Is Deal or No Deal (DOND) a Gambling or Just a Pure Game Show?

[Ishicryptic]

I don't know about this DOND games but from what I can understand in this thread the perticipants don't stake any money, I don't know how they are selected but inasmuch as they are not staking their money to win then it is not gambling. It could have some traits of gambling like the thrill of whether you will win or not but inasmuch as the perticipants are not putting their own money on the line it cannot be classified as real gambling. But I guess that perticipants can become addicted to winning and they might continue to apply to perticipate in the games, I hope the organizers would know better than recycling the same people for every show.

[Dunamisx]

I also don't see it as gambling because you don't use your money to bet it, but it's a kind of contest organized, we should try to differentiate what makes a game play gambling and the one that are not regarded as gambling based on the rules and procedure in playing it, as long as staking it's not involved, I may not regard this as gambling.

[jcojci]

That is gambling, the player choose one of the option and takes the responsibility whatever happening later. They don't know the risk so they use their minds and psychology to analyze what the effect if they choose one. Yes, they don't use money to choose the one but they still gambling on the option by take the one. Our life are also a gambling, realize or not because when you face on the situation which have two or three option, you should just take one to continue. You can't stagnant and don't do anything because that can makes other plan will not works.

[junder]

I also don't see it as gambling because you don't use your money to bet it, but it's a kind of contest organized, we should try to differentiate what makes a game play gambling and the one that are not regarded as gambling based on the rules and procedure in playing it, as long as staking it's not involved, I may not regard this as gambling.

I don't think it's a gamble because there's no money at stake. I've seen this show on tv with the Chosen One given a lot of choices, but I don't think it was planned because the person was part of the audience that was chosen, but could they possibly register by spending money to register? I don't think so.
I agree with what you are saying, As long as there is nothing at stake or we do not use capital then this is not gambling.

[Alpha Marine]

I used to watch that show back in the day. It's a game, and a game of chance and intuition, so it can be called a gamble.
Gambling doesn't necessarily mean you have to stake money. When you make a decision with pure intuition and no data whatsoever to back it up, then it's a gamble, because you are just hoping for luck.
I've seen some people turn down the offer of the banker, and in the end, they don't end up with the amount the banker offered.
I've also seen people win reasonable amounts on the show.
The choice they have to make when they choose a box, and the choice they have to make if they will accept the banker's offer for their box or not, is purely out of their intuition, nothing else.

Greed is a big motivation in that game. There were times that they could have accepted an offer of about $12k, but they said "no deal", and in the end, they won something less than $1k.
$12k is a lot of money, but because they had their eyes on a much higher price, they refused the offer because something in them tells them the amount in their box is higher.
The decisions are a gamble, nothing more.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

There are some activities that has some characteristics of gambling but are not gambling except you as a person wants to turn it into gambling yourself, example is trading, people say it's same as gambling but it's not even though it has a little characteristics to gambling, it's not gambling but someone can actually decide to turn it to gambling for themselves. This particular activity that you are talking about doesn't fulfill the real definition of what gambling is defined as, in real gambling, you must stake or wager money and the outcome of your wagering is still a prize which could be money or something else. In this case, the participants are not wagering to play the game.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Deal or No Deal is mainly a game show but it has gambling elements. Contestants don’t risk their own money, so it’s not gambling in the usual sense.

The game is based on chance and players have to decide whether to take the banker’s offer or keep going for a bigger prize which is similar to gambling.

It’s probably best described as a game show that uses gambling style decisions rather than actual gambling.

[tabas]

I know this game and I thought of it as an actual gamble. Because you'll be taking each round with a risk and losing that potential big/small money each round that passes by. It's fun to watch the show and I think that we just let it be as a game show that's very entertaining and if there will be some casinos that will recreate it as part of their game like being a slot or any reinvention that they can do, we might try and see how entertaining it will be for an actuality of gambling.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

I recently bumped into watching the Deal or No Deal in the BBC Brits channel at my friend's house and it got me thinking whether it should be classified as a gambling game or not because the contestants do not place bets with their own money but the entire game revolves around chances, risks and deciding whether to accept the banker's offer or continue with playing the game hoping for a bigger prize. When I had this discussion with my friend, it almost turned into an argument, he said it is not a gambling game and just a pure game show since it does not involve the player staking any money. He said this is what differentiates it from gambling substantially but I on the other hands believe that this DOND game shares same psychological elements with gambling such as the taking of high risks, chasing of higher rewards and making decisions under uncertainty. I believe these are the major things that define gambling. But this is just my opinion, I would like to hear from you, what's your own opinion when it comes to this game?

Well, I think I will side with your friend, because whether we believe it or not, a game show is game show and can't be classified as gambling most especially when the contestants or participants of the game has not stake any money that or which could possible turn into their loss if they lost in the game.

I understand gambling to be a game where the player has something at stake which they stand to loose if an outcome fails to go in their favor, and often times as we have seen, what most people put at stake is money.
If a game exists where the stake side is already taken care of and the participants or contestant are simply invited to come and play, and if they win, the receive a prize which could be cash, but if they loose, they get nothing but also lost nothing, we can't say those participating in such are gambling, they are simply participating in a game show.

[lionheart78]

It is gambling. Gambling is all about risk. You don't have to risk your own personal money before it should be called gambling. As long as something of worth was risked, then it is called gambling. It can also be someone else's money. In this case, people were invited to come and play a game. By so doing, they were given a choice to quit or gamble with the amount for a bigger win. This simple act makes it gambling.

why I argue that it looks more of a gambling to me is owing to the fact that despite that the said participants are not made to pay any amount of money to be qualified, you cannot say they did not invest in this show themselves, indirectly. Because before they came to the show, they had to spend money for transport and logistics, invited a few of their family members who came to support physically and emotionally and also encouraged their supporters to watch the game. I don't know how the selection process is in depth and I'm not sure if there are some financial commitments in the process to whether it is directly or not. So if we look at it in that direction, we should be able to say that the participants also have something to lose financially and emotionally which sometimes the emotional and mental pain costs more than the money invested.

I think you are confusing incidental expenses with a gambling stake.  If you apply incidental expenses as stakes and anything that was spent on is gambling, then everything and any activities in this world can be said to be a gambling activity.

People spend money going to entertainment, joining contests, taking college exams, and taking job interviews, they are spending incidental expenses, so are you saying these are gambling too?

I used to watch that show back in the day. It's a game, and a game of chance and intuition, so it can be called a gamble.
Gambling doesn't necessarily mean you have to stake money. When you make a decision with pure intuition and no data whatsoever to back it up, then it's a gamble, because you are just hoping for luck.
I've seen some people turn down the offer of the banker, and in the end, they don't end up with the amount the banker offered.
I've also seen people win reasonable amounts on the show.
The choice they have to make when they choose a box, and the choice they have to make if they will accept the banker's offer for their box or not, is purely out of their intuition, nothing else.

I think we better understand the difference between taking chance and gambling.  Lookingat this will definitely show the relation and the difference between these two labels, taking chance, and gambling.

[Odohu]

Since the deal or no deal does not involve the participants putting money on the table, I don't think it qualify as gambling. Gambling generally involve risk of winning or losing money, if the risk is completely removed, it becomes just like video games. I feel that those programs were primarily hosted for entertainment and not for people to bet on, besides, they just happen once in a while and not a program that happen everyday to enable people predict and bet on them.

[Pandu Geddon]

I think an event like that is just a quiz. It does look like gambling, but the players themselves don’t risk anything to get the prize. It’s an entertainment show. I don’t know how the participants are chosen, or whether the show is rigged or whether it’s purely the participants’ luck to win the prize without risking their money.

[Smartprofit]

I'm not a big fan of strict legal definitions (as a kid, I played Chingachgook and Mowgli more often than lawyers and attorneys), so I classify events based on my own common sense. 🙋

Until the contestants on "Deal or No Deal" win the first prize, I don't think it can be considered gambling... But once a player wins the first cash prize, and the host tells them, "Now you have two options! You can win a lot more or lose everything!" then we're dealing with classic gambling. It's a classic bet. The player either wins or loses. And it's this feeling of excitement and uncertainty, in my opinion, that draws viewers to this show. That's why they watch it!

And I'm sure the contestants on this show experience exactly the same emotions in this game as I do betting on the outcome of a match during the current World Cup. Both are gambling!🌋

[pawanjain]

I do thing this DOND is just the same as gambling. It's not the money that decides whether its gambling or not.
In some cases when gamblers are out of cash in real casinos, they bet their luxury goods like watches, cars or bracelets etc...
It can be considered in this case that the winner will be receiving these items as a prize.
The moment when someone is betting on something and expecting a reward in return then I guess he's just gambling.

[suzanne5223]

Until the contestants on "Deal or No Deal" win the first prize, I don't think it can be considered gambling... But once a player wins the first cash prize, and the host tells them, "Now you have two options! You can win a lot more or lose everything!" then we're dealing with classic gambling. It's a classic bet. The player either wins or loses. And it's this feeling of excitement and uncertainty, in my opinion, that draws viewers to this show. That's why they watch it!

This is actually the core concept of Deal or No Deal (DOND).
When the player picks a certain bag with yet to be know cash/reward, the banker gives the player the chance to deal/trade the bag s/he picked for the cash reward, which will be made public instead of choosing the fund that's still unknown to him/her, which is inside the bag s/he has.
This is technically gambling because it will create the feeling of excitement and uncertainty for every wrong decision made by the player will led to missing an important opportunity.

[lionheart78]

I'm not a big fan of strict legal definitions (as a kid, I played Chingachgook and Mowgli more often than lawyers and attorneys), so I classify events based on my own common sense. 🙋

Until the contestants on "Deal or No Deal" win the first prize, I don't think it can be considered gambling... But once a player wins the first cash prize, and the host tells them, "Now you have two options! You can win a lot more or lose everything!" then we're dealing with classic gambling. It's a classic bet. The player either wins or loses. And it's this feeling of excitement and uncertainty, in my opinion, that draws viewers to this show. That's why they watch it!

I think to differ, the player is not yet entitled to any prize until he chooses to deal or the game has concluded under its rules. Choosing a case and winning are two very different things in DOND mechanics, IMHO.  Continuing the game means he is still not staking his own money because the participant does not own any specific amount yet.

And I'm sure the contestants on this show experience exactly the same emotions in this game as I do betting on the outcome of a match during the current World Cup. Both are gambling!🌋

So, having experienced the emotion we experience during gambling, is gambling now?

I do thing this DOND is just the same as gambling. It's not the money that decides whether its gambling or not.
In some cases when gamblers are out of cash in real casinos, they bet their luxury goods like watches, cars or bracelets etc...
It can be considered in this case that the winner will be receiving these items as a prize.
The moment when someone is betting on something and expecting a reward in return then I guess he's just gambling.

Then should we modify what gambling is?  IN DOND there is no stake, participants don't need to stake their belongings, what they are playing with is actually not their own but a number in the case.  they don't own anything in that case until they choose to deal or eventually reached the last part of the game.

This is technically gambling because it will create the feeling of excitement and uncertainty for every wrong decision made by the player will led to missing an important opportunity.

In technical term what does the definition say about gambling?  Does the technical terms states gambling is defined by emotion?

[Ziskinberg]

If it is a game show, then it is not gambling. The very meaning of gambling is when you risk money, and in that case, you do not.

I believe you just have to audition, and if you pass, you will become part of the show. So if you are lucky, you can win money, but you are not risking your own money, which means there is no pressure on the contestant in that way.

But if it is offered online for betting, then that is gambling because obviously, you need to place money to win money.

[Dunamisx]

Deal or No Deal is mainly a game show but it has gambling elements. Contestants don’t risk their own money, so it’s not gambling in the usual sense.

That's true, most of the games we play can happen to be a deal or no deal agreement before we started and this does not really have to be gambling, contestant can go in for such play because they want to catch fun and as well risk their winning chance at no cost, which is why it is not a gamble because they don't have to stake anything before all of these could be achieved.

[Myleschetty]

But this is just my opinion, I would like to hear from you, what's your own opinion when it comes to this game?

The Deal or No Deal (DOND) was structured as a game show, but the cognitive and emotional processes are identical to those of gambling, so it's either your friend doesn't understand the concept of gambling or isn't fully aware that Deal or No Deal (DOND) game can be modified into a gambling game because it has the concept to provide psychological that involves risk taking, chance of higher rewards, and decision making under uncertainty, which is what we see in gambling.

[Agbamoni]

People spend money going to entertainment, joining contests, taking college exams, and taking job interviews, they are spending incidental expenses, so are you saying these are gambling too?

Most people say they gamble for fun and entertainment, so yeah, entertainment can be seen as gambling in some scenarios where luck is involved to have the fun. In the gambling industry, we see most contests from gambling platforms where one or two winners emerge out of 100 participants, if not more. Contest also, may be seen as gambling