UKC

I have come very late to this show, just started watching season 3 on iplayer after hearing it was very good. And, yes it is, really enjoying it. 

However, every breakfast they come into the dining room in small groups. And the final group to come in is always the "cliff hanger" group of faithfuls , of which one has been murdered and we, as TV viewers, do not know until this point.

Surely the contestants have figured this out? we are watching season 3, I am assuming the format was the same for season 1 & 2?  What am I missing here? we are 6 episodes in and the above has happened every morning at breakfast? 

Not sure what your point is.

It is a cliffhanger for us, the audience and a cliffhanger for the contestants.

All contestants come from their accommodation to the area where the breakfast scenes are shot. They are transported individually and the released by product staff to come into the breakfast room in groups or 3, 2 or sometimes solo. 

The contestant who has been 'murdered' is taken to another room where they are filmed opening the envelope which tells them they have been murdered.

The final groups to come into the breakfast room only really a relevance to the viewers as we have been party to the discussion between traitors about who will be murdered. As the format has been consistent for 3 series the contestants can infer something from the order that people come in but we also don't know how much has been done in the edit. 

Depends on taxi services from hotel/motels outside Inverness? 

Or just play the kids 'among us' game app which the tv is show is based on, it lasts about 10 mins and you'll realise how badly staged the whole traitors thing is. 

Like you, I've only recently started to watch the programme and have now seen all of Series 1 and 3. Same format in these so I assume series 2 is also the same. The purpose of the delayed reveal of which contestant has been murdered is fairly obvious, you only know who it is once everyone is in and that person hasn't appeared. Each time another group of 2 or 3 arrives, the breakfasters know a little more about who's been spared and therefore who the victim might be. We the viewers know the shortlist in advance - the other contestants don't, but may have an inkling based on the banishment votes the night before.

I don't really see how the murder reveal could be done any other way. Did you have something in mind as an alternative?

Or to drag out what is about 10mins of events daily into an hour of viewing. Don't really know how people get so drawn into this bilge and as for winkleman..  

I used to have the same opinion as you, but somehow got drawn into one recent episode and found it really interesting to witness how some people's perceptions of events or dialogue influenced others. And how a herd mentality can go against facts and sway the undecided. The round table discussion every night is pure rubber-necking at its best (worst?!) Factions and alliances are created and broken at the slightest glance or mis-spoken word.

I never used to be a fan of Claudia Winkleman either but I actually think she does a very good job as host/presenter. 

I don't have an alternative - the murder reveal at breakfast includes the other potential victims - the last group to enter -  hence the cliff hanger for the viewers. 

So, if I went on next seasons show, I would know that the last group to come in are almost certainly faithfuls that were discussed but not murdered. And I am assuming season 2 and 3 contestants would know this? 

i'm only about 7 episodes in so may well be missing something, but does feel like a kink in the strategy. 

Is this a game where either a solo person tries to win a sum of money, or a group of people work together to share out among themselves the same sum of money?

If so, does it not make mathematical sense to be in a gang to win something rather than be a solo player?

Never seen the show but this is how I think its played.

I don't think this is the case. Traitors do occasionally enter in the last group, along with the saved Faithfuls. It's less common, but it does happen and indeed the issue has been discussed in the 'Uncloaked' analysis.

Errr...., what?

I thought there was a cash prize?

There is. But surely you need to know how the game is played to comment.

Exactly, never understood the weird obsession that seems to have arisen around this show. Just play the game yourself, it's free. 

But does the prize get shared among the Traitors?

Or the prize is taken whole by the Faithful?

If there's a Traitor(s) in the final group, they alone win the cash, any Faithfuls get zero. If it's only Faithfuls in the group, they share it equally.

Aha! i need to seek out this "uncloaked" .... thx.

Ahhh.

Got it the wrong way round, but same concept. Winner takes all or the group are victorius

Edit

Apparently there was one instance in Series 1 where a Traitor entered with the last group and 4 occurrences in Series 2.

Useful link: https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/traitors-breakfast...

* CONTAINS SPOILERS*

That's the same thing isn't it?

I don't think they'd have it whereby two Traitors shared the pot. I suppose in theory this might be possible but who knows....

Thx - I won't click on that but good intel 

Yes, I noticed this. The last people in the room each morning have tended to be those singled out for being killed, so you can have a degree of confidence that they are faithful. 

However, they could be recruited at some later point. Also, I'm sure the production company have recognised this weakness. 

It's an interesting format and highlights so many of our flaws, amongst them confirmation bias, availability heuristic, bandwagon effect, anchoring bias, conservatism bias, overconfidence, outcome bias, and several others.

Delightful stuff and compelling viewing at times.

I re-edited after reading

Yip, gotcha. The interesting twist in Series 3 was that the Banished members of the final group don't reveal if they're a Traitor of Faithful when leaving, so the remaining contestants have less info to base their last decisions on. 

It was like the TV show with Noel Edmunds Deal or no deal, was just as straight forward.

The person had a box and after an hour, of holding onto that box, they could choose if they wanted to swap the box for another box.

It is very addictive and enjoyable viewing. It cannot be an easy game to participate in.CV is excellent as presenter.You can see whay she is so highly paid. The editing is first class and what makes it so gripping.

I remember the show vaguely but I've never seen a whole episode. But tbh I'm not really sure I see the similarity.

I also don't understand how you can claim a show is boring if, as you've admitted, you've never watched it yourself. Or is it just that the idea of it sounds boring to you?

This one. I have other stuff to watch or do that competes for my time, before I consider looking at a wonky fringe chatting to me.

It's the human condition. I know it can get heated on UKC but the Round Table on Traitors is brutal.

I do roll my eyes at the Adventure-washing; everyone razzing around beautiful contryside in over-specced & polluting Land Rovers is unnecessary and up there with Bear Grylls' contractual obligation to only ever appear on camera with a 20m 8.5m coil of rope around his torso (and a smudge of mud on his cheek), or shouty ex-SAS types braying at punters abseiling down what the narrator will dramatically call a "100ft vertical drop", but which in actual fact is a chossy steep slope.

There has been a Traitor in the last group that enter the room on multiple occasions across all 3 seasons, including this one.

This is an observation that a lot of casual/new watchers make and is demonstrably false. 

Apparently, they film lots of combos of people entering the room - it's only the viewers that see the true final edit. Otherwise, as you say, it would be easy for them to figure out the shortlist of who was up for being murdered.

I far preferred "The Adventure Game" and Playaway.  At least Brian Cant was entertaining.

I could never reason why a team would end up at The Vortex Task with a sandwich, and they'd put the sandwich in its entirety on the space ahead of them rather than breaking it up so they could repeatedly check the safety of their next move. Drove me mad.

I still occasionally refer to money as Grondas! I can't walk past a tall plant without grabbing its stem and do that babbling noise flicking your finger on your lips. Simpler times.

Top Trivia: Most proper nouns in the programme were anagrams of the word dragon!

If more than one traitor is left then they have the "traitors dilemma" They have to decide individually to share or steal the prize money. If they all choose to steal then they all leave with nothing.

Edit  At least that's what happened on the one series I've seen where multiple traitors were left.

Hah, that's interesting I didn't know that. Imagine going through the whole show with a fellow Traitor(s) to make the final group, both/all deciding to stab the other(s) in the back and ending up with nothing. That would indeed be quite a finale!

Edit: I really hope that's a foreign version, as I've only got the UK Series 2 to watch ... and that's not happened in 1 or 3!!

It was.

Probably  my favourite series, it isn't much of a spoiler as I'll explain below which is a spoiler.

..

.

.

.

.

.

. 

Three traitors made the final 5 and even got the remaining two faithful to vote for each other. This was after all 5 had  voted for the same faithful in the previous round 

Phew, thanks.

Game Theory/Traitor's Dilemma on "Golden Balls". Worth watching:

youtube.com/watch?v=S0qjK3TWZE8&

Not quite , as there can and are multiple traitors and faithful can become traitors.