S31.E05: A Snake In The Grass

[Shelby]

No Wah-bi, a tendon in your leg is not the same as almost losing a parent, especially at such a young age.

Bxtch.

I call BS on all the people in this forum who say she's such a lovely person in RL.

[Guest]

Thank you for alerting us to that link rat girl.Good to see its being picked up on what a misfire Kelly's return is becoming.

I love that Dalton recap but I don't agree with him that Kelly was some hugely anticipated feature of this season.  Maybe to Dalton and Jeff but I don't think most viewers really had any great interest in her.  I know I didn't.  Kimmi, either.  If I was a voter I probably would've voted for them just because but I bet Joe or Stephen had way more interest.  

 

Though I have to admit I have full respect for players like Kelly who won't play the fool for the show.  I'd be the same way.  Many of us would dislike becoming a laughingstock more than we'd like winning the million.  So we'd play to hopefully win but also to no matter what not come off as a total fool.  We're more averse to majorly negative outcomes than we're attracted to majorly positive ones.  

 

I guess that's why players like Abi that are the opposite are annoying to me.  It feels like a desperation thing, like 'not even my self-respect can come between me and my stab at the brass ring.  Degrade me, ridicule me, hate me-- but see me.  I'll probably never win this game but I'll use it for whatever notoriety I can milk from it.'

Edited October 23, 2015 by Guest

[Shelby]

It would have been funny if Woo said he got back home from visiting his mom in the hospital, and there was a model in his apartment, and they fell in love.

That just brought tears to my eyes. Dxmn you BRC. The only way that could have been more romantic is if Woo's coffee table was littered with Playboys.

Best post evah!

[KimberStormer]

Exactly. Other than "OMG! GIRRRRRRLPOWER!!1111!!!1!" I'm not sure what Monica was thinking even bringing that up at this stage. She had a strong four with Jeremy, Stephen and Kimmi--to suggest at this early stage that she might want to throw the guys over later on, without knowing Kimmi's feelings on it, was just bad game play for the sake of... well, I'm still trying to figure that out. Unless you know a bunch of men have allied specifically to ditch the women, trying to form alliances based on estrogen is pointless, especially at this stage when you still need strength in challenges and you weigh 90 lbs. soaking wet like Monica.

 

This seems to be unfathomable to people this week, but thinking about possible configurations down the road does not mean automatically and instantly severing all ties to your existing alliance.  As proven by the fact that Monica didn't mutiny, strip naked under the moon, paint her face with menstrual blood and scream I AM A WOMAN WHO RUNS WITH THE WOLVES, BAYON IS NO MORE, BOYS BEWARE!, but rather voted for Kelly as her alliance wanted to.  She wasn't "trying to form" anything!  She floated the idea of changing which member of the opposite side to target, to the other person on her side who stood to benefit from that change, and when this didn't go anywhere, she abandoned the idea and went along with her alliance.  That has to be the gentlest, smoothest, wisest way to quietly influence the game that there could possibly be.  Saying she was overplaying somehow, or voted herself out, or whatever, is looney tunes.

 

For the sake of...what?  Let me suggest some for the sake of's.  Here's Monica on a tribe of six.  Three women, three men.  Four Bayon, two TaKeo.  Now it's clear that Monica is on the bottom of the Bayons.  Furthermore, Jeremy is clearly at the top, and Jeremy also has been out fishing with Spencer and idol-hunting with Stephen, making bonds with, yes, specifically the boys.  Challenges are unpredictable, who knows what might happen.  Let's say they lose three challenges and everybody just kind of quietly goes along with the pecking order.  Kelly goes, Spencer goes, then inevitably Monica goes.  How to avoid this?  She can't avoid it when it's her turn to go, she has no numbers to work with, it's a simple 3-1 vote.  She also can't avoid it when it's Spencer's turn.  She has actually nothing to offer Spencer.  If she goes to him and says  "yo dude, I can save you, flip with me" then she has just given Spencer a huge gift, exactly what Peih-Gee gave Tasha.  Spencer has no tie to her, he wants to save his bacon; he runs to Jeremy and tells him what happened and the Bayons vote out Monica and Spencer has won himself another 3 days and more trust from Jeremy.  The only time she can avoid this is right now, when Kelly is going home.  If she can influence the vote, Spencer goes home instead; now, with Kelly there, she has plenty to offer Kelly.  Kelly has no special ties to Jeremy, and Monica can offer her a women's alliance.  I know!  Despicable!  Pointless!  What will these crazy girls come up with next?  An alliance based on nothing but identity?  Yet it is actually way better for Kelly than the possible 3 more days she could get by running to Jeremy.

 

Now let's imagine they don't lose three challenges.  They get to the merge five strong.  Who knows what the situation will be.  Monica is thinking about it.  She'll still be on the bottom of Bayon, plus on Jeff Probst's shit list for having the gall to be short.  What can she do about it?  Well it's very hard to say what configuration of players will get there, or what kind of faction she might be able to arrange.  But one idea that has worked in the past is a women's alliance.  Shocking, perhaps evil, and the odds are slim, but at least it's an option.  Let's say there's a 1% chance it might work.  That's still better than a 0% chance.  It's worth floating the idea, anyway.  If there's more women than men at the merge, she can see how things feel.  Might be just what she needs to escape from the bottom of Bayon.  So she floats it.  It's turned down.  Well, 1% is not worth sticking your neck out for, and they're still a pretty strong tribe, so they probably won't lose 3 in a row.  So Monica goes along with her Bayon 4, and keeps an eye on the future.

 

I call this great Survivor play.  Unfortunately she didn't realize, it seems, that Kimmi didn't like her, and is thinking about the game in a different (stupid) way.  Kimmi apparently doesn't think she needs options, or to worry about where she sits on the Bayon tribe.  Just keep the tribe strong, by, for example, voting out one of it, and letting everyone else know that you're not loyal to Bayon, that will surely solidify her position!  Great move by Kimmi!

 

 

Also impressed by Jeremy.  He's managed to allay any suspicions that he has their tribe's idol, and everyone on the tribe seems to come to him for anything regarding strategy.

 

Yeah, Jeremy is doing very well.  He's having an excellent game so far.  I'd say he's currently in the best position of anyone, especially as there are lots of other strong dudes to distract people with their imagined challenge strength.

[kikaha]

So was Monica. Her alliance was herself, Kimmi, Jeremy, Stephen and Keith. But like any good player she was thinking of other options later i the game. But that doesn't mean in any way whatsoever that she was ready to abandon this group at the first chance she got. The mistake she made was sharing her strategic thoughts with the wrong person.

I think the point is that none of them has talked about creating an all-men's alliance.  Their actions give no indication they want that.  Just the opposite.  They want to keep their alliance strong, and that means both genders. 

 

That is not true of Monica.  She has talked about creating an all-women's alliance in her confessionals.  She dreamed about it even before the game started and tried to forge an all-women's alliance even then.  She wants the women to stick together, and came back to that theme several times in confessionals. 

 

She broached an all-women's alliance with another player.  She said in one of her interviews that she was aligned with Stephen and Jeremy only out of necessity, and would drop them at any time to go on to greener pastures. 

 

All this was 180 degrees opposite of what Kimmi wanted.  It was opposite what Stephen and Jeremy wanted.  It was clear to them (and to me) they could not trust her. 

 

 

I call BS on all the people in this forum who say she's such a lovely person in RL.

 

But at least one of them knows her personally, in RL.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but you do not.  How is it you know more about her than they do? 

[Shelby]

I have to say too,this episode had so many crazy one liners. I was so busy saying shut up to Abi - I didn't get this one at first:

"I had someone else's part of their body inside me too." -Abi-Maria Gomes

I'm with you. First time I said, "Shut up Wah-bi," more that "Shut up, Probst." And I love saying, "Shut up, Probst!"

[Zuleikha]

Fishbach posted his blog (fast this time!), and it's interesting reading. I don't think it was as weird for him and Jeremy to go along with Kimmi in voting out Monica as I do for Kimmi voting out Monica (since a woman's alliance would target them), but it still seems weird how concerned by Monica's scheming they were. Especially since he was chatting on his Twitter about all the overlapping alliances everyone in old Bayon was (Stephen was apparently in at least two, one of which involved Jeremy and Tasha). But in particular, I was struck by this "Furthermore, Spencer was too good an ally to vote out, and even Wiglesworth seemed a part of our cohesive new Bayon unit."

 

Why? What makes Spencer such a good ally? I didn't see his season, but from the way he's described, I thought he would be someone who would be analyzing his position in an alliance and jump ship if needed to in order to move up. He was good in challenges, but Stephen even admits they weren't building game trust with Spencer (at the end of his blog "But Tribal Council is the one place you have on Survivor to prove trust to each other. If we missed an opportunity to build trust with our new tribemates – how could we truly make new friends?") Why does Stephen think in a merge or swap situation, Spencer would be reliable. Is it just because they believe that Spencer was at the bottom of old Ta Keo and has no allies to return to (which maybe is true?)

 

More and more, it seems to me like no one really liked or trusted Monica for whatever reason, and when she gave a sign that she would be an active player rather than a passive goat, they took it as a justification to vote her out. This is why I wish we'd gotten more of a look at old Bayon's tribal dynamics to have at least SOME idea whether Monica was undeservedly mistrusted or whether she was actually doing something to alienate her tribe mates.

[Guest]

That just brought tears to my eyes. Dxmn you BRC. The only way that could have been more romantic is if Woo's coffee table was littered with Playboys.

 And he took the supermodel to Chuck E Cheese where he takes all his dates.  

[Oscirus]

What makes Spencer such a good ally?

 

Spencer has nobody else to go to ( I guess maybe Tasha but since Tasha's with them so it's the same thing).  In a game about alliances, It's close to the middle of the season and Spencer still doesn't have a tight one. He's a very tempting proposition.

Edited October 23, 2015 by Oscirus

[Jextella]

Spencer has nobody else to go to ( I guess maybe Tasha but since Tasha's with them so it's the same thing).  In a game about alliances, It's close to the middle of the season and Spencer still doesn't have a tight one. He's a very tempting proposition.

 

Spot on...Fishbach said as much.  Spencer needs them more than they need him.  And, he has potential to be a long-term ally because he doesn't have strong connections on other teams.

 

Meanwhile, Monica demonstrated a strong propensity for disloyatly.  Wiggles, as Spencer and others have said, has friends from her old tribe.  IMO, it made sense to get rid of Monica now.  WIggles might be a good option to go next because she has more alliances than Spencer.

[KimberStormer]

But why doesn't thinking about Spencer as a possible ally demonstrate Stephen's strong propensity for disloyalty, if thinking about Kelly as one demonstrates this about Monica?  Especially as Stephen actually voted against his original tribe, which is something Monica never even considered?  Why doesn't Stephen thinking "hmm, I could use Spencer later, if that's convenient" mean that he has severed all ties to Bayon forever, if that's what Monica thinking "hmm, might be good to keep the women's numbers up" means?

Edited October 23, 2015 by KimberStormer

[NutMeg]

My question is probably naive, but how can they be sure Spencer doesn't have hidden pre-merge alliances? For all they know, he could have super secret pre-game alliances with Keith, Kass, Ciera and Joe, and a super-secret even closer alliance that no one will ever see coming with Woo. For all I know, it might even be possible - not likely, and he wouldn't be able to not mention it in talking heads, but production could have chosen not to show it. So why are they so sure that they don't even consider the alternative?

[LanceM]

But why doesn't thinking about Spencer as a possible ally demonstrate Stephen's strong propensity for disloyalty, if thinking about Kelly as one demonstrates this about Monica?  Especially as Stephen actually voted against his original tribe, which is something Monica never even considered?  Why doesn't Stephen thinking "hmm, I could use Spencer later, if that's convenient" mean that he has severed all ties to Bayon forever, if that's what Monica thinking "hmm, might be good to keep the women's numbers up" means?

 

Not just Stephen, but Jeremy has said that Spencer could be a useful tool for him as well.  But apparently that is different than Monica thinking the same thing with regards to Kelly.

[NutMeg]

The difference is that Stephen and Jeremy didn't tell Kimmi that they thought Spencer could be useful for them (Stephen and Jeremy, respectively, not "the tribe").

[LanceM]

The difference is that Stephen and Jeremy didn't tell Kimmi that they thought Spencer could be useful for them (Stephen and Jeremy, respectively, not "the tribe").

 

How do you know they didn't? There is a lot more going on than we are being shown.

 

But that is not really the point. The point is there seems to be a double standard where Monica is "disloyal" for thinking Kelly might be useful to keep around while Stephen and Jeremy get know such label for thnking the same thing about Spenver.

Edited October 23, 2015 by LanceM

[NutMeg]

You're right, I don't know. I should have said we didn't see them telling Kimmi etc.

[Zuleikha]

Yeah, I don't see the reason to believe Spencer about his lack of alliances. Per Stephen's own blog, Spencer and Kelly both claimed to be on the outs at Ta Keo, so how can they know which was lying and which was telling the truth. I'm also honestly not sure Spencer's options are even limited... he was in an alliance with Kelley Wentworth after all.

 

Also, Kimmi/Jeremy/Stephen kept Spencer on the outs of the vote. If Spencer makes it to merge, there is a good chance that even if Spencer has no alliance now, someone will offer him one. And the three old Bayon have given Spencer no reason to stick with them. Spencer wouldn't even be betraying them to flip at merge because they didn't actually bring him into their alliance.

[KimberStormer]

The point is there seems to be a double standard where Monica is "disloyal" for thinking Kelly might be useful to keep around while Stephen and Jeremy get know such label for thnking the same thing about Spenver.

 

Not even for actually voting out a member of their alliance.  As Stephen said, Tribal Council is where you learn who's really loyal.  Yet somehow voting out a member of Bayon makes them more loyal to it than the one who votes for a TaKeo?

[pennben]

This seems to be unfathomable to people this week, but thinking about possible configurations down the road does not mean automatically and instantly severing all ties to your existing alliance.  As proven by the fact that Monica didn't mutiny, strip naked under the moon, paint her face with menstrual blood and scream I AM A WOMAN WHO RUNS WITH THE WOLVES, BAYON IS NO MORE, BOYS BEWARE!

 

I don't agree with you that Kimmi clearly made a mistake (we can't know that now), but, my goodness, that last sentence ....that was extraordinary!

[Oscirus]

But that is not really the point. The point is there seems to be a double standard where Monica is "disloyal" for thinking Kelly might be useful to keep around while Stephen and Jeremy get know such label for thnking the same thing about Spenver.

 

It would only be a double standard if they went to Kimmi and said "let's keep Spencer around in order to maintain the gender numbers."  But they didn't not to Kimmy, not to  the cameras.

Edited October 23, 2015 by Oscirus

[Oscirus]

Also, Kimmi/Jeremy/Stephen kept Spencer on the outs of the vote. If Spencer makes it to merge, there is a good chance that even if Spencer has no alliance now, someone will offer him one. And the three old Bayon have given Spencer no reason to stick with them. Spencer wouldn't even be betraying them to flip at merge because they didn't actually bring him into their alliance.

They still kept him safe. Hell the fact that Monica voted to eliminate Kelly should tell Spencer who's back they had at tribal. As you've said, he still is somewhat unknown, no need to give him anything he could use to force a tie.

[Zuleikha]

They still kept him safe.

So what? I can't say that won't mean anything to Spencer because I don't know what type of player he really is, but it certainly shouldn't! It was a freebie for him. He didn't make deals to be kept safe, so he didn't incur any obligations.

[kikaha]

The point is there seems to be a double standard where Monica is "disloyal" for thinking Kelly might be useful to keep around while Stephen and Jeremy get know such label for thnking the same thing about Spenver.

 

No double standard.  Monica was disloyal because she was talking about breaking up her alliance.  Has nothing to do with whether to cut Spencer or Kelly. 

[kikaha]

Just read Stephen's blog about this last episode.  He says, "Monica was transparently scheme-y. She told Kimmi that she wanted a girl's alliance, not realizing that Kimmi was close with Jeremy and me. Monica also came to me and suggested a "big move" – which could only in context mean voting out Jeremy – without realizing that he and I had a budding bromance."

 

He also gives an ironic quote from Monica herself, during her first season:  "You've gotta take your enemy out the minute you can." –Monica Padilla, Survivor: Samoa.

 

Monica showed she could easily turn into their enemy.  Maybe as soon as the next day.  So they followed her own advice.  They took her out. 

[himela]

I still don't see why everyone is so sure Spencer's playing that good of a game.  He's at the bottom of his tribe, is not trusted very much, and was left completely out of the loop for Monica's blindside.  Sure, he does well at challenges, but that's about all he has.

 

Spencer's game is good because of the degree of difficulty that it has. Most players till now at least had it easy. They are either in a winning tribe (Ta'keo) or in a good alliance (Bayon). At the moment Joe, Terry, Cierra, Kass, Keith and Kelley are in an always winning tribe and Jeremy, Stephen, Monica and Kimmi were in a good alliance (until Monica decided to throw this luck in the garbage and paid for it). The only people who have had to struggle are the Angkor tribe. Spencer found himself in a minority alliance with Shirin and he managed to convince his then tribe mates to keep him. He realized his mistakes in the game last time and promised to change them. The next day he found himself again in a minority being only by himself. He has zero alliances and is open to join any alliance that will want him and that makes him a good choice to keep. He managed to change himself and become a new Spencer who will be less strategic and more cool and emotionally vulnerably so that he keeps himself in the low. He pleaded his case in this tribal council without showing his inner state. Spencer's game is good because he can adjust to new situations and remain a winner through them while most other players just had it easy. Spencer needs to lay low, play the weak emotionally victim and become a loyal force in Bayon in order to go forward.

[marys1000]

In a world of paranoia and people looking to out scheme you its often best to keep ponderings, musings, vague ideas and thoughts to yourself.  I see this as Monica's only mistake although I suspect that its pretty normal and ongoing to stand around the fire and talk various strategies and past shows.  An all girls alliance was something she had in her tool bag of ideas as a possibility down the road.  She mentions this out loud.  Goes to TC with apparently no other thought that to vote with her alliance.  And someone looking for an excuse to vote her out because they thought she was irritating used that vague musing to to gin up a blindside.

 

Really this says more about Kimmi.  That musing about voting one alliance member off vs. another was just Kimmi's own internal rationalization to heself for being a big f'ing snake in her alliance.  "oh she said something" when really Kimmi just as might as well gone to the guys and lied about something Monica said to get them to turn on her.  But she needed that rationalization even if it was about something that was fairly inconsequential. 

Shes a snake.  Not Monica. 

 

Before the running off to the boys I found her extremely unpleasant about the clams and her secret scenes with I'm so much older and wiser and just how stupid is Monica (older and wiser is simply not true, I know plenty of stupid old people).  I really didn't like her. 

 

I hope this bites her in the ass sooner than later and its a bunch of guys that take her out. 

 

And I agree, I sort of hope the tribe that hasn't lost any challenges does because that's the only time you get to see anyone.

Edited October 23, 2015 by marys1000

[himela]

Kimmie knows that after the merge everyone will be targeting the strong guys like Jeremy, Terry and Joe and the strategic ones like Stephen and Spencer while she will lay low and be their friends. Kimmie has a good potential to ride under the radar till the final three because nobody will consider her a threat and in the final tribal council she can play the card "I outsmarted all of you, I alligned with the big targets while YOU were voting them out and now I am here and YOU are there suckers!".

[ProfCrash]

See, I think the two Bayon heavy tribes are thinking far ahead. They know that they are going to need original Ta Kao members as swing votes and that there is no way that the Bayon 10 are going to remain strong at the merge. It doesn't make sense for some Bayon members to accept that because they are going to be on the bottom.

 

Stephen was not in a good place in the original Bayon. He seems to have used the last few days to build a better relationship with Jeremy and to build some type of relationship with Spencer. As soon as Monica shows that she is talking about an alliance that would not include Stephen in the future, Stephen can look at his spot in Bayon, tenth, and improve on that. Ninth is better then tenth and it is more then possible that Jeremy, Kimmi and Stephen go back to Kelly and Spencer and say "we have your back, final five?"

 

Spencer and Kelly don't have a tribe to go back to. Even if they were in an alliance with all the remaining original Ta Kao tribe, that tribe is totally out numbered. There is no reason to think the Spencer and Kelly are going to rejoin that group. And Spencer and Kelly know that they were not all aligned. Woo flat out told Spencer that he is not with him. Abi stabbed Spencer in the back. Terry made it clear that Spencer, Kelley, Peih Gee, and Shirin were in no way going to be a member of his alliance so Spencer knows Terry is out. So Spencer has Kelley Wentworth and that is it. He would jump on final five that included Jeremy and Stephen. Hell, Spencer has been trying to build something with them.

 

Kelly Wigglesworth has Terry and Woo left. I doubt that she thinks Abi is really with them. And, lets be real, Kelly is not really playing Survivor. She is one of the "take care of camp and don't worry about the game" camp. I think she will just keep doing her thing and not necessarily be worried about who is next to go. She is so not involved in the strategic game play that we didn't see her scrambling to save herself tonight. We didn't see it because she probably wasn't doing anything to save herself. Dalton keeps saying that Kelly is driving Probst crazy because she is so not involved in that element of the game. Kelly will go with the flow because that is who Kelly is. I do think that she is loyal and if she gives her word that she will stick to it but I don't think she is out there building alliances.

 

Kass, Ciera, Keith and Joe did the same thing. They brought in Kelley and are going to play Terry. I think they will use Terry for votes but will get rid of him if they need to before a merge or after they have numbers after the merge.

[peachmangosteen]

I'm very amused at the idea of Wigles thwarting all of the producer's plans by being boring in confessionals.

Me too. I love it. Anyone that pisses Probst off is someone I'm a fan of.

 

Monica didn't turn on Kimmi. Monica confided in Kimmi. That is the opposite of turning on her.

 

Exactly. All Monica did was suggest that maybe down the line it might benefit them to go against other members of their alliance, which, fucking duh, of course! Everyone should think that. But apparently Kimmi is content to just go along with Jeremy until he decides to cut her loose. Or maybe she'll get lucky and he'll keep her because he knows he can easily beat her. Either way, you aren't winning Kimmi. Idiot. Bottom line is Kimmi decided to throw Monica away for Jeremy/Stephen when Monica was thinking about throwing them away later on. Which benefits Kimmi. I just don't even understand how that is a good move in any way.

 

But why doesn't thinking about Spencer as a possible ally demonstrate Stephen's strong propensity for disloyalty, if thinking about Kelly as one demonstrates this about Monica?  Especially as Stephen actually voted against his original tribe, which is something Monica never even considered?  Why doesn't Stephen thinking "hmm, I could use Spencer later, if that's convenient" mean that he has severed all ties to Bayon forever, if that's what Monica thinking "hmm, might be good to keep the women's numbers up" means?

This. +1.

 

Really this says more about Kimmi.  That musing about voting one alliance member off vs. another was just Kimmi's own internal rationalization to heself for being a big f'ing snake in her alliance.  "oh she said something" when really Kimmi just as might as well gone to the guys and lied about something Monica said to get them to turn on her.  But she needed that rationalization even if it was about something that was fairly inconsequential. 

Shes a snake.  Not Monica.

 

I completely agree.

 

Kimmie knows that after the merge everyone will be targeting the strong guys like Jeremy, Terry and Joe and the strategic ones like Stephen and Spencer while she will lay low and be their friends. Kimmie has a good potential to ride under the radar till the final three because nobody will consider her a threat and in the final tribal council she can play the card "I outsmarted all of you, I alligned with the big targets while YOU were voting them out and now I am here and YOU are there suckers!".

Good luck to Kimmi trying to win in a F3 with any man (that isn't Russell) while you're a woman playing the UTR game. Or, as it's called when a woman does it, the coattail riding game.

Edited October 23, 2015 by peachmangosteen

[RescueMom]

Don't expect one person to agree with me, but I am Team Clam. Good gawd, they were on day 6 or something? It possible to live an entire lifetime without cruelly killing it.

But certainly going vegetarian, even under Survivor conditions, is not going to be the death of anyone.

If I were on the show, I'd be the one getting up in the middle of the night, setting the chickens free.

 

I'll be the one person who agrees with you! 

[ghoulina]

Spot on...Fishbach said as much.  Spencer needs them more than they need him.  And, he has potential to be a long-term ally because he doesn't have strong connections on other teams.

 

Yes, alliance wise Spencer definitely needs them. But I do think they need him challenge wise. He was the best player on their team with these last two challenges, IMO. In fact, on the skeeball game, Jeremy was sucking tremendously and when Spencer stepped in he started landing ball after ball. It was too little too late, but he's good. If they don't want to continue to end up at TC, they would be wise to keep him until the merge. 

[cooksdelight]

I wonder why Probst picked Kelly W. as the only person from season 1 to be in the running? The quietest one out there during her season. Probst has already burned through Hatch and Sue Hawk, no way would he bring either of them back. Rudy is far too old at this point. I don't know why he's surprised that Kelly isn't running around screaming or causing chaos. The game is far different today and Kelly probably isn't sure exactly what the new game play is all about. I don't think she's watched any seasons after hers, has she?

[ProfCrash]

They wanted Greg and have asked Colleen at various times but they both said no. Geravise, Rudy, Sue and Richard had already played so they would not be available and, lets face it none of them would do well out there. Sue had her melt down last time and would not be able to play the new style game. Rudy is too old. Richard wants to think he would do well but he would be out fast. I don't think he would do well with the fast pace nature of the game now. He wants to play head games and he likes to be in the drivers seat. I don't think he could take a back seat to anyone. And I think that he has been very critical of a lot of players in his podcasts and that he might have angered folks.

 

So outside of those folks, who would they bring back? I can't see Sean coming back. Dude couldn't stand voting people out in season one, there is no way he plays today. Who else would you bring back? I am honestly having trouble coming up with the names of other players.

 

And I think they wanted Kelly back pretty bad. I just think Probst forgot who she was as a person and that she was never someone who gave a good confessional or great answers at Tribal. I am happy to see her back but not surprised by her lack of a story. She is not a shit stirrer.

[himela]

In my books the only thing Wiggles has is that she happened to play in Season 1. I remember nothing else of her.

 

I listened to Monica's interview to Rob and she said many times that she had an alliance with Kimmie, that everyone was talking about voting out Kimmie while Monica was trying to prevent that and that there were rumors Bayon threw the challenge "to vote Monica out". Well I don't buy any of this. Monica wants to play the victim by saying "I loved Kimmie, we were allies and she betrayed me" rather than admit that she was thinking of herself - I think she even said that in one of her head confessionals. And throwing the challlenge? Yeah right. Narcissist much Monica?

 

Her exact phrase was "keeping Wiggles might be a benefit for my game", she didn't say "our game, women's game, Kimmie's and mine game".

 

Monica seemed disappointed by the edit cause she wasn't shown at all for 4 episodes and suddenly she was presented as the crazy woman who wants to save the clams and boom, gets voted out.

[blackwing]

This seems to be unfathomable to people this week, but thinking about possible configurations down the road does not mean automatically and instantly severing all ties to your existing alliance.  As proven by the fact that Monica didn't mutiny, strip naked under the moon, paint her face with menstrual blood and scream I AM A WOMAN WHO RUNS WITH THE WOLVES, BAYON IS NO MORE, BOYS BEWARE!, but rather voted for Kelly as her alliance wanted to.  She wasn't "trying to form" anything!  She floated the idea of changing which member of the opposite side to target, to the other person on her side who stood to benefit from that change, and when this didn't go anywhere, she abandoned the idea and went along with her alliance.  That has to be the gentlest, smoothest, wisest way to quietly influence the game that there could possibly be.  Saying she was overplaying somehow, or voted herself out, or whatever, is looney tunes.

 

Saying that others can't understand your point of view and complaining that others are finding your point of view "unfathomable" suggests that your point of view is the only correct one and that everyone else is 100% wrong.  I disagree with you regarding Monica.  Everyone knows a merge is going to happen.  But I think where Monica went wrong is that, just like with the clams, she was looking too far ahead.  She was in a good position with Bayon.  Her alliance of four appeared solid.  The best thing to do would be to take that alliance into the merge, and then hopefully add other players later to get the numbers.  Perhaps ally with others from original Bayon.  I think that's what Kimmi's thought was.  But here was Monica, telling her that when we get to the merge, we have to look to form a women's alliance.  Why?  What was wrong with the perfectly good alliance they already had?  Did Jeremy or Stephen prove to be untrustworthy or bad alliance mates?  

 

She made it sound like that as soon as they got to the merge, she and Kimmi should dump their alliance and join up with other women.  Apparently purely because they are women, and because she wants a woman to win the game.  1) It shows incredible disloyalty to her current alliance, because it shows she is just using Jeremy and Stephen for the numbers.  2) Wouldn't you want physically stronger men in your alliance post-merge?  The strong men in your post-merge alliance that are individual immunity threats would get picked off before you.

 

So I do think that she played her hand too soon.  I don't think there's anything wrong with her wanting to form a women's alliance post-merge, if she felt so strongly about it.  But she should have kept it to herself.  Her problem is that she didn't get a good enough read on Kimmi to understand that Kimmi might not necessarily feel the same way about a women's alliance.  Unless they had lots of talks about girl power during their daily clamming walks, Monica just badly misread Kimmi.

 

They wanted Greg and have asked Colleen at various times but they both said no. Geravise, Rudy, Sue and Richard had already played so they would not be available and, lets face it none of them would do well out there. Sue had her melt down last time and would not be able to play the new style game. Rudy is too old. Richard wants to think he would do well but he would be out fast. I don't think he would do well with the fast pace nature of the game now. He wants to play head games and he likes to be in the drivers seat. I don't think he could take a back seat to anyone. And I think that he has been very critical of a lot of players in his podcasts and that he might have angered folks.

 

So outside of those folks, who would they bring back? I can't see Sean coming back. Dude couldn't stand voting people out in season one, there is no way he plays today. Who else would you bring back? I am honestly having trouble coming up with the names of other players.

 

And I think they wanted Kelly back pretty bad. I just think Probst forgot who she was as a person and that she was never someone who gave a good confessional or great answers at Tribal. I am happy to see her back but not surprised by her lack of a story. She is not a shit stirrer.

I agree that Kelly would be the obvious choice to bring back.  She was the one that made it to the finals and barely lost, and got skewered by Sue Hawk along the way.  Colleen and Greg have no interest.  Apart from the ones you mentioned,  Jenna also appeared on an All Star season.   Stacy Stillman is persona non grata.  There were two other older people (the older lady voted out first and the older man who used his glasses as a magnifying glass to make fire).  There was a black female that I liked but can't remember anything more about.  I guess the only other two contestants who could or might come back would be Gretchen, the Army survivalist (?) who really thought the show would be about surviving on an island with nothing, or Joel, the younger guy who sold gym equipment or something like that.

[ghoulina]

So outside of those folks, who would they bring back? I can't see Sean coming back. Dude couldn't stand voting people out in season one, there is no way he plays today. Who else would you bring back? I am honestly having trouble coming up with the names of other players.

 

Sean was voting people out alphabetically, so at least we'd have a chance of getting rid of Abi quickly! Ha!

 

As to your question -  I don't know. I would have said Colleen, Greg, Jenna, or Joel - and you posted that the first two have already been asked and said no and Jenna has apparently also done a second season, so.....Kelly makes sense as a choice, in the sense that she was "THIS close" to winning season 1. So I could see how her coming back and winning this season might be a big deal in Survivor-land. However, she's not really a good choice if you're looking for good TV. Kelly was a quiet player. She was nice and got to know people. She wasn't super into alliance building, even though she was in one. She did very well challenge wise, especially towards the end - but the challenges of season 1 were vastly different from what we see today. 

Edited October 23, 2015 by ghoulina

[cooksdelight]

the older lady voted out first and the older man who used his glasses as a magnifying glass to make fire

I know BB died, Sonja survived breast cancer but I am not sure if she's still alive.

[Nutjob]

 

Saying that others can't understand your point of view and complaining that others are finding your point of view "unfathomable" suggests that your point of view is the only correct one and that everyone else is 100% wrong.  I disagree with you regarding Monica.  Everyone knows a merge is going to happen.  But I think where Monica went wrong is that, just like with the clams, she was looking too far ahead.  She was in a good position with Bayon.  Her alliance of four appeared solid.  The best thing to do would be to take that alliance into the merge, and then hopefully add other players later to get the numbers.  Perhaps ally with others from original Bayon.  I think that's what Kimmi's thought was.  But here was Monica, telling her that when we get to the merge, we have to look to form a women's alliance.  Why?  What was wrong with the perfectly good alliance they already had?  Did Jeremy or Stephen prove to be untrustworthy or bad alliance mates? 

 

She made it sound like that as soon as they got to the merge, she and Kimmi should dump their alliance and join up with other women.  Apparently purely because they are women, and because she wants a woman to win the game.  1) It shows incredible disloyalty to her current alliance, because it shows she is just using Jeremy and Stephen for the numbers.  2) Wouldn't you want physically stronger men in your alliance post-merge?  The strong men in your post-merge alliance that are individual immunity threats would get picked off before you.

 

So I do think that she played her hand too soon.  I don't think there's anything wrong with her wanting to form a women's alliance post-merge, if she felt so strongly about it.  But she should have kept it to herself.  Her problem is that she didn't get a good enough read on Kimmi to understand that Kimmi might not necessarily feel the same way about a women's alliance.  Unless they had lots of talks about girl power during their daily clamming walks, Monica just badly misread Kimmi.

Yes to all of this. Unless Kimmi had previously expressed interest in breaking from Jeremy and Stephen (which it doesn't seem likely at all), Monica was thinking way too far ahead and badly misread the situation. There is no reason to talk "women's alliance" while you're still in separate tribes unless you have a) other interested women and b) enough interested women to form a real alliance. For all her looking ahead, Monica tipped her hand too early.

 

I also don't think we have enough information to know what kind of game Kimmi might play after the merge. I've already seen it suggested that she might go UTR, but her move on Monica, to me, suggests exactly the opposite--that was a power move on her part, and it only solidified her loyalty in Jeremy and Stephen's eyes. She didn't last long enough in Australia for us to know what kind of post-merge game she might have.

[ProfCrash]

She could have made a different case to keep Kelly. Spencer is going to be harder to beat in challenges. Spencer is better connected with people on the other tribes and would be more likely to flip. Spencer is actually playing he game while Kelly is focused on surviving and not really playing. Monica had many selling points for keeping Kelly but she went to keeping more women then men and a future alliance. She misread the situation as badly as you could.

[cooksdelight]

Anyone who thinks too far ahead gets bounced. Every single time.

[fishcakes]

Don't expect one person to agree with me, but I am Team Clam. Good gawd, they were on day 6 or something? It possible to live an entire lifetime without cruelly killing it.

 

I'll be Team Clam too. I always feel bad for them having peacefully survived the ocean for 50+ years only to be killed by some idiots on a game show.

 

 

Though I have to admit I have full respect for players like Kelly who won't play the fool for the show.  I'd be the same way.  Many of us would dislike becoming a laughingstock more than we'd like winning the million.  So we'd play to hopefully win but also to no matter what not come off as a total fool.  We're more averse to majorly negative outcomes than we're attracted to majorly positive ones.

 

I agree with this too. I would much rather be known for three months as "oh, there's a Kelly in this game?" rather than to be thought of as "that douchebag that was on that jungle show" for the rest of my life.

Edited October 23, 2015 by fishcakes

[ProfCrash]

I agree with this too. I would much rather be known for three months as "oh, there's a Kelly in this game?" rather than to be thought of as "that douchebag that was on that jungle show" for the rest of my life.

Amen. Let me be Monica or Ciera or Kelly over an Abi or Russell or Shambo any day of the week. Or, god forbid, Dan or Will. I would rather be able to say I played the game and no one remembers me then be a jack ass.

[Guest]

Anyone who thinks too far ahead gets bounced. Every single time.

Right, but I'd say they can *think* ahead, they just can't say so aloud.  Or act on those thoughts.  Fun tv.  

 

Team Linguini with Clam Sauce here.  Mmm.

[Alapaki]

As Al Pacino says in Glengarry Glen Ross, "you never open your mouth until you know what the shot is."

 

Monica simply misread both Kimmie's attitude towards her, and her interest/need for a secret sub-alliance.  In doing so, she handing a lethal piece of ammunition to someone who was happy to get her out.

 

As far as Kelly Wigglesworth, I can understand her desire to lay low.  It could be that she realizes that TPTB are trying to make her happen, and make her, as Dalton Ross says, "the poster girl" for the format of this season.  But I think that also places a huge target on her back, because of the FTC argument that it gives her.  In that situation, I completely understand her not taking Probst's bait and gushing about what a "second chance" this is in front of other players.

 

Finally, I understand TPTB forcing this "old school vs. new school" on us, because there's no social dynamic too complex for Burnett & Co. to over-simplify down to this vs. that.  But what I don't forgive are the players who go along with it.

[KHenry14]

As far as Kelly Wigglesworth, I can understand her desire to lay low.  It could be that she realizes that TPTB are trying to make her happen, and make her, as Dalton Ross says, "the poster girl" for the format of this season.  But I think that also places a huge target on her back, because of the FTC argument that it gives her.  In that situation, I completely understand her not taking Probst's bait and gushing about what a "second chance" this is in front of other players.

 

 

 

 

You make a good point about Kelly lying low about her Survivor past while around other people. But not during her confessionals. Would it kill her to say something, anything, interesting? She has a unique spot in Survivor history, and she could bring a context that nobody else could have. Yet we get absolutely nothing from her.

 

And couldn't they get Stacey Stillman to play again???   LOL   ;)

[Zuleikha]

Bottom line is Kimmi decided to throw Monica away for Jeremy/Stephen when Monica was thinking about throwing them away later on. Which benefits Kimmi. I just don't even understand how that is a good move in any way.

Yeah, that's what I think. I really have no problem with Jeremy/Stephen turning on Monica in favor of Spencer because I can understand how the situation came where that benefits their game. What Monica was musing about would not have helped them, and they do seem to be building strong ties with Spencer. But I will never understand why Kimmi was so upset or buy that this move was anything other than horrible for Kimmi. I know editing doesn't give us a full picture of relationships, but there is no way Jeremy or Stephen or Spencer view Kimmi as their #1 ally the way that Monica did. I would honestly be surprised if Kimmi is even in Jeremy/Stephen's final 4 plans at this moment.

 

What I do dislike is Stephen trying to paint Monica's play as some kind of moral failure on Monica's part in his blog. Monica wasn't being transparently schemey. She wasn't being any more schemey than anyone else on her tribe (except Wigles). Her problem was that she completely misjudged Kimmi, which resulted in Kimmi taking a fairly innocuous conversation and using it as an excuse to vote Monica out. But Monica only had that conversation with Kimmi because she trusted Kimmi and what she was proposing didn't hurt Kimmi. It was not bad play for Monica to talk strategy with Kimmi--it was bad play for Monica to misread her relationship with Kimmi and Kimmi's relationships with Stephen/Jeremy/Spencer.

 

and that there were rumors Bayon threw the challenge "to vote Monica out". Well I don't buy any of this.

Fishbach basically confirmed this in either his Twitter or his People blog. He didn't admit to outright throwing it, but said something like they were not opposed to losing. 

[fishcakes]

I don't know that Kimmi reasoned it through this way and there are a lot of contingencies, but I think it could potentially have been a good move for her only because if Monica flips on Jeremy/Stephen later and Kimmi goes along with that to form a women's alliance, then Kimmi is also a flipper but can't claim the credit because she's not only seen as a flipper, but also as a coattailer. Generally, juries will reward people who've broken with their alliance if they're considered the mastermind. Parvati wins over Amanda, Kim over Chelsea & Sabrina, Tony over Woo, and Tyson over Gervase because while they all lied, broke promises to, and voted against people who believed themselves to be in an alliance with them, in all those cases, the former person was seen as the one driving the strategy. So the jury is mad at all of them, but they begrudgingly respect the one who seems to be genuinely outwitting and outplaying as opposed to being used as a vote. At least by being the one instigating the vote against Monica now, Kimmi can, if she gets to the end (which I don't expect to happen) argue that she was loyal to her alliance and she was the one who drove the vote against the threat to her alliance. Not that anyone will care what happened pre-merge, but it's slightly better than, "Monica had a plan and it was better for me so I went along with it."

 

Overall, I don't think it was either a great or a horrible move but I lean toward it being an okay one. I mean, it was great for me because it made things more interesting than the continued Pagonging of old Ta Keo, but for Kimmi I don't think it's going to make a huge difference in her game.

Edited October 23, 2015 by fishcakes

[kassa]

But certainly going vegetarian, even under Survivor conditions, is not going to be the death of anyone.

 

 

But they don't exactly have a garden full of veggies to eat, do they?  Coconuts are pretty labor intensive.

 

In early seasons they were allowed to eat the flora (tapioooooooca!) but I think that was verboten years and years ago.  They get rice, and they can fish/collect shellfish, and that's about it.  Maybe there's an occasional chicken/eggs.  

 

I think there was some environmental fiasco after one of the seasons where they really did some permanent damage, and that may have altered policy on how much they could plunder the landscape.  (There definitely was an issue with coral souveniers as I recall). 

[KimberStormer]

I'm not surprised by that.  I mentioned last week that I'd be thinking about throwing a challenge this week too.  When Stephen hit Angkor's target I thought, I bet he's throwing it.

 

Kimmie knows that after the merge everyone will be targeting the strong guys like Jeremy, Terry and Joe and the strategic ones like Stephen and Spencer while she will lay low and be their friends. Kimmie has a good potential to ride under the radar till the final three because nobody will consider her a threat and in the final tribal council she can play the card "I outsmarted all of you, I alligned with the big targets while YOU were voting them out and now I am here and YOU are there suckers!".

 

She'd have better potential to do this if she had an ally who's not a big strong guy.  And she's not under the radar now.  A lot of people think they can coast to the end and win this way.  How many have ever actually done it?

 

Saying that others can't understand your point of view and complaining that others are finding your point of view "unfathomable" suggests that your point of view is the only correct one and that everyone else is 100% wrong.  I disagree with you regarding Monica.  Everyone knows a merge is going to happen.  But I think where Monica went wrong is that, just like with the clams, she was looking too far ahead.  She was in a good position with Bayon.  Her alliance of four appeared solid.  The best thing to do would be to take that alliance into the merge, and then hopefully add other players later to get the numbers.  Perhaps ally with others from original Bayon.  I think that's what Kimmi's thought was.  But here was Monica, telling her that when we get to the merge, we have to look to form a women's alliance.  Why?  What was wrong with the perfectly good alliance they already had?  Did Jeremy or Stephen prove to be untrustworthy or bad alliance mates?  

 

She made it sound like that as soon as they got to the merge, she and Kimmi should dump their alliance and join up with other women.  Apparently purely because they are women, and because she wants a woman to win the game.  1) It shows incredible disloyalty to her current alliance, because it shows she is just using Jeremy and Stephen for the numbers.  2) Wouldn't you want physically stronger men in your alliance post-merge?  The strong men in your post-merge alliance that are individual immunity threats would get picked off before you.

 

But this is exactly what I mean by unfathomable.  It's not that I'm right, it's that people are talking about this in a way that I find sort of like Keith in SJDS being baffled by the idea of a sub-alliance.  How on earth did Monica make it sound like that simply by mentioning the number of women?  Why is it so all-or-nothing?  When did she say they "have to"?  It's not a giant switch that says ALLIANCE A or ALLIANCE B.  It's just a possibility.  And she wasn't the slightest bit aggressive about it (she was far more aggressive about the clams), just a simple question, do we want to keep the women's numbers up?  No?  OK; she voted for Kelly.  Strange thing to do if you are "dumping" your alliance because you "have to" ally with women.

 

We know from this very episode that her position on Bayon was not great.  She saw, as she said in interviews, that Jeremy bonded with Stephen and Spencer--which we have also seen on TV.  Soooooo many people have thought "well my alliance seems solid.  I will just go along with the ride," and been voted out at five or six and we all say "ugh why didn't she do anything when she had the chance?"

 

There are going to be plenty of strong dudes at the merge no matter what happens.  And Monica would, indeed, have had some on her alliance: Jeremy, for one.  Because she didn't suggest voting out Jeremy or Stephen, she suggested voting out Spencer, who is not on her alliance and never has been.  I don't see how it's "incredibly disloyal" to want to keep a potential ally for down the road, but not to consider your alliance members as shields.  Personally I think it's rather more disloyal to vote your alliance-mate out.

 

If you're Kimmi, Monica's idea cannot possibly harm you.  It can only help you.  Let's say that Monica does, at the merge, want to flip with women, and Kimmi doesn't for whatever reason.  Well, good news for Kimmi.  Because Monica tells her everything, considering Kimmi her #1 ally.  So now she knows what's happening and can move to save the day.  Or, if there's nothing she can do to stop it, she's still in good shape, because she's included in the new alliance and she's the closest ally of the ringleader of it, so she can smile and go along with it, and perhaps later on plot her revenge or a coup or whatever.  Now, let's suppose Jeremy is going to go back to his brolliance with Andrew, Joe, etc.  Will he tell Kimmi?  Of course not.

 

But I will never understand why Kimmi was so upset or buy that this move was anything other than horrible for Kimmi. I know editing doesn't give us a full picture of relationships, but there is no way Jeremy or Stephen or Spencer view Kimmi as their #1 ally the way that Monica did. I would honestly be surprised if Kimmi is even in Jeremy/Stephen's final 4 plans at this moment.

 

Me too.  She's a pawn to them.

 

Anyone who thinks too far ahead gets bounced. Every single time.

 

Like Cirie?  Or do you just mean this season?

[cooksdelight]

r one of the seasons where they really did some permanent damage, and that may have altered policy on how much they could plunder the landscape. (There definitely was an issue with coral souveniers as I recall).

Australia, the trip to the Great Barrier Reef that Colby won, he and Jerri (I think) took back a bunch of coral. A HUGE no-no.

KimberStormer, every season. And as noted, the ones who talk about it out loud, that is. From what I've been told, it's 24-hour paranoia so I guess it's natural to think ahead to save your sanity a bit.