Deal or No Deal?

There is absolutely no skill in this "gameshow" at all - it is pure luck. Having said that, it is incredibly addictive. Noel Edmonds, finally back on TV after years in the wilderness, hosts this UK version of a game-show that I think originated in Australia, before being sold all over the globe. Channel Four and Endomol (the people behind "Big Brother") bought the concept for the UK market and are showing it some six times a week in the afternoon slot at 4.15pm after the ever-popular "Countdown" show.

The idea is quite simple - 22 numbered boxes (each with a different sum of money ranging from just 1p up to £250,000) and 22 contestants. For each show, one of the contestants is picked at random and comes to the table with his or her box and then has to choose which boxes to open in order, hopefully leaving themselves with the box or boxes that have the most money in right to the end. At set points during the game after opening a certain amount of boxes, the phone rings and Noel talks to the mysterious "banker" (a person whose secret identity is second only to "The Stig" from BBC's "Top Gear" motoring magazine show) and tries to tempt the player to sell their box to him - the question being "Deal" or "No Deal".

As I said before, this is pure luck. Sure, you can try to pick numbers based on birthdays or use odd and even numbers or even try to make a spreadsheet based upon all the shows so far, but ultimately the process is completely random. The only skill involved is taking the money that is offered at the right time and maximising your winnings. No-one has yet won the biggest sum possible - a cool quarter of a million, though there has been one poor guy who walked away with just a penny and another 10p winner, so the key factor is not to be TOO greedy - just do well enough to get a sum of money you are happy with and walk away. It will take a very brave person indeed faced with a choice at the last box to decide whether to accept an offer of £120,000 from the banker or open his box which MIGHT have £250,000 in it, but equally might have only £50. Do you take the £120,000 you've been offered and be grateful, or do you go for the big one and come away with something much smaller? I'd love to go on this show, but after watching so many games unfold I'm still not sure whether I'm a real gambler or a bottler. As soon as I was offered £10K or more, I'd probably walk, even if I had the best game-board possible. Maybe I'd feel differently if I was up there. Somehow, I doubt it. I'm not that greedy - £10K is plenty. I'd love to get on this show!!

22 contestants stand with 22 red boxes in front of them. The computer selects one at random and he or she must come to the front of the others with their box. They must then select boxes from the remaining 21 to try and identify which ones has the smaller amounts of money to eliminate them while keeping the location of the big money in play until the end. At times here and there a mystery banker will call in to try and convince the contestant to sell him their box for a certain amount of money – to which the contestant must decide whether to "deal" and take the money or "no deal" and keep playing for more money.

I glanced at the viewing figures over the Christmas period and noticed that, at a time of a year with loads of films and television events on the box, that "Deal or No Deal" won the highest ratings on Channel 4. Confused I decided to watch a show to get a grip on what about this show was making it so well watched. After a short time I realised that this was very much just a big game of chance dressed up as something suspenseful, skillful and tactical. This dressing seems to be enough for many viewers but I just found it amazingly dull; each decision is delivered slowly and occasionally talked through but really it doesn't matter what number is "lucky" or who's birthday they represent, it essentially comes down to luck and being aware of the odds. It does confuse me that it should do so well on afternoon TV given that it follows Countdown – a show that is the exact opposite and requires a real word power.

It is to the credit of the producers that they manage to stretch it out for over 30 minutes and keep a reasonable air of suspense – again, not enough for me but it is obvious that it grips some viewers. They use the music well and the cameras are slightly wobbly and mobile giving the show the slight feel of a cop drama rather than a studio quiz show. A lot rests on the shoulders of Noel Edmonds and he tries hard but cannot convince with so little to work with. He talks about keeping it positive and he works the contestants well, stressing the need for them to do something (although they can only open the box in front of them). He says that he likes their style, likes what they are thinking, likes what they are doing etc; he does well to keep the mood of tension in the studio but to me it just seemed like he was desperately flogging a dead horse. His conversations with the banker are the weirdest thing I've seen in a quiz – we can only hear his side of the conversation and he then gets to build the offer up tension-wise, however he wants; it is just a little weird and false.

The whole show feels quite low rent and I do give credit where credit is due, because the producers have managed to squeeze so much tension out of it. Personally I just found all the talk of tactics etc to be pointless because the whole show is based on luck and a very small amount of playing the odds; for me it was only this latter section that was of interest but it made up so little of the show to be not worth the effort. So despite topping the Channel 4 ratings, I just can't see the fuss. Noel Edmonds seems to be really enjoying himself and be totally enthralled by every move the contestants make but this all exists in his head and, despite trying really hard, he just couldn't make me care about a series of rolls of the dice.

This pointless rubbish just involves random opening of boxes - there's no skill involved. When I watched the first episode, I was expecting that they'd move onto something better in later rounds, but it was the same boring thing throughout the show. I've never watched another episode.

So here's the format: There are random boxes containing cash awards that the contestant eliminates one by one. Occasionally a phone will ring which the presenter answers and then offers the contestant cash to drop out now (the call was from 'the banker', rhyming slang perhaps?). The offers are poor at the start, until there are only a few boxes left. And that's it, no intelligence required.

How anyone can watch this is beyond me, but to make it worse it's hosted by the retard pandering king himself, the excreable Noel Edmonds. I can't watch him without the hair on the back of my neck standing up. So smug, so slimy and insincere.

This is THE worst thing on TV, bar none.

When 'Deal on no deal' was first mentioned in the National press before it started in 2005, they were very sceptical as was I, about how a 45 minute show, with just a contestant picking red boxes at random would be much of a hit, but here we are close to 4 years later, the show which stated in the Netherlands is now practically everywhere in the world very much like BBC's The Weakest Link,

There is no skill to this game - and I wish Noel Edmonds would stop banging on about....'How well you're playing the game' & 'psychological game of cat and mouse with the banker'

IT'S PICKING BOXES FOR PETE'S SAKE!!!

But I have to say I, like many others am addicted