simplyme

The bigger issue may simply be that the Heroes were so convinced it was a women's alliance. That led to JT handing over the HII. It led to the Heroes concocting explanations for why Parvati was still there when they merged (JT says in a TH that the only explanation is that she must have played an idol too.), even before Russell explains. Even when Russell's explanation has holes (he and Parvati played idols but weren't allowed to vote in the revote), the Heroes swallow it. It led to the Heroes not talking to any of the villains except Russell, really, and Sandra having to sneak in one chat with Rupert to give him the low-down. It led to JT immediately declaring that Sandra had to be the one lying with only Rupert arguing with him. Actually, I see the eagerness to see a women's alliance as a symptom of the general distrust the dominant members of the Heroes tribe had for women the whole game. Men don't go home only when women vote for them. Often (especially pre-merge) they go home due to a power struggle between two men. Amanda knew giving the HII up based on the assumption of a women's alliance was dumb. She said so in a TH. Candice supported the move because she would rather a villain have the HII than JT (which tells you what Candice thought of JT by then.) But in that tribe, no one was going to care what Amanda or the evil, sneaky Candice thought anyways. The worst Amanda would do is cry and then acquiesce. Tl;dr: I'm back to the make-up of the Heroes tribe screwed them. Too much group think, too little logic.

I didn't make it through the list. Once I saw that Adam was ranked higher than Sophie, I gave up. (Also, I hate page-by-page slideshows.) I'm not sure why the authors of that article considered Adam's FTC performance to be "strong" even disregarding the revelation of his mother's cancer. Adam won because no one wanted to lose to the neurotic girl with panic attacks or the self-righteous guy with no strategy, but he wasn't really ever running the game. Hell, most of the time Hannah ran him. Adam was a (very loud) mess much of the time. Sophie knew who she wanted to end up with, made sure to quietly get rid of the people she didn't while letting others think they were in charge, and let Coach and Albert make asses of themselves along the way. It wasn't flashy, but it was effective. I'm a bigger fan of effective than loud.

To me, this season is an excellent example of how different casts impact a castaway's chances to win. Parvati was not only hurt by her association with Russell but by a jury with multiple members who viewed her from the beginning as evil and manipulative. James was holding a grudge, Rupert and Colby were into the "we're heroes" thing, and JT distrusts women. (Had Russell not been a jerk to JT, I think he would have had JT's vote. As it was, JT had to choose between two women, and he wasn't going to choose Parv who he gave Russell the HII to get rid of.) Candice, Tom, and Stephenie never had much of a prayer either simply based on the make-up of the Heroes tribe and the alliance of people who knew each other. This is the tribe that got rid of Tom and kept an injured James. Stephenie was a target from day one. Candice was scary because she was smart! (Thank you, JT, for saying essentially that after your first in-depth talk with her.) Once JT blindsided Cirie, he removed the only real obstacle to him running the tribe. Rupert, James, and Amanda all followed him. Amanda occasionally acted torn and did doe eyes as she did so. *eyeroll* So to me, I don't know if you can say Parvati should have won, because that opens a can of worms. Parv only made it to the end because she was a villain. If she starts out as a hero, she's screwed, just like others were. I think the best you can do is note various effects on the season and how they possibly impacted the outcome. But the winner is the winner, even if it drives you bananas*. *(To quote James, "Did you know there's such a thing as banana etiquette?")

I know that was in South Pacific. It may have been in PI too and I just don't remember it. (I remember it from SP because everyone ganged up on one person to force them out.)

So in rewatches (for me) and first-time watches for SimplyMom, we're now up to this season, and so far SimplyMom is just gobsmacked. I'm enjoying the heck out of watching this season with her. The Tyson voting-himself-out thing: "He's not really going to vote for Parvati, is he? Why would he? That would be stupid." And as his torch gets snuffed, "Well, James and Erik, you can rest easy now. That was the stupidest thing I've seen yet." (Personally, I loved Rob's confused look.) As Rupert says, "There's obviously a women's alliance over there": SimplyMom says, "What is with these men and their fear of women?" (Admittedly, she noticed on her own in Tocantins that JT would have voted out a woman every chance he had if Stephen hadn't talked him down. Cuz women are scary and untrustworthy, but Coach is noble.) As JT explains his plan to give the HII to Russell: "He has the brains of a turnip. A turnip!" The note itself just elicited actual splutters. I think she was beyond words at that point. That's where we are now... Just before the merge. More viewing tonight once we wrest the TV from SimplyDad. She can't wait to see how this plays out. I can't wait to see her reactions. Oh, I wanted to say that Candice does really well in challenges, but you can see she's pretty much over her tribe. She's talked to Amanda about JT, but Amanda has been wishywashy, so at this point you can pretty much tell that Candice is satisfied if JT and Rupert eff off and die. Screw winning. She knows she has no chance.

I'm having more and more trouble shoehorning people into these archetypes. I mean, they kind of work, but people often shift through several and seem to also be defined by what roles are already taken. For example, I'd generally consider Cirie a fox, but if she had somehow ended up in the F3 with Sarah (I know, no one lets Cirie near the F3), I think she might play the bunny role. Yes, in FTC she would highlight her fox traits too (gameplay), but I think she'd use her social game (bunny-ness) as the real key to try to turn fox Sarah into goat Sarah for having flipped and backstabbed. She'd be a foxy bunny.

One of the things I don't like about certain challenges is when the order the castaways go pretty much determines who will win unless they are completely inept. I didn't see the Outback season, but I'm always a little leery of puzzles that are pure strategy because the order players go has such an effect on what it is possible for them to accomplish. One's ability to win is heavily dependent upon circumstance and other players, even if they make excellent strategic choices. So if it's going to be something strategic, it generally shouldn't be turn-based IMO. I always liked both of these.

I'm pretty sure they've done that one in at least three seasons. I know they did it in Micronesia and Caramoan. I think they did it in Palau also. They really need new challenges.

I like BFM. If people decide it's too close to BMF, maybe we can go with Big-Ass Move (or Big Arse Move) instead, shortening it to BAM. That sounds like a comic book punch now that I'm typing it.

Rupert came back for Blood vs Water Figured I'd put that bit in a spoiler tag in case anyone hasn't seen BvW.

Apparently Debbie's BM got her voted out.

Heh. To be fair, I just rewatched that season not too long ago. Until then, I'd forgotten that chain of events too. I'd forgotten Amanda did anything other than make out with Ozzy and cry in that season. I understand your argument. It makes sense from an "I've been done this way before" standpoint. Viewing from my couch, I can see from differences in the situation. Cirie herself said during Micronesia that she always felt like the bottom person in every alliance she was in (fairly accurately IMO). I don't think that was the case this time. She and Andrea felt like co-leaders and partners, so I guess I felt like taking out the other base of support (and bigger target) in her alliance before the big threat in the other alliance was gone was a mistake. Of course, I have the benefit of watching from the comfort of my couch rather than having to, you know, play. :)

I'm not sure why Parvati gets the blame for "turning" on Cirie in Micronesia. Amanda, Cirie, and Parvati thought it was an F3 and went to F3 together. They were devastated to learn it was an F2. At that point Cirie knew she had to win the IC because either Parv or Amanda would take the other one. Amanda won the IC over Cirie. (Parv went out first). Amanda chose Parvati over Cirie, probably because she felt closer to Parv who had never voted for her and always been aligned with her and because she thought she had a better shot against Parv. You can blame the format, or Amanda, or Cirie for not winning the IC, but I don't really see how Parvati can take the blame.

Pretty much. :) And @MissEwa summed up my thoughts pretty well with: So I wish they'd just stop with the marketing words and go for what they're actually trying to analyze. And then we can all hop on our maaaaaagical ponies and ride away up the rainbow together...

I agree with this. I like the new FTC format but wish they wouldn't try to fit the format to three marketing words they made up eons ago. I'd prefer if they did something like looked at social, physical, and mental as the three dominant facets of play if they need a structure for the jury discussion.

Oh, I definitely think Troyzan is being unfairly critiqued for his game. I think managing to make it to the end after being put in the positions he was says some pretty positive things about his game. But also like I said, each game is different, and this season, with the two people he ended up with and that jury, he wasn't going to win. C'est la vie. And I will totally agree that watching people make Big Moves (even Amazingly Dumb ones) is better than having to rewatch Redemption Island. I will claw my eyes out. That season made me actually yell at the tv more than any other. Hantz and Coach seasons had a lot of sarcastic comments from me, but that season was like watching person after person slowly walk to the edge of a cliff and jump off. This is a great discussion. Thanks, Troyzan and fellow Ptv folks! ETA: If we could hand out an award based on faces, it would be between Troy and Michaela for me. I'd probably give the edge to Troyzan with Michaela as runner-up. Some of Aubry's eye rolls give her a respectable third for me. We could name the award after Eliza.

I looked for a better place to move this answer, but I didn't notuce a strategy thread, so apologies if this is slightly off-topic for Troy himself. I don't think there's one right way to play Survivor. Each season is different based on the twists, the cast, the challenges, when the merge occurs, etc. I thought Troy played a fine game in some ways. He made it to F3 after being odd person out on an earlier tribe and was usually in the minority. I think most people liked him quite a bit as a person. He also won one or two individual immunities. Some seasons, with some casts, that would have given him the win. But this cast put more value on strategic gameplay they respected than other casts have. That sank Troy. They also valued the social game, which hurt Brad more than Sarah, who managed to cover most of her social backstabs under gameplay. Like @MissEwa I don't mind Big Moves. But I've noted that they can put a Big Target on you, so you should be smart about why and when you pull them or they have a tendency to send you home. For example, if your Big Move is taking out one of your own allies and that will leave you untrusted by pretty much everyone and in the minority, I'm not sure if I consider that a Big Move or just an Amazingly Dumb one. For me, in order to win Survivor, you have to get to the end. That usually involves some amount of moderation. As for the difference between Troy and HvV Sandra and why one wins and the other gets zero votes, it's a combination of what moves each attempted to make and what people they were sitting next to in their F3. IIRC, Sandra tried several times to change the way others were voting in attempts to take Russell out, but she was unsuccessful. By the end, the jury despised Russell and realized they should have taken her advice. So Sandra was given credit for actions she advocated that the jury wished they had taken. Troyzan, as far as we saw, was fairly passive. His alliances with Sarah and Brad were because they reached out to him. So there were not even attempted actions that he could claim. Troy's biggest problem, though, is that you can win as the coat-tail rider who everyone likes, but only if you go to F3 with two people that you know most of the jury won't vote for (for whatever reason). Troy went with a dominant strategic force in the game and someone with five immunity wins and neither was despised. Sandra went with Russell H. and Parvati, and the two of them could have walked on water and performed brain surgery on war orphans (pro bono) and not been able to swing another jury vote their way due to either past relationships or things that happened in-game. Or to put it another way: If you see two oxen heading for the finals and you've got a much better relationship with most of the jury, it's fine to ride them.

I think people with different views on Michaela and Brad can debate until they're blue in the face (or their fingers fall off). I think this is one of those cases where folks just have to agree to disagree. I'd hate to see anyone losing fingers over Survivor without even playing it. :P As for Brad picking up Tai when he hugged him, I do think he sincerely felt crappy after watching himself. I don't think he was intentionally trying to pull a power move. I do think Brad is clueless about how condescending or disrespectful he can come across to others without realizing it. @Winston9-DT3 described the general societal rules really well, IMO. None of this makes Brad an evil person. It means he's socially unaware in certain situations... which is probably true of most people, but what those situations are vary based on their life experiences. So I'm certainly not going to get out the pitchfork and torches for the guy because of that hug when I felt he was trying to apologize, but man, it honestly made me wince in sympathy for both of them.

If she just does the occasional undercover hooker gig, it might work fine. There are some dumb people out there. I can see it now. "Holy (bleep)! You look just like that chick from Survivor! For an extra $5 can I take your picture while you (bleeeeep)?"

Heh. SimplyMom and I just started rewatching this season, too. I'd forgotten Laura M. was on it until that comment. I will say that I'm enjoying this season after slogging through the Hell that was Tocantins. I loved Taj, but she couldn't save it. We're three episodes in and my mother is horrifyingly fascinated (or possibly fascinatingly horrified) by Russell Hantz. He's helped her put Coach in perspective.

I wonder how much was the FTC and how much was seeing the edit that showed the way he spoke to Tai and Tai sobbing? He had to have known at that point that there was no way he was winning. I admit I was both angered at him and felt bad for him, because I imagine most people who aren't saints say things they really regret under stressful situations when dealing with people who have irked them. Most of them don't have their jerk moments captured on film, and most Survivor contestants have a chance to process their jerk moments in the safety of their friends and family and then issue a response. He pretty much had to see it with his competitors and the person he said it to, then face the public for a reading of votes. I imagine seeing himself say those things was a shock to him, because often we perceive the situation very differently from a bit of distance. Like through a camera lens months later. No wonder he looked devastated.

I understand Brad's reasoning, but that was a mistake because as others have pointed out, it wasn't about Michaela. It was about the rest of the jury. By essentially not bothering with the question, the implied answer (well, as I saw it) was, "I talked to people and learned about them, but only the ones I thought were important to me in some way. Not you." Because if Brad at some point felt like his life in the game had depended on Michaela? I feel like he would have made that effort, whether or not she was horrible to him. I feel like we saw enough of his play to make that statement. I mean, he realizes he's down and out, he starts talking to Zeke about the Sooners. He just really fumbled that question and didn't get that others would have wanted to hear something personal he'd learned about them. Instead, he reinforced Michaela's point because he saw the question as only pertaining to her. Maybe that's a result of the new jury format? Maybe was still thinking of it as a juror asking their question rather than trying to persuade an entire body of people en masse?

As far as I'm concerned, a couple of them obviously weren't crushed enough and they learned little from their mistakes. Rupert and JT continued to underestimate women in their next appearances. They both need handlers. Actually, I'd say JT needs both a handler or two and an opposing tribe that's hideously dysfunctional. I'm not really sure there's any way Rupert wins anything other than fan favorite short of a catastrophic meteor strike.

He should have. She mentioned it all during the family visit when Jeff asked her about her mom. Even if Brad couldn't remember her mom's name, he should have remembered some of what Michaela said. He didn't even have to have a conversation with her to get that information. Anyone standing there during the family visit should have known and been able to mention something from that if they'd put in any effort. It was obvious how much Michaela loved and respected her mother. Yeah. I think he thought most people did, and that was his problem.

But, but, but... then the young, female eye candy wouldn't have to borrow clothing from the males in order not to freeze to death! Would the game survive?