The Traitors UK discussion thread *SPOILERS*

[Wideload90]

Hugo. The worst traitor ever. 

Battle of the barristers.

Lovely.

[DavidB6937]

What was he thinking? That breakfast performance was absolutely ridiculous. 

[Nexus]

Disappointing that they're revealing the secret traitor so early as well, but presumably it's because Hugo fucked it. 

[DavidB6937]

53 minutes ago, Nexus said:

Disappointing that they're revealing the secret traitor so early as well, but presumably it's because Hugo fucked it. 

Seen some suggestions they may still keep it from us but I think that'd be really difficult from an editing perspective? Just not sure how it'd work.

[RedTwoster]

3 hours ago, Wideload90 said:

Hugo. The worst traitor ever. 

Battle of the barristers.

Lovely.

And also perhaps battle of the Traitors? Harriet is my number one suspect to be the secret traitor - and going after Hugo like that would feel like a safe thing to do when no one knows your true role. 

I actually have mutual friends with Stephen, so I’m kind of willing him on. His enthusiasm to kill Ben may have fucked him a little bit, though. 

[TheBurningRed]

He was squirming away and crumbled when cross examined by Harriet. He had a disaster in that round table 

[Wideload90]

I would be disappointed if he was my barrister. This show has done no favours.

Also sad that the secret traitor has been revealed already but I loved the build up with the family tree. 

[Dai]

Unless Harriet is the secret traitor, then surely her round table performance is actually an even bigger blunder than Hugos, isn't it? She has guaranteed herself getting murdered at the first opportunity.

EDIT: Actually, even if she is the secret traitor, shes royally screwed up anyway, as if she doesnt get murdered at the first opportunity then everyone is suspicious as to why.

 

Even after all these series they don't remember it's way better to just be quiet at the start. Saturday also had the classic Traitors story of a person having huge heat on them the day before, then pretty much nothing the next day. Happens loads, and I wonder what the human behaviour is behind that. 

Edited January 4 by Dai

[DavidB6937]

1 hour ago, Dai said:

Saturday also had the classic Traitors story of a person having huge heat on them the day before, then pretty much nothing the next day. Happens loads, and I wonder what the human behaviour is behind that. 

Its the "ooh something shiny!" mentality of being easily distracted by something new. So many of them are unwilling to commit to their own ideas or stick to one particular one. Its how so many Traitors stick around way longer than they should do. Over multiple series worldwide. I just did a rewatch of one of the Australian ones and theres someone who should've been gone way earlier. You just end up shouting at the TV in frustration but thats what makes it so good. Even the glaringly obvious seems to slip by.

[BomberPat]

the weakness of The Traitors is that it's a better TV show than it is a game, and if you stop and think about the game for five minutes none of it really works - there's no real benefit to voting off Traitors early, nor any drawbacks to voting off Faithfuls you just don't like, it only starts to matter in the end-game. Conversely, if the Traitors are weakened by early banishments, they just get the chance to recruit again anyway because they don't want an ending with no Traitors. The other weakness is that after the first series it lost its mystery, and now the people applying know exactly what game they're playing, and have watched every previous series - I've seen this series compared to mid-00s Big Brother in that regard, and the best example of this yet is Hugo trying to do Jonathan Ross' "I'm a Traitor!!!!" reveal, but with nothing behind it to make it meaningful. 

The Secret Traitor seems to be their attempt to change things up by introducing something new to the mix, and to diminish some of the power the Traitors hold over the game, and while I think it risks making things less interesting, I expect they know that and there's more to it than we know - I wonder if the Secret Traitor has also been given some side tasks to complete that we don't know about yet. 

Whereas their efforts to try and circumvent meta-gaming from people who have figured things out seems to be entirely to cast idiots and arrogant arseholes who aren't nearly as good at this as they think they are. I don't normally get into the series until about halfway through, but I do enjoy hearing everyone who thinks they have superhuman abilities of deception and of reading people turn out to be really, really bad at this game, or people be so self-involved that they're convinced of the silliest things - nobody but you cares that you're a "secret barrister", love. 

There's something that put me off the American version of the show early on, which was the amount of people refusing to believe someone would be a traitor because they "wouldn't do that", seemingly forgetting that none of this is real and that they were all playing a game called The Traitors. I'm getting some of that vibe from people fixated on two contestants having known each other outside of the game - yes, it's a weird coincidence, but it's a coincidence that came up before Claudia picked out who the Traitors were, and it's not like it offers them any advantage whatsoever. What do they think the plan is? Even if you apply together, there's no guarantee you both become Traitors, and chances are you don't, so I'd just like one person to explain why they think there's something suspicious going on there.

I also think there's going to be loads more prior connections revealed, though, and that's what the Family Tree is all about. 

[CTXRussomark]

On 1/5/2026 at 9:05 AM, BomberPat said:

The other weakness is that after the first series it lost its mystery, and now the people applying know exactly what game they're playing, and have watched every previous series - I've seen this series compared to mid-00s Big Brother in that regard, and the best example of this yet is Hugo trying to do Jonathan Ross' "I'm a Traitor!!!!" reveal, but with nothing behind it to make it meaningful. 

The series was filmed before the celeb version aired so I think you're maybe trying to find things to support your view, but that aren't actually there.  Nothing about Hugo's reveal seemed unusual to me - I think they're just told to stretch things out for the dramatic effect, hence nobody ever just saying "nah, I really was a faithful actually".

So far (including this series) I think they've done a great job of avoiding the Big Brother issue of everyone being a fame-hungry wannabe influencer.  Most still seem like normal people (as reality TV standards go) and there to play the game first and foremost.  And the show format is one of the few where knowing what to expect doesn't seems to make any difference whatsoever as they still make the same mistakes year after year. 

Edited January 6 by CTXRussomark

[RedTwoster]

On 1/5/2026 at 9:05 AM, BomberPat said:

the weakness of The Traitors is that it's a better TV show than it is a game, and if you stop and think about the game for five minutes none of it really works - there's no real benefit to voting off Traitors early, nor any drawbacks to voting off Faithfuls you just don't like, it only starts to matter in the end-game.

I totally agree. There’s no such thing as ‘Traitor behaviour’, meaning that catching anyone is often purely down to luck. Traitors can slip up, but if that happens in the early stages you gain nothing by eliminating them - they’ll be replaced. Best to befriend them and keep them around until it really matters. 

It’s a great show, but it’s as similar to Deal or No Deal as it is a deductive puzzle game. It’s more about the way people act in this situation than it is the game itself.

[DavidB6937]

Oh what a frustrating episode.

1. I wish they hadn't revealed the red traitor that early but I assume the Hugo thing brought it forward a bit. Still, quite a shame as it had potential to be more interesting. There's definitely some clashes in personality coming though.

2. Reece. Come on man. I feel sorry for him but he's got the key to everything and said NOTHING.

3. Stephen. Terrible Traitor surrounded by terrible Faithfuls. He's lucky.

The whole thing is just AHHHH! at the moment but obviously far easier to judge from your sofa than it is under pressure.

It'll be interesting to see what other connections come out, if any. Amanda once arrested someone at Reece's sweet shop who turned out to be Jade's dad.

[FLips]

47 minutes ago, DavidB6937 said:

Amanda once arrested someone at Reece's sweet shop who turned out to be Jade's dad.

Is that what you heard last night IN THE TURRET?

I still don’t understand how two of the traitors can stand at the family tree, ask the other person there to leave so they can discuss “something dangerous” or whatever it was, and then that person not think that’s suspicious and bring it up.

Another traitor says “last night” at the roundtable and not a single person notices but they hyperfocus on other bizarre useless things.

The secret traitor stuff was a big wet fart. Revealed way too early to make any impact and acted as a delayed recruitment. The only saving grace would be if they still have secret traitor powers they’re hiding otherwise what was the point?

It’s such a frustrating show to watch. Partly because of how bad they all are at the game but also because they’re so bad it makes me suspicious of the editing and direction of the show. 

[DavidB6937]

7 minutes ago, FLips said:

Is that what you heard last night IN THE TURRET?

That was such an incredibly cringe moment. She clearly thought everyone was going to laugh their arses off or something and then it was the most awkward thing ever.

I hope it's her undoing. Awful.