nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Deal or No Deal is the dumbest tv show in history.

paleoperson

It seems to be for people who don't understand the most absolute basic law of probabilities - the law of averages, aka common sense.

If one box contains $100 and one contains $0, what deal should you accept? Obviously you should accept only something >$50 because you were winning in the long run that way.

"ah now hold on a second OP, $16k can be worth a lot more to some people than a half chance at $32k. $16k will dig them out of debt while they don't need $32k"

The only real problem with debt the interest it accrues. Ideally, this should go both ways. So for whatever debt the $16k uses up, the $32k should make double of, hence the law of probabilities still applies exactly.

If we do however assume that people in debt pay more on their interest than people gain on their savings, all you have to do is factor this into their probability equation. So you could calculate after the next 10 years of interest both in debt vs outside it. Any other thing could be added if you like... simply calculated odds, not "but do you feel daring today Geraldine?".

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

GMSA

Never realised the UK version ran for 11 yrs. Channel 4 axed it in 2016 thank Christ. Can't stand Noel Edmonds so have never watched a full episode. Remember Countdown was on before it everyday. Now that was worth watching. Required a level of intelligence, the tv audience could take part and there was some female distraction as well:)

kneemos

893bet wrote: »

I watched it for years with my Mam before she passed away.

Thankfully my suffer is over.

Did you pick the box?

ohnonotgmail

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

So many reality shows deserve this title. Deal or No Deal wasn't exactly The Wire but its no Love Island or Big Brother either.

How about Celebs on The Farm?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celebs_on_the_Farm

Is that the one with David Beckhams bit on the side jacking off a pig?

jimmymack

https://amp.theguardian.com/media/2006/oct/21/broadcasting.arts

Great article that pops up whenever Deal or No Deal gets mentioned, it seems like an utterly bizarre set-up

Birneybau

I'm surprised Edmonds ever got work after this:

Deebles McBeebles

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Is that the one with David Beckhams bit on the side jacking off a pig?

Hahaha I have no idea but I really hope so. I haven't seen any of it other than the ad but the premise is just such a desperate attempt at making a tv show.

fancy pigeon

"I have a strategy" To pick random boxes based on some feeling...

Franz Von Peppercorn

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

The all start with zero.

They receive an offer of 10K or so and they turn it down on the "chance" to win X

Its stupid.

If someone walked up to you and tried to sell you a lotto ticket for 10K for the "chance" to win X you would think they were mental.

Take the first offer and go home.

Yeh. Open half the boxes and take the 10-20k. Then look disappointed when you didn’t get the 50k you had no chance of knowing was in the box.

Grayson

jimmymack wrote: »

https://amp.theguardian.com/media/2006/oct/21/broadcasting.arts

Great article that pops up whenever Deal or No Deal gets mentioned, it seems like an utterly bizarre set-up

That was a really good read.

I think I've seen one celebrity edition of it and that's it. It does come across very weird behind the scenes.

orourkeda1977

Laois_Man wrote: »

Funny that, I always say a similar thing about Soap Operas. If you watch one of them for a couple of years, you'll have seen all the same stories that all of them do. There's a hell of a lot more hours in those!

Haven't watched Deal or No Deal in years - I didn't even know it was still on. Edmonds' waffle was annoying alright - but even more annoying was his pretense that he was on the side of the contestant, when behind it all, what he was actually doing was subtly goading them into losing money!

I'm not a fan of soaps but at lest we got a chance to perv at Michelle Keegan for a while

Allinall

paleoperson wrote: »

It seems to be for people who don't understand the most absolute basic law of probabilities - the law of averages, aka common sense.

If one box contains $100 and one contains $0, what deal should you accept? Obviously you should accept only something >$50 because you were winning in the long run that way.

"ah now hold on a second OP, $16k can be worth a lot more to some people than a half chance at $32k. $16k will dig them out of debt while they don't need $32k"

The only real problem with debt the interest it accrues. Ideally, this should go both ways. So for whatever debt the $16k uses up, the $32k should make double of, hence the law of probabilities still applies exactly.

If we do however assume that people in debt pay more on their interest than people gain on their savings, all you have to do is factor this into their probability equation. So you could calculate after the next 10 years of interest both in debt vs outside it. Any other thing could be added if you like... simply calculated odds, not "but do you feel daring today Geraldine?".

The bolded bit is where your mathematics and probabilities are very flawed.

There is no "long run".

893bet

kneemos wrote: »

Did you pick the box?

I sure did!

Franz Von Peppercorn

Grayson wrote: »

That was a really good read.

I think I've seen one celebrity edition of it and that's it. It does come across very weird behind the scenes.

I was thinking that journalist was a cut above the normal writer. he’s the guy who wrote the men who stare at goats and the psychopath test.

Yer Da sells Avon

Uncharted wrote: »

Supermarket sweep.

That is all.

I was in Tesco's (yes, Tesco's) earlier, and when I was at the checkout and I heard the beep, I thought of the fun I could have been having on Supermarket Sweep.

paleoperson

Allinall wrote: »

The bolded bit is where your mathematics and probabilities are very flawed.

There is no "long run".

According to the context I'm using it in it's correct.

Credit Checker Moose

893bet wrote: »

I sure did!

[Deleted User]

jimmymack wrote: »

https://amp.theguardian.com/media/2006/oct/21/broadcasting.arts

Great article that pops up whenever Deal or No Deal gets mentioned, it seems like an utterly bizarre set-up

Wonderfully-written article, says a lot about the show and about Edmonds. I've never seen an entire programme, but I'm beginning to believe that it really is the dumbest show in history

-A Corrie fan

Allinall

paleoperson wrote: »

According to the context I'm using it in it's correct.

I thought the context was Deal or No Deal?

The contestant only gets one shot at it.

El Horseboxo

jamesbere wrote: »

How they made a game show out of randomly picking boxes I'll never know.

I was doing that all through college and never had a show made about me.

Motivator

Probably the worst “game” show ever to be aired on the television. I just can’t get my head around how it lasted for so long. Is it still being shown?

I watched a few episodes a few years ago and could never get my head around the backslapping that was given to contestants for their “great strategy”. I doubt a 54 year old bin man from Coventry has a particularly intelligent “strategy” for opening boxes. Absolutely the worst I’ve ever seen.

paleoperson

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Wonderfully-written article, says a lot about the show and about Edmonds. I've never seen an entire programme, but I'm beginning to believe that it really is the dumbest show in history

-A Corrie fan

I've been known to watch a fair bit of Corrie, Eastenders, X-Factor, reality tv and more throughout the years, not for a good while now. But I'm certainly no tv snob, unless you're getting into Geordie Shore type of level, which is just taking the piss.

Motivator wrote: »

I watched a few episodes a few years ago and could never get my head around the backslapping that was given to contestants for their “great strategy”. I doubt a 54 year old bin man from Coventry has a particularly intelligent “strategy” for opening boxes. Absolutely the worst I’ve ever seen.

The only valid "strategy" is to add up all the amounts of the boxes and divide by the number of boxes there. If the banker offers above that accept, below that decline. This is what annoys me about the show the most, it's like blasphemy of the most absolute basics of maths. It's not like saying I'm so cool with my maths, it's more like... I don't know man. I'm sure some of these people are capable individuals but they're being made a fool of by the show.

At least with the likes of Gogglebox there's always a degree of subjectivity about it. Even a show like Winning Streak is pure luck yes, but I don't think there's any time when people are asked whether they want to gamble away their money and where the odds are clearly biased either way, and it's especially not the whole show.