WHAT

Another play who has no grasp of how good these endgame offers are on a low stakes board and crashes.

Or not with that offer!

SURELY she has the sense to take that???

That is a stupidly generous offer - only £400 less than the higher amount.

Stephen points out she can win a further £400 if she no deals and has the £2k in her box, but she could also beat the banker if she dealt now.

Jane says she came with nothing and is leaving feeling rich after meeting everyone there.

Jane says

DEAL

That's like offering 98 grand on the 100k still being on the board. THIS BANKER IS MAD.

Jane's husband says he'd have dealt as it was a good offer.

Stephen opens Jane's box 16 and reveals £2,000

Box 22 - Paisley - £750 ends the game.

Jane says her time on the show has been out of the world and such a wonderful and emotional experience.

I'm fine with reasonably generous offers on low stakes boards but these ridiculous AMOs need to stop.

Still, £1,600 sure as heck beats 1p.

Crazy offer, only £400 to gain and £850 to lose on a coin-flip… get Hugill back in the building!

The big money was never really there in this game, nor was the jeopardy of a low blue late on… good to see she got something she was reasonably happy with, and obviously valued the experience. It would be good to see someone go all the way and open a red though…

Wow, these offers are absolutely ridiculous. That last offer, was basically asking to be dealt!
Not a big money game, but not a pennies game either.

Surprised Jane was picked so early! Garvan and Janelle, was the 2 earliest to play their games apart from the first few of the original 22 contestants!

Hope she enjoys the money, quite a feisty lady! Good for her!

Are they doing proper random selection this time around? If so, a “Lucy” is statistically plausible just by chance…

Those comments that completely discarded the decent offers defy belief. I'd love to have a spare £3,000 stashed under my dilapidated mattress! Wouldn't we all love to have a spare £3,000! After all, if *they* have a spare £3,000, so should everyone else!

What in the bleeding heart of Christ was that.

Swatting away four figure cash bonuses like that in an economy like this. Had the board fallen a different way, I fear that gluttonous money GREED would have consumed our player today. We were spared the carnage of yesterday just by the happenstance of a red value being on the table. If it was a blue, it was being won. It's as simple as that. GREED doesn't discriminate.

We've had worse games ofc, but in my view I don't believe the episode should have aired.

Unlikely, you could have situations where you're in attendance for over a month. That's a long time to have ''HOL'' written into the work rota. I'm reasonably certain that Lucy spent some of her stint in her actual gaff because she lived in Bristol and might have still been working on the side.

Today was technically the 3,000th episode of the show!

(This show count excludes the celebrity shows and other specials, in line with how DoND themselves did it according to the stats board which was on display in the later years.)

These players haven't been having much luck recently. The ones that make brave gambles lose out while those that deal could've had a lot more.

Still, glad Jane won a decent amount in the end and had the sense to deal the absurdly generous final offer which is becoming far too common.

As for why she played so early... I reckon it's because the cost of BSL interpreters would have necessitated only having her there for a short time.

I think the players are genuinely selected at random in this version vs the Noel version where they were predetermined by production beforehand.

That would explain why Jane (and Stevie last week) hasn't stayed for very long.

Most games are just following a samey, predictable pattern I'm afraid - a lot of these players would've won some meaty sums in the older version and had some proper dilemmas, in their own minds at least, with the more significant sums they were risking. Most players see these amounts just as 'modest' and have frankly very poor board-reading skills, or just prefer taking the board beyond its limits.

If only they could've kept the original money ladder. The banker seems very confused about what his aim should be, and ends up finishing games with a "cost of living" handout for the final offer when the game goes pear shaped. If everyone's going to (blindingly?) go to the end as the amounts aren't enough for them, they need to get the older board back or cast players (and a banker!) that actually have some knowledge of maths...

Would also help if the audience ACTUALLY CLAPPED A DECENT OFFER!

Looking at the stats, the first two players won five figures but only one has since. Five have gone to the end and all took home blues.

Stats, I regard you as (for lack of a better word) a 'professional' forumite. Never involved in or creating chaos or trolling, you just do your thing quietly.

So seeing an excoriating post like that about this revived carcass of a show, that hits every nail on the head, stemming from your pen... it's pretty telling. It was not the right world to spunk this show in to and it has no direction or consistency. Or even moral taste.

It baffled me how there was COMPLETE SILENCE at the £3,000 3-box offer. I get that it's a low figure but that was only 12% below the mean!