Deal Or No Deal is my favourite show on the telly. Its been so since it has begun.

However after Alma's game yesterday I feel that there is one thing that could be done away with.

If you recall the banker call made at five box was when Noel made the comment that "The banker too plays on with honesty".

If you recall the first box Alma selected after the deal was made was the "newbie".

We will never know of course if indeed this would have been selected if she had not have dealed.

But how many games do we see 22, 13 & newbie selected in the round after the deal has been done.

And this is usually after Noel says "We play on with honesty".

Perhaps I'm alone in thinking this, but I would like to hear what other people's thoughts are.

I think most of the time the players play on with honesty afterwards.

And, if, in the proveout, the player selects a box they have been keeping to one side for whatever reason, Noel will usually pull them up.

For example, with Jack (my namesake!) from April last year, after he dealt, he immediately selected a box he'd been keeping to one side because he was suspicious of it; Noel pulled him up, but he then nominated another box that he was keeping to the end (which, unfortuantely, contined the 250k).

One common complaint about 'playing with honesty' is the hypo-swap, or the lack of it. norwichdonder regularly complains about the lack of a hypo-swap, after a player expresses feelings for a box with a big sum, but does not hypo-swap for it; Macka from June last year, being a good example: the box he was keeping to the end had some odd connection with his father, and it contained 100k, thus raising the question of whether he'd have swapped for it.

Then again, when the hypo-swap is done, it is often complained about, especially, when the 250k is involved (Rob, anyone?). Many point out it is usually done with the smaller amount on the table. Also, many believe that people who say they would've swapped on a 250k/peanuts final two wouldn't have done so in live play (Martyne, in particular, is often used as an example of this).

That's my views on playing with honesty. If you don't have a system, it is quite hard to, but only the player themself knows for sure what they really would've done.

when someones dealt the banker often rings up before they open the last box to say he would have phoned to say what the next offer would be depending on what was revealed in the last box but how often does he ring up to do that in active play and shouldnt he sometimes make extra offers after someones dealt and when someone deals at 8 box in one of the special weeks they dont play on with honesty

Playing on with honesty in special weeks would be a bit cruel, especially if there are holidays involved to be won.

The banker sometimes rings up at 3-box in live play to let them know the scale of the next offer based on their next box decision.

Doing extra offers in proveout would just be counter-productive because there's no televisual value in giving the player decisions they can't make.

I suppose its all down to the system the player has for selecting their numbers. I can imagine its tough to start choosing numbers at the start of the game. So you may decide to leave certain numbers you wouldn't want to pick.

Does anybody know if players have been banned from picking numbers in order; 1,2,3,4,5 etc. I've only seen it done once. And can't remember it done since.

The contestant that picked their numbers in order of numbers on a dartboard was my favourite system.

I think contestants could pick the boxes in any order using any method they want (it would be quite funny if we had a speight of contestants who just went in numerical order though)