This was fun. If you had let the briefcase winner see who had cheated, he might have more incentive to distribute the money less evenly.,(reply>), @Madness Reborn But it was totally possible to single one person for the screwing (and it is what i would have done).  Soph, Rohin, and Sam played MOSTLY by agreed terms, but Rohin has a huge independent streak. I would tell them, guys, we're all getting paid... and it's coming out of Mia's pocket.,(reply>), @Michal Brat It would not have been a gamble. 3 out of 4 people were required to agree (the deal did not have to be unanimous) and I think Mike knew perfectly well who the sneaky one was.,(reply>), @Madness Reborn if it was complete strangers without any public image this could have been interesting: would 3 players throw one under the bus to walk away with e.g. $150 more that agreed before or would they be teamplayers?<br>In this configuration, 90% sure this would have been no option for any of them, i agree,(reply>), @Madness Reborn Yes, this option was more hypothetical. In fact, I was quite happy with the results.,(reply>), @Michal Brat I don't see this working. Sophie played by agreed terms and Rohin did until things got too screwy for his liking. I could genuinely see Sam and Mia taking this offer but I think the other two would push for fairness and end up screwing everyone; best everyone be screwed rather than singling one person out, especially with the profile of each of the players. I can't say for others, but I can say beyond any doubt, I wouldn't watch the channel of someone who could go along with that.