S29.E04: We're A Hot Mess

[Nightbaron]

I don't think we've seen it rain so far, so it's conceivable that they kept their fire going during the 5(?) days they were without a flint...

[willpwr]

Per Drew, he and only he kept the fire burning.

[Jersey Guy 87]

 

So let me get this straight. They find the flint right by the fire pit? So wtf happened? Jon doesn't find it in his pocket so he announces he's lost the flint. So everyone, including Jon, just must have accepted that sad fact as irreversible and never even tried to look for it. I mean beside the fire pit would be the first place to look if they had even tried no? They don't deserve the fishing gear.

 

I'm assuming they put Drew in charge of finding the flint.

[loki567]

I'm not sure if I agree that Kelley didn't do anything, I think that what she didn't do probably helped her the most, which was that when she heard what Drew was saying she was smart enough to listen, read the room, she probably noticed, the same as Natalie that the men weren't on the same page and realized she wasn't in any danger so she didn't start any drama. In that kind of situation usually people make the mistake of starting a yelling match to defend themselves and then going to talk to everyone to try to flip the votes whereas she seemed to keep her cool pretty well and didn't need to rally the girls, she saw Natalie was already doing it so why should she paint a target on her back by doing what Drew said she was doing? I see Natalie as loud and brash whereas Kelley is more stealthy, they both probably had the same goal, they just had different ways of doing it. If I were on Survivor, I'd love to have a Natalie around to basically vocalize everything I wanted to, do the alliance's dirty work and draw attention to herself. I'm not saying that Natalie didn't do anything, she definitely did, but this is the same tribe that just last week was yelling at the other tribe for picking off the women, I'm pretty sure that they all had it in the back of their minds that the same thing could happen to them and they were already allied since the first episode so what Natalie probably did was just help hone in on which guy needed to go because from what I understood, the women were undecided between Jon and Drew until Natalie told them what Drew was saying. I think all the ladies did very well, though, they showed some serious solidarity and smarts so I'm going to say well played to all the women, not just Natalie or Kelley.

 

You're basing all of this Kelley strategy off of what exactly? I can understand giving equal amount of credit for the females on the blue tribe for not allowing themselves to be pulled into the usual female slaughter. I just don't understand the singular amount of praise being aimed at Kelley with the, "Way to go, Kelley!" "Favorite player!" "Best strategical player so far!" What did she do? 

 

Natalie did most of the legwork but people seem to be nursing a grudge based off her Amazing Race history. Which I didn't see so I have no baggage with her. 

[willpwr]

You're basing all of this Kelley strategy off of what exactly? I can understand giving equal amount of credit for the females on the blue tribe for not allowing themselves to be pulled into the usual female slaughter. I just don't understand the singular amount of praise being aimed at Kelley with the, "Way to go, Kelley!" "Favorite player!" "Best strategical player so far!" What did she do? 

 

Natalie did most of the legwork but people seem to be nursing a grudge based off her Amazing Race history. Which I didn't see so I have no baggage with her. 

Since you quoted me, I'm basing my comments off of what I saw. I saw her listening to Drew in the background, showing restraint which requires strategy and self control. I never said she was the best strategist ever. She is one of my favorites, though and I'm entitled to decide that based on my own perception because I do notice background players and I've seen her reactions every episode so far. The ladies have been in an alliance with Jeremy since day 1, never in my post did I discredit Natalie or what she did because as annoying as I found her on TAR, I'm liking her on this show except for the fight she picked with John Rocker in last week's episode. There are different strategies and ways of playing like I stated in the rest of the post you quoted, one is lowkey and the other in your face, I can appreciate both approaches, which I did, not just the obvious one.

[Kromm]

There's something "off" about the whole flint-gate.

 

When Drew tries to barter with JP, he says that the "new" flint hadn't ever been struck -- it was completely unused and therefore tradeable.  So are we to believe that in all the time since they got the second flint they did not have to start a fire?   Did they keep a fire burning?  I'm confused by how they could have anything other than two used flints at their camp.

 

Of course, it was Drew making the statement so it was probably BS.

Was it the new flint they said was unused or the older one? I've deleted my recording so I don't have this on tap to check.

 

If it was the older one, it could make more sense.  Perhaps they first light a fire without a flint.  We know the other tribe did eventually (Dale with his glasses), so perhaps they did as well using some other method (the ol' two sticks rubbing together bit, perhaps)--in their case in the period before they won their Flint in the first place.  Then they won the Flint, went back to their camp, let the fire go out at some point, then noticed they'd idiotically lost it before they even had a chance to use it.

Edited October 17, 2014 by Kromm

[Constantinople]

About re-hiding idols that played or voted out:

I skipped the last 2 seasons, so I can't comment on what happened then, but the general rule of thumb seems to be that "they" like to have 1 idol per tribe. If that 1 idol is played or the idol holder is booted, they hide it again. If more than 1 idol is out there at the merge, they wait until all the existing idols are played/booted and then hide 1 idol (1 idol for the 1 merged tribed).

I think this has been the general rule of thumb ever since they started rehiding idols, though I think there are at least a couple of exceptions

1. In One World, I'm not sure, but I don't think they re-hid an idol when there were still 2 tribes, possibly because it was so close to the merge they just said Eff it.

2. In Caramoan, I think the majority alliance and Malcolm's minority bro alliance each had an idol at the merge. I think Malcolm's minority alliance played theirs (or somehow it was taken out of circulation). Then, even though it was after the merge, they re-hid it.

But I'm a little fuzzy on the details. Also, upthread, someone mentioned that in last season's Brain v Body v. Beauty season, someone was voted out holding an idol on the Brain tribe, but the idol wasn't re-hidden.

Just a long winded way of saying I think Rocker's idol will come back into circulation
 

Ultimately though, although I love the schadenfreude of seeing Drew eliminated, I wonder if it was a wise long-term decision.  Both he and his brother had shown themselves to be such colossal douche-nozzles that I don't think either of them had much chance of winning at FTC.  In fact, if the FTC involved those two and one other person, it might be the first time in Survivor history that Probst stopped the jury before they voted and just said "oh fuck it" and handed the check to the other finalist right then and there.

Herding goats is a difficult and dangerous business. Drew may have been too unpredictable, or too stubborn, ironically enough, to be a goat.

The women had no reason to want to keep Drew.

If anyone suspected that Drew threw the challenge, that would reason enough to get rid of him.

If someone thought Drew was on the level during the challenge, there are still other reasons to get rid of him
a. his challenge performance sucked - more of that risks you getting booted out
b. his stubbornness in continuing to Mr Ring Toss even when he continued to suck
c. his stubbornness in insisting on who should be booted and his refusal to listen to other view points (even Russell, in Samoa, listeend to Shambo about who they should target in Galu).
d. He does squat around camp

Also, perhaps it's just me, or perhaps it was the editing, but I got the sense that the tribe was relieved when Drew was sent to Exile Island

[NYGirl]

According to Drew most of his team knew he was going to throw the challenge:

 

http://www.cbs.com/shows/survivor/news/1003314/

[cooksdelight]

Also, something else that I would learn; how to make a simple animal snare or trap to catch small animals

Remember all the grilled rats in season one? Somewhere along the line, someone got upset (someone in the locale where they were filming, I think it was Africa) about them eating local animals. Even rats or birds. I think from that point on they were told to only fish, not to kill the animals in the trees or the bushes. Otherwise, we'd have monkey meat for dinner every night out there.

I'm still trying to get the story from Skupin on that wild boar that showed up at camp in Australia. :)

[Kromm]

Remember all the grilled rats in season one? Somewhere along the line, someone got upset (someone in the locale where they were filming, I think it was Africa) about them eating local animals. Even rats or birds. I think from that point on they were told to only fish, not to kill the animals in the trees or the bushes. Otherwise, we'd have monkey meat for dinner every night out there.

I'm still trying to get the story from Skupin on that wild boar that showed up at camp in Australia. :)

Well it's also possibly unsafe for them to butcher and eat their own animals.  The risk is comparitively low with fish, but with other animals there's a much bigger chance of them getting some disease or parasite from eating a fresh killed, likely inexpertly butchered and cooked, animal (especially the exotic ones).

[Donny Ketchum]

Also, upthread, someone mentioned that in last season's Brain v Body v. Beauty season, someone was voted out holding an idol on the Brain tribe, but the idol wasn't re-hidden.

Yes.  That was I, and that was Garrett from the Brains.  He found the idol on the very first day, but when the Brains went to the second Tribal Council of that season, he was blindsided and voted out with it in his pocket, and it wasn't rehidden.  That boot was also similar to Drew's, save for having an idol.  Garrett, like Drew, thought that he was running the game on his tribe.  But like Drew, the women realized where they'd stand if Garrett wasn't taken care of, so Kass, Tasha, and J'Tia rose up against Garrett and Spencer to overthrow the former.  Again, one of the best boots in the history of Survivor.

[Eggman]

And maybe it was just me, but I had a very hard time following Jon's "logic" about voting out someone who no longer has a "loved one" on the other tribe. Anyone who does still have a loved one conceivably has an automatic ally in the event of a merge.

The fellow lobbying to get rid of the singleton still has a loved one in the game.   Losing your loved one isn't such a bad thing because you can now offer undivided loyalty.  Conversely, having your loved one still on the other tribe makes you a target, because your loyalty is divided.  UNLESS, you argue that a group of players whose loved ones are still in the game could reunite with their loved ones and make a cross-tribe alliance, which is what I assume Jon was trying to argue.  I think he was trying to get out in front of the pack in terms of establishing what the criteria is for eliminating people and making that criteria one that favored him and his plans.

 

 

I think if Drew had been less obnoxious, Natalie would have voted for Julie because of her being useless

 

Being useless isn't really a bad thing.  What matters isn't if another player is useless or not, but LOYAL to you, or not.   If you can get Julie to stick with you because, woman, well then, she's the best kind of useful. 

[KHenry14]

One thing I find fascinating is that you NEVER here people talk about Survivor on the show. Supposedly Kelly talks all the time about having watched every show, yet we never see that. And does no one ever have a conversation like "I remember Parvati did this" "Or Russell did that to someone" Does Burnett think no one will know what people are talking about? This has always been curious to me. And if Drew had ever paid attention to the show, he'd know that being a fan doesn't necessarily translate to being a good Survivor player.

[truthaboutluv]

I don't know, Jon referenced J'Tia and her throwing the rice when he copped to losing the flint. Philip talked about Boston Rob practically during his entire time on Fans vs. Favorites II and things he'd learned about the game from watching Rob, last season Spencer didn't mention too many players but he talked about the game a few times, showing that he had studied it well. It's how he figured out that they were having a Final 2 instead of a Final 3 based on Jeff's comments after the Final 4 immunity challenge. The first few seasons after All-Stars, I remember people were quick to side eye any guy and girl who seemed close because they would reference Rob and Amber and what happened with them in All-Stars. It may not be over the top but it's been shown. 

[loki567]

The fellow lobbying to get rid of the singleton still has a loved one in the game.   Losing your loved one isn't such a bad thing because you can now offer undivided loyalty.  Conversely, having your loved one still on the other tribe makes you a target, because your loyalty is divided.  UNLESS, you argue that a group of players whose loved ones are still in the game could reunite with their loved ones and make a cross-tribe alliance, which is what I assume Jon was trying to argue.  I think he was trying to get out in front of the pack in terms of establishing what the criteria is for eliminating people and making that criteria one that favored him and his plans.

 

Which is understandable considering that last year's BvW ended up with a majority alliance of singletons. 

 

IMO, the cross-alliance politics is more interesting aspect of BvW than seeing two loved ones compete. You have to consider the other tribe in your plans earlier than the merge and prepare for the possibility that your alliance might fall apart when loved ones reunite. 

[BigRedCheese]

 

One thing I find fascinating is that you NEVER here people talk about Survivor on the show.

 

I do remember, years ago, one of the producers talking about the second season, and said the players constantly talked about the first season, but that was all edited out because they wanted the season to stand on its own. They let a little slip through now and then, and with Phillip, his BR worship was such a big part of his game, it kind of had to be left in, but I imagine they still edit most of it out for the same reasons.

[Wings]

It makes sense they would edit extensive talks about past seasons.  It takes viewers out of the climate of the current show.   Where they are located is very close to civilization and I bet they talk about that from time to time, too. 

Edited October 18, 2014 by wings707

[BC Mama]

About re-hiding idols that played or voted out:

I skipped the last 2 seasons, so I can't comment on what happened then, but the general rule of thumb seems to be that "they" like to have 1 idol per tribe. If that 1 idol is played or the idol holder is booted, they hide it again. If more than 1 idol is out there at the merge, they wait until all the existing idols are played/booted and then hide 1 idol (1 idol for the 1 merged tribed).

I think this has been the general rule of thumb ever since they started rehiding idols, though I think there are at least a couple of exceptions

1. In One World, I'm not sure, but I don't think they re-hid an idol when there were still 2 tribes, possibly because it was so close to the merge they just said Eff it.

2. In Caramoan, I think the majority alliance and Malcolm's minority bro alliance each had an idol at the merge. I think Malcolm's minority alliance played theirs (or somehow it was taken out of circulation). Then, even though it was after the merge, they re-hid it.

But I'm a little fuzzy on the details. Also, upthread, someone mentioned that in last season's Brain v Body v. Beauty season, someone was voted out holding an idol on the Brain tribe, but the idol wasn't re-hidden.

Just a long winded way of saying I think Rocker's idol will come back into circulation

 

I think it will for sure if they merge this week!

[Nashville]

And maybe it was just me, but I had a very hard time following Jon's "logic" about voting out someone who no longer has a "loved one" on the other tribe. Anyone who does still have a loved one conceivably has an automatic ally in the event of a merge. So . . . wouldn't you want to vote out someone who DOES still have a loved one in the game so that you can isolate them? Now, I understand that Jon would want to target "singles" since his girlfriend (?) is still on the other tribe. But still. It made no sense. I can't believe no one (like Natalie) pointed out the stupidity of that argument.

 

Or maybe it was entirely logical and I just missed it completely.

The fellow lobbying to get rid of the singleton still has a loved one in the game.   Losing your loved one isn't such a bad thing because you can now offer undivided loyalty.  Conversely, having your loved one still on the other tribe makes you a target, because your loyalty is divided.  UNLESS, you argue that a group of players whose loved ones are still in the game could reunite with their loved ones and make a cross-tribe alliance, which is what I assume Jon was trying to argue.  I think he was trying to get out in front of the pack in terms of establishing what the criteria is for eliminating people and making that criteria one that favored him and his plans.

Actually, Jon impressed me some by making this argument at this early point in the game. What does past show history indicate in terms of split couple-pair arrangements?

1. When one half of a couple is voted off, the remaining half of the couple has tended to benefit from a varying period of immunity; partly from sympathy, but more so for strategy because the "remainder" is considered severely weakened by the loss of their partner and therefore less of a strategic threat.

2. That is, until the remainders balance or outnumber the "wholes" (members of still-existing complete couple pairs) - at which point the remainders invariably decide the wholes represent too much of a threat as a ready-made unbreakable alliance come Merge time, and consolidate to break up as many whole couples as possible before the Merge.

So - if you are a whole, doesn't it make perfect logical sense to pick off the remainders before their numbers become insurmountable?

IMHO Jon's argument showed more strategic awareness than anything else we've seen so far this season.

[Alapaki]

IMO, the cross-alliance politics is more interesting aspect of BvW than seeing two loved ones compete. You have to consider the other tribe in your plans earlier than the merge and prepare for the possibility that your alliance might fall apart when loved ones reunite.

 

 

Another couple of factors that I think complicate the strategy this season are:

 

1. Exile Island:  This creates the potential for cross-tribal alliances to be formed, HII clues to be shared, and generally raise suspicion about the players who've been there; and

 

2. NO Redemption Island:  I think the consideration of whether or not to target a 'singleton' last BvW season was influenced by the possibility that their partner might come back from RI and reunite with them.  Now, when someone's gone, they're gone.

 

Ultimately, though, unlike the last BvW season, I don't have any sense yet for which if any couples are planning on aligning.  It seems like everyone's playing very much of an individual game.  (we have seen Jeremy suggest alliances, but he's suggested them to just about everyone but Drew, so I'm not sure how serious he is, or how serious he is being taken).

[NutMeg]

Who was the genius who said in a confessional 'We are literally starving to death here" after the sausages which were part of the reward were shown?

[BigRedCheese]

 

Remember all the grilled rats in season one?

 

I remember one of the players, not sure which one, said that they were told they could not kill any animals for food. But they got so hungry and desperate that they went to a producer and asked for special permission to eat the rats, and they agreed to make that exception.

[truthaboutluv]

Ultimately, though, unlike the last BvW season, I don't have any sense yet for which if any couples are planning on aligning.  It seems like everyone's playing very much of an individual game.  (we have seen Jeremy suggest alliances, but he's suggested them to just about everyone but Drew, so I'm not sure how serious he is, or how serious he is being taken).

 

 

I think so far the individuals' game we've seen the most is Jeremy and Josh and it seems like they're both playing the loosely align with everyone and get along with everyone strategy which isn't necessarily a bad strategy to have. So I can definitely see how so far it would not be absolutely clear who is truly tightly aligned. I will say, and this is just off a few scenes here and there so I may be wrong, that Jeremy and Natalie may have closer alliance than the other members of Hunahpu realize and Alec and Wes are closely aligned on Coyopa.

 

I just thought it was interesting that Jeremy was the guy Natalie felt comfortable and secure enough with to broach the plan to blindside Drew, knowing that he is seemingly in with the guys. Also, if Drew isn't entirely full of shit in his exit interviews, he claims that Jon, Natalie and Jeremy were the ones who knew he was going to throw the challenge. Well it was clear Jon and Drew were very tight so not surprising he told him. I think Natalie and Jeremy may be a pair to watch and neither has their loved one anymore, the thing Jon was expressing concern about.

\

It will be interesting to see what happens this week with the tribal shake up or whatever happens, since I think it's a little early for the merge. 

[elizacat]

Remember all the grilled rats in season one? Somewhere along the line, someone got upset (someone in the locale where they were filming, I think it was Africa) about them eating local animals. Even rats or birds. I think from that point on they were told to only fish, not to kill the animals in the trees or the bushes. Otherwise, we'd have monkey meat for dinner every night out there.

I'm still trying to get the story from Skupin on that wild boar that showed up at camp in Australia. :)

Didn't Natalie kill a rat in Samoa I'm sure i remember that.

[cooksdelight]

BBQ pig in the Outback.

[Jersey Guy 87]

 

 

 

Keep in mind Drew also said this in the

 

According to Drew most of his team knew he was going to throw the challenge:

 

http://www.cbs.com/shows/survivor/news/1003314/

 

The same article also says Drew got closer to Alec because of the show.  I guess it was during the less than 24 hours they were together.  In other words, Drew appears to live in his own reality.

[Hera]

My takeaway from this episode: both Drew and Alec are pissy little arrogant bossy shits. I hope their parents watch this episode and feel ashamed for raising two huge assholes.

I had a related takeaway: I hope I never have to deal with Drew and Alec's parents. I realize that self-awareness isn't exactly peaking in one's early-to-mid 20s, but to make to 22 and especially to 25 so deluded about your abilities—it pretty much has to be because your parents have worked very hard to shelter you from everything worse than the most mild of disappointments. (ETA: I can't imagine the sort of people who think this is good or healthy, and I'm sure I don't want to meet them)

 

I'm kind of hoping to see Jeremy and the women stay together and make a run for it.  It would be so fun to watch.  Loved that, even with his irritation at Keith, Jeremy voted with the women he aligned with.  But a little worried that his outspoken willingness to have secret side alliances may make him a target.  But probably not for a while, if the women on his tribe stick together. 

 

...

 

Re: Keith and the Jeremy idol talk - I think Keith panicked.  A lot of people have to talk about things when they're stressed out as a way of sorting through it all, instead of processing things solo.  Keith is one of those; he was frustrated about not finding the idol and was working through that out loud.  I don't think he intended to throw Jeremy under the bus; he just had a thought and had to express it, rather than taking some time to think about the implications.  Unlike Keith, classic Survivor strategists are much more internal thinkers, and don't become slaves to their paranoia.  So, big mistake on Keith's part, but I think it was more a case of verbal diarrhea/ freaking out than any nefarious intent. 

 

More venom & spitting fire from Jeremy.  He just keeps getting more angry every second.

Not seeing venom or spitting fire from him at all.  He's gotten upset at things that are, well, upsetting.  What I'm seeing is a man trying to play the game and being frustrated when a supposed alliance member betrays him.  Yes, he was annoyed, but he didn't freak out or lose his temper or threaten to punch anyone in the mouth (ahem, John Rocker).

I really like Jeremy, especially now that he's not worrying about his wife every 20 seconds. I don't blame him at all for freaking out about the rumor that he had an idol. We saw last season how Tony's lie about how Cliff and Lindsey were targeting Sarah spread and became the pretext for targeting them—and as far as we were shown, it was completely false. If Hunahpu had been inclined to try to flush out an idol, Jeremy would have been toast. I think he just wanted to make sure that people understood that he didn't have an idol so that a) he wouldn't get votes in an attempt to flush it and b) so that his closest allies (which now doesn't include Keith) wouldn't think he was keeping secrets from them.

 

I think the outspokenness about secret alliances and sub-alliances is probably a wash. Yes, some players might worry about what deals he's made and with whom, but players have to worry about other players' alliances and sub-alliances anyway. And at least now other players know that Jeremy understands these concepts, which means that up to a certain point, he's attractive as an alliancemate, since he's unlikely to be the one who, for example, accidentally outs the suballiance of four in the larger alliance of seven. After a certain point, you want the people like Drew and Keith whose understanding of the game is less sophisticated and who could probably be dragged to the end (not so much Drew anymore, which is a shame, since I enjoyed watching him obliviously get under his tribe's collective skin) for an easy win, but it's too early in the game for that.

 

I see Natalie as loud and brash whereas Kelley is more stealthy, they both probably had the same goal, they just had different ways of doing it.

This is what I love about Survivor—watching people with vastly different personalities navigate each other and the game.

Edited October 21, 2014 by Hera

[choclatechip45]

I remember reading somewhere that each location has its own rules about what type of animals they can kill. I know in Africa and maybe Guatemala they were on nature preserves so they couldn't hunt for food.

[allthatglitters]

I found an Q and A with survivor producers about what food they could hunt:

 

The contestants are not allowed to hunt or use certain things. In fact, they are expressly forbidden from doing so, per their contract.

“Only flora or fauna [fancy names for plants and animals, respectively] designated by Producer may be harvested or hunted for food, respectively,” the contract states. “Rare or endangered species will be identified by Producer…and must not be harmed or killed by Contestants.”

 

http://theashleysrealityroundup.com/2012/09/21/answers-to-your-frequently-asked-survivor-questions/

 

I still don't see why they couldn't hunt rats. They are vermin. I think its stupid and unfair to not let them catch small animals, but, like one season, one contestant smashed a sharks head in. So as long as it lives in water its ok? Don't call the show "Survivor" if you don't let them try and survive any way they can. But maybe they do allow it, as this article suggests that there are certain animals that can be "designated" safe to hunt by the Producer. Like I say, I'd learn how to make a simple snare or trap.

[Nashville]

I expect the rat ban might be for the sake of the contestants' own well-being. Rats can be hosts for scores of communicable diseases, up to and including bubonic plague and hantavirus.

To tell the truth, I was surprised they did let them eat rats that one season, and I fully expect someone in Production may gave lost their job for OKing that little rodent rotisserie. The public health folks would have been screaming for someone's head.

[Hera]

Rats and the like might also occupy an important niche in the local ecosystem or food-chain. Admittedly, the contestants are probably not competent enough at catching them to have a major ecological impact, but I can understand why local authorities and the producers might take a "better safe than sorry" approach, especially if there are any endangered species living in or near the camp sites.