In order to play I'd have to rewatch the older series, does anyone know where I can download them?

Pretty much agree with most of that, although the only thing i'll change is series 3 worst male from Paul to Rory, Paul was bad but Rory was far worse, from his dictatorial management style to forcing a product that was hideous when there were other ideas on the drawing board.

Rory's a strange one for me, he was terrible when he was a competitor, but I thought he was great in the final and a major asset to Simon's team. Otherwise I would have put him bottom.

Tom (hownwbrowncow) knows more about this than I do. Maybe he can offer some help?

I know some of the series are available on iTunes.


You could say the same for Paul though. Obviously he was dreadful on the France task and deserved to go, but in the five previous tasks he came across as one of the more capable guys. That was why Sir Alan said, 'You could have won this!' - he had been considered a serious competitor before that travesty. He seemed okay in the final as well. Maybe he was a good team member, just not a good leader.

Series 1 and 2 are available on youtube.

Series 8-10 are available on a website I'd PM to you.

Series 3-7 you'd have to purchase, either through iTunes, or another site which I'll PM to you if you want.

Thank you

I'm grateful for any information so thank you.
I've found 1 and 2 on YouTube, I'm not certain they are complete but probably. I will check properly later
Series 3 and 4 have the odd episode on you tube. I really would like to watch the first 6 series they were so much more fun than the new style show.
I'll let you know how I get on.
Thank you

I had a look this morning and all the early series seem to be there.

I just finished rewatching TYA3, and I'd forgotten how bad Patrick was. Either we were never shown what he did after the week one fail, or he did nothing of interest.

So I'd give him my worst male that season, and perhaps top 5 in my "candidates that made it further than they should have" poll.

Now I actually think that Patrick was a lot better than he was made out to be, and I think he was given without a doubt the most unfair edit of all time. Anything bad he did was really played up, and anything good was completely glossed over.

He really wasn't that bad. There were some tasks when he really did quite well - on the 10 items task, for example, he led the sub team and I think it was more down to him than Andrew that they won. On the WOMAD task, he had quite a pleasant, approachable sales patter with the seat umbrellas. Even on the clothes task, his wetsuit kimono was actually appreciated by some of the edgy shops - there was one person who made it very clear that the only reason she wasn't buying it was because it was a one-off item, and that if there were more she'd jump at it. All that stuff was only vaguely covered by the edit though, whilst things like his awful pitch in Week 2 were very heavily emphasised.

I really don't understand why the editors gave him such a negative portrayal. When it was on, I thought he was going to win - the negative edit would be for the shock value when he pulled it out of the bag on Task 8 and gave a phenomenal performance. When that didn't happen, I didn't really understand why he was given such a horrible edit. I didn't think he really deserved it, I felt quite sorry for him actually.

If anyone has bought them on iTunes, could they not share them with others via their Google Drive?

I don't exactly know how that works, but someone shared me videos of another TV show like that so I know it's possible.

I don't disagree with what you say, but if I were to make allowances for one, then I'd probably have to make allowances for all, so I have to go on what was shown.

I think he was a polite and sweet young man, I just think the apprentice wasn't for him (especially considering the shouty people and bulldozers that were in that year).

Yes, I see your point.

Obviously you can only go on what was shown, but what I notice in a candidate may not be what the producers want me to see. Ella Jade, for example, was given a nightmare edit as PM last year, but I just saw her doing the best she could on a completely impossible task. The thing about Patrick is that although he got a bad edit, there isn't actually that much that he actually did wrong. Most of the time he was just invisible - and if someone is invisible, you can try to actively look for what they are doing when the camera is focussing on someone else. Therefore, you can try to see past the edit and form your own conclusions.

I don't mean this in a bad way, but if someone has spent £60 on six series, I doubt they'd want to share them for free.

I'm not so sure, some people are just generous. I frequently burn CDs for my friends from CDs that I myself have already purchased, it's the same thing really. If I had them, I would be happy to share them with people. As it happens, I don't really have time to watch them right now so not planning to buy them just yet, nor do I know how to do it. But in a few months' time, I may well purchase them, if by that point no one has put them in the public domain. And if that happens, I will certainly be willing, if someone can teach me how.

But in the meantime, if anyone else would like to, there will be no need for me to do that. I wouldn't ask anyone to purchase them simply in order to share with the rest of us, but if someone was planning to buy them anyway, why not help a buddy out?

I can't find all of series 3, did you?
I've found series 4, I wonder why series 3 has been singled out, I can only find a few episodes

I think that perhaps Series 4 has been re-uploaded since the purge, and they haven't been taken down yet.

From the last series I'd say Mark and Roisin as the best, then Robert and Lindsay as the worst.

You think Lindsay was worse than Sarah?

I mean, I suppose you could make the argument that Sarah at least tried, whereas Lindsay seemed to just give up very early. But by the same argument, Lindsay was at least able to leave with her head held high having realised that it wasn't for her, whereas Sarah just blundered into catastrophe after catastrophe.

I think you could make cases for Lindsay, Sarah and Gemma being worst female last year. At least Lindsay understood she was fading, Sarah was marginalised after week one, and Gemma did nothing much of note so avoided the fickle finger of fate. My pet peeve is those that slide through doing nothing and big upping themselves.

Hmm, I tend to give Jemma (which is how she spells it) the benefit of the doubt there. When people are criticised for being invisible in the early weeks, I often think that they might well be a victim of just not being able to stand out from the crowd (unless of course they are shown specifically to be avoiding any responsibility, like Lindsay or Alex BC). We saw very little of Jemma in the first four weeks, but there's nothing to suggest she was doing badly - for all we know, she may have just been quietly getting on with things. In Week 5 she did an awful tour guide, but she did also do some good price negotiation, and she had her head screwed on right when she told James not to go in at £3 because they'd be laughed at. I think it's a shame she went so early - I think she may have had more to her than we were shown, would have been good to at least see her as PM. Lord Sugar made it pretty clear that had James been in the boardroom, he would have been fired over her.

No doubt about that, and if she'd pushed that fact, that Sanjay brought in the wrong people, she still may have saved herself.

It's just when I look at who I consider bad, it's not just the obvious "you done screwed that up" for me, but also you're going to lose points if I can't even remember you're in the show. Perhaps it's a leftover from my BB days, you not only have to do well on the show but also sell yourself to the viewer (well me, I know it's a personal taste thing).

I think it depends at what stage in the competition you're in. If it's Raj from Series 1 (fired in Week 9 without having done anything significant) then fair enough. If it's only Week 5, and there are 20 candidates in total, I think some people have to be given the benefit of the doubt.

Fair comment, I would also settle for "You were watching the show from between your fingers because of that twonk James (or Daniel depending what week it was), so it's no wonder some people were invisible".