Deal or No Deal

"Deal or No Deal", from Endemol, the folks that gave you "Fear Factor" and "Extreme Makeover", brought this international import to the States for a five-night run on NBC originally back in December 2005. Hosted by Howie Mandel, the show is like a cross between "Let's Make a Deal" and "Russian Roulette", and here's how it works: A contestant out of the audience chooses one numbered briefcase out of 26 for their game. The cases have cash values ranging from one cent all the way up to $1 million (and there are several six-figure prizes starting at $100,000). All the values are posted on a large, projection-screen TV monitor in the studio. The contestant then begins a process of elimination, calling out the numbers of six briefcases. As each number is called, a lovely model opens the numbered case to reveal the cash amount inside (Mandel: "Nikki, open the case."). The cash amount is then removed from the list of cash values on the projection monitor.

Following this, a "banker", seated in a surveillance room above the studio floor, phones the host with an "offer" - a dollar amount he is willing to make for the briefcase the contestant chose at the start of the game. Essentially, the offer is an average of all the cash amounts on the monitor that haven't been yet eliminated - the more low amounts that are eliminated, the higher the offer. The host informs the contestant of the offer - which is posted in large numerals on the projection monitor - and then, after a bit of mathematical banter, the host pops the all-important question to the contestant: "Deal or No Deal?" If the contestant accepts the Deal, he/she wins the value of the offer and the game ends. If not, the contest must open five more briefcases before the next offer is made. If the contestant passes on the Deal at that point, then he/she must open four more cases, then three more, then two more, until in the later points in the game, there is an offer issued after one briefcase is selected.

The tension increases with every round of selections because in many cases, a contestant chooses a case with a large dollar amount, eliminating the possibility of winning that prize. Also adding to the drama - the contestant has three to four other guests (loved ones or friends) on the show to help him/her decide whether or not to take a Deal, usually introduced after the second round of briefcase selections. So there is an emotional aspect to "Deal" as well, one the large studio audience gets pumped up for.

Once the contestant has accepted a Deal, the host has the contestant theoretically play out the rest of the briefcase selections ("Let's see what you would have done...") and then reveals the contents of the briefcase that the contestant chose at the start of the game.

Overall, "Deal or No Deal" offers the best odds for winning $1 million on national TV - 1 in 26. But as host Howie Mandel states at the beginning of each show, the game is a combination of "luck, guts, and a great sense of timing." Part of Mandel's opening spiel: "One million dollars as the top prize. No crazy stunts to perform, no trivia questions to answer. In fact, there's only one question you need to know how to answer, the only question that counts. Deal or No Deal?" At the time of this writing, "Deal or No Deal" was introduced by NBC as a "stripped" broadcast (same time for five consecutive weeknights), airing between 8pm and 9pm Eastern Time. The show's initial ratings for the first two nights were great news for NBC; they handily won their Monday and Tuesday time slots.

Part of the entertainment value of "Deal or No Deal" is watching the contestants agonize over whether to accept a Deal or press their luck; a knowledge (or appreciation) of probability helps a lot, and screen graphics are occasionally shown to help viewers do the numbers (Example: "Kyle has a 25% chance his case contains at least $300,000"). The exchanges between the contestants and their guests are often very funny. Host Howie Mandel, better known for his goofball stand-up comedy and appearances on "The Tonight Show With Jay Leno", is an affable host, not overpowering the show. He has "a great sense of timing" himself, and sets up cliffhangers before each commercial (sending the audience into frustrated groans of anticipation).

And for anyone that doesn't believe there's a play-along element to the show, you get caught up in the moment, screaming at the TV, "Take the deal, you bonehead!" Most NBC affiliates also participated in the "Lucky Case" home game, in which viewers could win $10,000 based on their selection of one of the 26 cases.

Considering "Deal or No Deal" requires no intellectual knowledge (other than, perhaps, a little statistical analysis) nor mastery of a game (such as "Wheel of Fortune" or GSN's "Lingo") it is a surprisingly entertaining show. At the time of this writing, over 30 other countries had their own versions of the show.

First off,I don't want to sound like some buzz-kill here in regards to this show,or sound like I'm taking this show too seriously. Basically,when and if I watch this,besides the possibility that there's not much else on,I watch this primarily because I'm a student of human nature,and I do find it interesting what--when it comes to money--is any given individual's "breaking point" is. Sometimes I put myself in the place of the contestant,where I would or wouldn't deal. Sometimes I put myself in the role of Howie(and he does a very good job as the host,one part friend,one part Devil's advocate,lighter on the advocate). I even occasionally put myself in the role of one of the Oh-so-Gorgeous models(don't ask)! Much of the time,though,I'm usually just watching to guess what the Banker would do,figuring how much he would offer according to which cases have been opened.

The falsehoods I'm referring to--and thusly,why I feel like this show is equally,if not more so,head-banging and frustrating in nature--are some very important little notions and precipices that this show so famously stands atop. I've narrowed down the offenders to three biggies:

1. Each contestant is playing for a Million Dollars. While in principle,this is a correct assertion,more realistically and literally,the contestants are more playing to see how much they can make off the BAnker's offers. At it's heart,this show is adversarial,and few contestants leave with what's in the case they select(and usually,when they do,it's WAY less than they wanted).

2. That the case boards are easy to read. For example,just because someone eliminates a fair cluster of small amounts,particularly early,means that the board IS a player's board. By contrast,just because a number of large amounts are off the board at the start,DOESN'T mean the board cannot be favorable. In other words,in a game of probabilities,just because the high odds might favor the player ISN'T in and of itself a good tell of whether or not a player should deal.

3. After the deal has been made(and often it is),the host will ask the contestant what he or she would've taken if they'd gone on. Ponder that for just a second. Unless the contestant in question had a map plan of which cases they would've taken and when,this is a HUGELY false device,meant to instill a sort of "What if...?" twist to the end-game that is neither truthful or necessary.

There are more minor examples of these:magical thinking devices that are to somehow fool the contestant(And by proxy,the audience)into thinking that this is(or is supposed to be)ruled by something other than happenstance or luck;the assumption that the contestants are all somehow "average" people,when it seems like there is a definite type of people who are selected(usually,that connotes a person who possesses a lot of enthusiasm,good luck charms,loud, resolute family members and friends and stays pretty light on such meaningless stuff as intelligence,particularly in math,pretty SUB-average IMHO). I guess what I'm trying to say,in sum,is that this show is a perfectly okay wasting of an hour's TV time,but you might want to keep in mind that this is as much(if not more so)sideshow and theatrics as it is any sort of chance for people to get rich. Do that,and the viewing of DoND will go down a lot easier,particularly if you are not their type of contestant material.

This is, without doubt, the most boring show I've ever seen.

I admit, I've only watched it once, but once was enough to convince me there is a major void in talented game show producers.

The only way I'd watch again is if it was on late/late night and I was having trouble sleeping.

It might be less boring than counting sheep (I suppose).

And that Howie person? Oh please.

zzzzz

(and seriously, all those models...where did they get those things, Stepford Modeling Agency?)

Well, I, for one, find this show to be very interesting and entertaining. Walk away when the commercials come on and come back three or four minutes later and you will eliminate most of the irritation. Howie Mandel does a really good-natured hosting bit that should be a lesson to those that take themselves too seriously.

The girls are great and are having a lot of fun. This show will develop into a truly entertaining habit for the American viewing audience.

I found myself muttering at the ridiculous offers of the mysterious banker (the cheap creep ... get real!) I wanted some of the macho type, posturing contestants to refuse an offer and have to settle for a lot less. (goody goody) .. The whole gamut of human emotions that is strung out here is quite consuming... I look forward to the next show to see what sort of contestant we have and how they will handle it.

I should like so much to slap some of the contestants silly. Greed is either funny or pathetic and sometimes both at once. Tune in and feel very superior to these poor creatures and find yourself pulling for some of them and despising others. All the facets of watching a wrestling match without having to ignore the phoniness. These people really do want that money.

I am trying to tell you why you are going to get hooked. A very nice package and I say, "Yay, Howie, keep it on the fun level that it is now. Watch it. Enjoy it. Don't let anyone tell you it is not worth while until you have tried it yourself. Any night it is NOT on, I am very disappointed.

OLD DAD

Since when does a show have to be "intellectually Challenging"? Wheel of Fortune has lasted for decades with practically NO intellect required. (Other then knowing the English Language) The reason this "game" is so good is because it IS Brilliantly simple. They could've just called it "Greed" because that's all it's about.. that and knowing how to play the odds. In the tradition of "Let's make a Deal" where contestants keep their prizes or chose between trading for what's behind curtain 1, 2 or 3; there hasn't been a similar game on television since.

You have to Praise "originality" on television these days no matter how simple. Look at how many Networks copy the success of an Original show.. there was American Idol, so other networks tried to bring back Star Search to compete, and then Nashville Star.. both of which never came close. Survivor becomes a hit, so they try Fear Factor, The Cage, and endless others. "Tough Man" makes a mark as a Boxing competition, so they throw out the Contender and another Boxing reality show. Lost becomes a hit, so networks try and compete or Capitalize with Surface, Invasion and Threshold ... Law and Order and CSI are hits, so they make two more Spinoffs of each that saturate the Original.

These days, if a show isn't competing with a similar show it should be PRAISED. Surprisingly enough, "Deal or No Deal" actually has that "addictive" entertaining quality to it. No matter how simple it is. It's only downside in programming is that it's competing for airtime against "American Idol" which has been dominating 3 nights in a row in it's new season... blame those responsible for scheduling.

I can see this show returning many more times. And as for the "Banker", He'll probably be revealed one of these days. Maybe It'll be Regis. Simple it may be, but with all the copy-cat programming, at least it's refreshingly "Different".