hope it has a large amount of money in it. The banker offers you money throughout the game for your box and will offer larger amounts if you have a lot of the large amounts left on the board. Hence the applause if you can take out all the small amounts.

[factor-fiction]

If you mean during the game it's because whatever box you take is taken out of the game, so it's better to choose all low value boxes.
But even though I'm very knowledgeable about Maths I struggle with the maths for this game.
You start with a box. It doesn't matter what order you pull the other boxes out- it still doesn't change what's in your box.
It's more about striking a good deal

[VHG]

You get the money that is in the last box opened.

So ever time a "low value" box is opened that is good because it leaves more "high value" boxes.

However dont think there is any skill in it at all, it is all "luck" as nobody has any idea what is in any box.

The only "skill" may be deciding if you should take the bankers offer or not during the game, and then it is more "bravado" than "skill".

[Old_Geezer]

It is all about holding your nerve and hoping "Lady Luck" got you a large amount box when it was your turn to play. If your nerve breaks mid-game you then hope you had a small amount box after all, and that you are fortunate enough to reject the large amount boxes ASAP. You don't get any more, having already "dealt", but it makes you feel better if you didn't chuck in the quarter mill.

[Coldicote]

Interesting but what a peculiar sort of game. I'll look more closely next time for what the banker is offering (whoever/wherever he is!). It would help if these points were explained at the beginning or during the programme. Thanks for your replies.

[THECORBYLOON]

If they just picked one of the boxes and were then given the choice of that one or the one they have already, the game could be over in two minutes.

[grasscarp]

Coldicote I was like you baffled and couldnt be bothered to watch. However, it was a favourite of my bedridden father, so as I sat beside him I started watching. Follow one episode and you will be alright. You may even end up like me, long after my father has died, watching it. Although I try to do something useful at the same time, like a bit of sewing!

[Coldicote]

Thanks again. I'll try but will need a bit of persuading, or perhaps just stay with Countdown, Pointless and Eggheads.

[Tuvok]

You'll be amazed how many players turn down big amounts - hoping for a larger amount, and then get a lower amount.

You'll hear them on about the 1p club - thats those who only got 1p!!

Basically low numbers being revealed are good until they have dealt, then the numbers higher than what they dealt at are good, low numbers then are bag!

[Giggsie]

coldicote you are like my mum countdown pointless eggheads you cannot interrupt her til they are finished. But she also watches deal so you may get into it also.

[flitty]

I cant stand the thing. It just reiterates the greed of our society. Tell me where you can go and in 15 minutes someone says do you want 9000 quid. You would snap there hand off. Remember a bloke saying deal before the break once to about 10k. Edmonds backside fell out. But it cleared his debts and thats what he wanted

[Old_Geezer]

Implying those desperate for a certain amount of cash apply to go on the show, rather than someone who can play the game without such external influences on their choices. Fair enough for them I suppose. But if the player is not desperate for money it makes rejecting the low offers a 'no brainer' (without having the benefit of hindsight obviously).

[maggiebee]

Deal or No Deal just annoys me. It seems to bring out the greed in some people, but maybe that's the type of contestant they attract. No skill required, just a few lucky mascots, a lot of hugging and that inane Noel Edmonds grin. Give me Pointless any day, at least a degree of knowledge is required and Alexander and Richard are very entertaining. Grumpy Maggie has spoken!

[Graham-W]

Statistics say there should be a £250,000 winner on the table once every 22 programs. Equally, there should be 1p. Every game is random.
It's a bit like poker but without the skill. You've got to know when to fold 'em, and know when to fold 'em.

[Graham-W]

^^
Fold, hold.

[gollob]

People on the programme on the whole are stupid . There have only been 5 winners of £250,000 yet there has been 46 winners of 1p. Funnily enough of the 5 winners they have all been female. If people just rejected the bankers offers all the time they would be far better off. There would be nearer 50 Jackpot winners rather than 5.

[masma]

It makes me so angry when someone can win, say, £10,000 then sit and cry because they had more in their box. Even if they win the 1p it's 1p more than they went in with.

[tonyav]

Those are my thoughts as well, masma.