Since I think the original Deal-Eye is better to use now more than ever, I shall use it to evaluate the decisions for each game. I shall also use its own methodology to determine whether or not it would take Box 23, which involves plugging in the possible outcomes of Box 23 as values on a 5 box board and use it's Deal-Eye benchmark to determine whether or not it would take on box 23. Thanks to goal-seek on Excel, I have been able to calculate the tipping point above which Deal-Eye wouldn't take on Box 23, and it's £5,140.92. Since that seems to be roughly the tipping point for the average contestant on the show, at least given the games we've seen so far this year, I think this is an accurate estimate.

Since I don't have the time to post every game so far this year, I shall simply state what Deal-Eye would've done in those games:

Joey: Deal £2,900 at 11 box as it was nearly half the average on a 3 box game with no fall-backs, plus Deal Box 23 for a total of £12,900.

Kim: After marginal No Deals at 8 and 5 box, £80, which it would've gotten back after purchasing Box 23.

Pedram: After a marginal No Deal at 8 box, £7,500 at 5 box, which it would've kept for a DRAW.

Sarah: Deal £5,000 at 5 box, as just like Pedram's game, it was nearly half the average on a 1 box game with minimal back-up. Unlike Sarah, however, it would've purchased Box 23 and have its winnings bumped up to £15,000.

Nick: Thanks to Deal-Eye's aggression on 3 box games at 8 box and 2 box games at 5 box, £1,000, which would've turned into NOTHING thanks to Box 23.

Kash: After a marginal No Deal at 8 box and an insufficient increase at 5 box, 50p from the Box, which would've doubled to £1 by Box 23 for a DRAW.

Jamie: Thanks to the poor offers throughout, £20,000 from the (non-swapped) box, and needless to say it wouldn't be risked on Box 23.

Kelly: After a marginal No Deal at 8 box, £3,000 at 2 box, which would've been turned into £13,000 thanks to Box 23 for a DRAW.

Lily: After a marginal No Deal at 5 box and a generosity decrease at the final offer, £3,000 from the box, which would've been halved to £1,500 by Box 23.

Mick: Thanks to the low blues holding down the benchmark, £700 at 5 box, which would be unaffected by Box 23.

So far this year, Deal-Eye has Won 3 games, Lost 4 games, and had 3 DRAWS. It's total winnings are £60,681 compared to the player's £106,902.

I'll start posting individual games tomorrow.

Well done Ben!

Angel..............



Exactly what we DID NOT need after yesterday's crash. I can safely say that is the most inconsistent Undeal there's ever been, but it is certainly justifiable to take it on if you could afford the 40% chance of losing £9,000. Still, it was very odd that she was willing to Deal a stingy offer at 8 box in the first place if she willing to take that Undeal on. Unfortunately, that Undeal also cost Deal-Eye a potential Power 5 win as it never swaps , though £9,000 would certainly be a believable on today's finish.

On another note, as this is separate from the main Deal-Eye experiment and I very much believe it was disadvantaged throughout the last 7 months of 2013, I'll start a new tally using only 2014 games.

2014 Deal-Eye Stats
Players' Winnings: £106,907
Deal-Eye's Winnings: £69,681
TIED 5.5 all after 11 games (as I use half-points for all draws for simplicity sake)

I'm sure the "new" Deal-Eye would want more than the £9,000 making it again, unfair and more like a roulette thread than ever before. Bravo ACB!

ACB can get on with it now, I really don't care!

First of all, thank you, Statsman, for sending me a copy of your Deal-Eye Spreadsheet.

Now to Sacha's game..............



A very unlucky game throughout, hinting the jackpot and the £75,000 in the opening round, then not not having a single after the 2nd one that shifted the board in her favor until after she dealt. I certainly understand her Deal, especially after seeing 4 of the past 6 contestants go home with a blue. But sadly, she now joins Stan in the Hall of Fame as the lowest seller of the £100,000.

On a better note, Deal-Eye scores it's first six figure win of the new year.

EDIT: Sorry I forgot. Obviously the 5 box offer was £5,000 and Deal-Eye's verdict was NO DEAL.

Cool! Just a few things:

1. If you "Print-Screen-Paste" The player photo to Picture Manager or similar, you can crop, re-size and get rid of the white bits!

2. "NO DEAL" just inverses the colours of "DEAL"

3. With Gains/Losses, it's ONLY recorded if the Player/Deal-Eye goes for Box 23, so you can see the amount of times they have gained/lost from it, and indeed how many players have gone for it. So, currently 2 players have gained from it, 1 lost, and 2 got their money back! 5 from 12 games.

Joey and Kelly gained £10,000 from box 23 and Kash got her money doubled to £1, so actually 3 people gained money from box 23.

How many DEAL-EYES do we need

Perhaps polish it up a little bit? So many different colours
I don't really know how the maths works so I'll leave you to it. I did S1 for A-Level Maths and never wanted to do stats again (those stupid stem and leaf diagrams really pissed me off!)

Good luck with it though!

Aha! Just in ACB's hands now, after some discussion I decided it was best to have one existing (and admittedly less confusing) version of Deal-Eye. The graphics are no more garish than the set now, it's tricky to include all the stats without colour-coding them to an extent...

I can step in for the odd week of analysis, if that's ok with ACB...

I strongly disagree with this and the whole thing has left a bad taste in my mouth.

Deal-Eye was StatsMan's creation and it should be up to him about how to take it forward without people complaining loudly and often and taking away control of it.

To ignore box 23 as is now being done is fundamentally incorrect. Whether you like it or not winning a blue is now not as much of a disaster as before due to the +£10,000 chance so to ignore this possibility when evaluating offers is wrong.

The new version of Deal-Eye is no more complicated than the old one. Treating offers as EV can (and should) be done in the background meaning no change in what is presented on the spreadsheet. (The only difference being the main offer under consideration as otherwise you'd have odd situations such as OFFER: £2000 BENCHMARK: £2,100 - DEAL so this should be OFFER: £2000 (£2,300 or whatever it comes out as) BENCHMARK: £2,100 - DEAL)

StatsMan has put a lot of work into Deal-Eye, and contributors such as myself and KP have given input into how the maths should work and I'm annoyed it could be for nothing.

I've made some suggestions in the other thread how to improve the output. These can also be applied to this version as I think it's a bit cluttered with quite a bit of redundant information.

I'd like to see the new version running. By all means keep this one going, although I don't really see the point. If anything it might be interesting to see how the two versions compare against each other.

First of all, regarding cfd's post, this Deal-Eye is FAR more effective than the one that effectively treats Box 23 as a £2,000 bonus, as all Box 23 is doing to the Banker's offers is making them more sensible on low stakes games, making the old Deal-Eye more viable. If we stuck to the other Deal-Eye I can guarantee you that Joey's 8 box Deal would've been one of the few it would've made this year, effectively turning Deal-Eye into a Wakeyist rather than the analyst it's supposed to be.

Anyway, Graham's game........................



Poor offers throughout today from Deal-Eye's point of view, which allows it to score it's first £250,000 win of the year. I admit, though, that Deal-Eye was lucky in this case, and I fear it may be at the same disadvantage down the road that it had in the latter part of 2013 if this is the beginning of another run of cautious play and poor offers throughout.

I don't know how you base these comments on so little evidence. As it is OldDE has only dealt a couple of extra offers compared to NewDE. And one of the No Deal's made by NewDE was saved by 23 which is why we take it into consideration. Arguably the biggest crash so far was in Lily's game which NewDE only no dealt by £600 (offer being 99% of the benchmark) but OldDE no dealt that too.

Just becase DE might no deal a lot doesn't mean it's a wakeyist and not analysing the game. The analysis is still there but DE can show offers for being poor. Even on new DE you'll note that the benchmark is still considerably lower than the mean.

Your last comments about the £250,000 win I find quite telling. DE did not get lucky for the £250,000 win. The offers were poor and correctly no dealt. A lot of us on this forum would have won the £250,000 today due to poor offers, just as yesterday most of us would have had £100,000 for the same reason.

Cautious play and dealing poor offers is not a disadvantage to DE. If players are willing to take low offers then more fool them.


Anyway... water under the bridge. For the time being I am going to update NewDE and run it alongside this one. It may be interesting to see where their decisions differ. Assuming all goes well I should have updates up on Monday as I travel down to Bristol tomorrow for the weekend to watch this thing live

A double feature today..........................



Firstly, good play by Laura at 8 box mentioning the OHO mentality and confidently No Dealing the derisory offer she had, which prompted the Banker to increase the generosity at 5 box. Sadly, that only served to stop both her and Deal-Eye from having a big finish.



Then there was Dean. A cautious Deal at 5 box, but surprisingly enough Deal-Eye saw saw it as being just as generous as the 8 box offer. Regardless, neither were anywhere near enough for Deal-Eye, and thanks to it not a stigma towards winning 1p, it scores a £20,000 OPW.

Anita.............................



Edit: DEAL-EYE leads 6 to 10 after 16 games

A thoroughly deserved victory today for Deal-Eye. I think today's game made it abundantly clear that many currently on the wings have the "Deal at 5 box regardless of the board and offer" mentality, no doubt still having the 4 recent blue wins in mind. Thankfully Deal-Eye is not affected by previous games and plays the board in front of it.

Case for dealing £8k and taking box 23 actually, that offered the best odds of a significant uplift. Condensed reds boards should arguably be played differently now with box 23... and that's one of the main reasons "Old Deal-Eye" is broken...

As I mentioned in the commentary, the 5 box board was like a slightly MORE generous version of Box 23, with £5, £5k, £10k, and £15k being virtually the same as NOTHING, HALF, MONEY BACK, and DOUBLE, respectively, but with £35,000 being a lot more than +£10,000, so it really doesn't make mathematical sense to take on Box 23 if you're going to Deal at 5 box.



I'm glad you agree with me, Statsman.

Looking forward to today's result!

JP.....................................



After a marginal NO DEAL at 5 box and the subsequent crash, Deal-Eye purchases Box 23 for a WIN.

£5k was the other box with the £10 Pity... That was kinda neat having the last 2 boxes as the sum Deal-Eye went away with!