Even when he tactics blow up in his face spectacularly (ie today's game, and Roop's), he never changes them. He just keeps using them. Remember how hopeful we were after Marlene's game, which followed on from that dour run of caution, then our hopes were dashed by Natalie's partial crash (which she backed out of)?

In days of old, the Banker reacted to games like today's defensively, and changed his gameplay tactics. Not any more though; what's the betting he'll lowball Sunday's player to force them into a crash and wipe out any possible influence of today's game.

(This is not supposed to be a rant, BTW; otherwise, I'd do it in the appropriate thread)

Any other opinions?

Oh yes, I was entirely optimistic the banker would change his overall strategy somewhat after Marlene's game (especially after this being the last game of a batch I saw live, so the belief remained for a few months...), but alas not to be the case.

I guess the producers save enough from the majority of contestants that they are prepared sacrifice a chunky portion of the budget for 'drama' in the big-finish scenarios...

The trouble with it, in my view, is that it tends to leave a sour taste in the mouth either way; if it's won, it's deemed as too 'easy', and if the game crashes it seems a bit... unjust.

Most players are probably going to gamble £10k for a life-changing sum, even more so now with the fallback of 23. In my mind, the game's most watchable when it's a challenge and a genuine battle between player and banker.

I remember Noel saying a few weeks ago "The banker HAS to take into account Box 23 when making this offer!"

Yea...of course he does Noel