Survivor In The Media

[KimberStormer]

And that other members of the jury can argue back at them when they do!

[MissEwa]

I'd like it better if they did away with dividing it into the outwit/outplay/outlast sections, because of my previously-covered issues of those words being mostly meaningless, but other than that this is a relatively minor and tentatively good change. And the fact that no jury member can ever ask anyone to prove their gameplay by removing their teeth again is a good thing, imo. 

[SVNBob]

Just now, MissEwa said:

I'd like it better if they did away with dividing it into the outwit/outplay/outlast sections, because of my previously-covered issues of those words being mostly meaningless,

We don't know for sure if they'll do that again yet.  

Since it seems that most feedback regarding that structure is negative, it may get dropped starting in S36, the first season to start shooting after the new format aired.  But because there hadn't been any audience feedback when they filmed S35, that FTC might have the same structure.

[peachmangosteen]

7 hours ago, MissEwa said:

And the fact that no jury member can ever ask anyone to prove their gameplay by removing their teeth again is a good thing, imo. 

1

What makes you think that?

7 hours ago, SVNBob said:

Since it seems that most feedback regarding that structure is negative ...

 

It is? It's almost overwhelming positive here. Does the media hate it?

Edited June 17, 2017 by peachmangosteen

[SVNBob]

Not the format of the open discussions.  But the forced structure therein of talking about "outwit, outplay, outlast."

[MissEwa]

8 hours ago, peachmangosteen said:

What makes you think that?

That really was the height of bitterness and while I really disliked Dawn that "question" ruined Brenda for me as well. I'll miss the "my question is you suck" and "tell me why I'm better than you" questions, but I don't do well with deliberate attempts to humiliate. Plus, every time anyone mentions that season toothless Dawn flashes through my head and I do not need that. 

[azshadowwalker]

2 hours ago, MissEwa said:

That really was the height of bitterness and while I really disliked Dawn that "question" ruined Brenda for me as well. I'll miss the "my question is you suck" and "tell me why I'm better than you" questions, but I don't do well with deliberate attempts to humiliate. Plus, every time anyone mentions that season toothless Dawn flashes through my head and I do not need that. 

Couldn't agree more. Brenda is hateful. The attempt to physically humiliate an older woman is pretty indicative of how older women are treated, in general, and I have no use for anyone who plays that game. Brenda is dead to me. 

[simplyme]

5 hours ago, azshadowwalker said:

Couldn't agree more. Brenda is hateful. The attempt to physically humiliate an older woman is pretty indicative of how older women are treated, in general, and I have no use for anyone who plays that game. Brenda is dead to me. 

I don't think it had anything to do with age or gender. Dawn screwed up Brenda's vote all on her own. She relied upon Brenda and forged a very close bond with her. When Dawn lost her teeth, she literally told Brenda both, "I couldn't bear to let anyone else see me like that" and "I'll quit if I can't get my teeth back." So when she backstabbed Brenda, Brenda was very hurt.

I think Dawn outplayed Cochran in many ways, but if you tell someone that your teeth are more important to you than a million dollars and they're the only one you trust to see you and you knew they would fix it... Well, you reap what you sow. You aren't getting that vote if you backstab them, and be prepared to take your teeth out to try to earn the million. With Brenda, Dawn screwed up in terms of getting her vote. Dawn was way, way, WAY too close to Brenda to backstab her without emotional repercussions, especially with not much time left before FTC. That was a massive social game fail there.

I have more issues with other people on the jury not giving Dawn credit for often being the person who gathered the intel used to make decisions, or with people who get upset about being voted out by people they were never close to. I think Brenda thought she had made a very special connection with Dawn, and in some ways Dawn broke her heart.

[MissEwa]

I actually agree with you about Dawn @simplyme - but (to me) it was such an ugly moment that it made Brenda look even more terrible. 

[azshadowwalker]

On 6/16/2017 at 8:45 AM, ByaNose said:

 

http://ew.com/tv/2017/06/15/survivor-matt-van-wagenen-tribal-council/

Ugh. Still defending his 10 million HII. Begging the question when he claims that there weren't more than usual. The problem isn't that there were more; the problem is that so many have existed for so long. 

As for Tai being "smart," he was able to find two with the same goddamned clue. Finding idols isn't about smarts, especially with that kind of luck and the constant re-hiding. 

Of course, Survivor ptb never say they did something wrong unless a woman with a social game wins. 

[LadyChatts]

So they want to cast true fans vs recruits so 

On 6/16/2017 at 11:45 AM, ByaNose said:

 

http://ew.com/tv/2017/06/15/survivor-matt-van-wagenen-tribal-council/

 

So they want to cast true fans vs recruits because they think fans have an appreciation for the game and won't let a FTC get ugly?  Also, I wish we could have seen an unedited, complete footage version of S30,.  Probst hyped it, and now this guy said he loved it but it was a different perception with the fans (who knew, you actually want to have more than 1 person to root for).  

Quote

I'd like it better if they did away with dividing it into the outwit/outplay/outlast sections, because of my previously-covered issues of those words being mostly meaningless, but other than that this is a relatively minor and tentatively good change. And the fact that no jury member can ever ask anyone to prove their gameplay by removing their teeth again is a good thing, imo. 

Quote

 

We don't know for sure if they'll do that again yet.  

Since it seems that most feedback regarding that structure is negative, it may get dropped starting in S36, the first season to start shooting after the new format aired.  But because there hadn't been any audience feedback when they filmed S35, that FTC might have the same structure.

 

I hope so, because I really didn't like asking why their game relates to the 3 staples of Survivor.  Other than that, it's a pretty perfect format.  As we've said, the jury has their mind made up anyway.  I'd like them to show less footage of the FTC, and more of the finale, even though that ain't happening.

Edited June 18, 2017 by LadyChatts

[peachmangosteen]

15 hours ago, MissEwa said:

That really was the height of bitterness and while I really disliked Dawn that "question" ruined Brenda for me as well. I'll miss the "my question is you suck" and "tell me why I'm better than you" questions, but I don't do well with deliberate attempts to humiliate. Plus, every time anyone mentions that season toothless Dawn flashes through my head and I do not need that. 

I don't really understand why something like this couldn't come up in the new format though. 

5 hours ago, azshadowwalker said:

Of course, Survivor ptb never say they did something wrong unless a woman with a social game wins. 

1

*applause emoji*

[MissEwa]

8 hours ago, peachmangosteen said:

I don't really understand why something like this couldn't come up in the new format though. 

It could but I feel like it's less likely. 

[piequinn35]

Joe and Kelly beat Jeremy and Woo in Candy Crush. Haha can't believe theres a tv show for candy crush ?

[LadyChatts]

Joe seems to win everything except Survivor.  Maybe he needed to be on a show that didn't involve strategy and having people vote.  The Amazing Race might have been more his speed.

I had seen a preview earlier this week, and it gave away that Joe/Kelley won.  I don't play Candy Crush and don't know if I'll watch again, but it was fun tonight.  You could tell who definitely plays this game.  I'm surprised they didn't have them all play for charity, even though it sounded like Joe is donating his winnings towards that.  

Edited July 10, 2017 by LadyChatts

[azshadowwalker]

On 6/17/2017 at 11:14 PM, simplyme said:

I don't think it had anything to do with age or gender. Dawn screwed up Brenda's vote all on her own. She relied upon Brenda and forged a very close bond with her. When Dawn lost her teeth, she literally told Brenda both, "I couldn't bear to let anyone else see me like that" and "I'll quit if I can't get my teeth back." So when she backstabbed Brenda, Brenda was very hurt.

 

Brenda was playing a fucking game that is based upon lying to people to advance your position. She's fine with the game when it suits her. When it doesn't, she will attack in the most petty, misogynistic way possible. Fuck Brenda. She's walking trash and needs to grow up. Someday, she will be an older woman who isn't so traditionally hot. Hope she remembers what a piece of shit she was when that day comes. 

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Survivor received three Emmy nominations:

OUTSTANDING CINEMATOGRAPHY FOR A REALITY PROGRAM

OUTSTANDING PICTURE EDITING FOR A STRUCTURED OR COMPETITION REALITY PROGRAM

OUTSTANDING CASTING FOR A REALITY PROGRAM

[BK1978]

I am not sure why people were shocked about Brenda in the Dawn situation.  She was an asshole the first time she played as well.

[SVNBob]

54 minutes ago, BK1978 said:

I am not sure why people were shocked about Brenda in the Dawn situation.  She was an asshole the first time she played as well.

I don't recall that being the case.  I do remember Sash being an ass and Chase being wishy-washy, leading to the winner of that season.  And there were a couple of other people having asshole moments, (Jane and the fire, the shoe incedent), but I don't recall specifically any of that behavior from Brenda.

Not that I'm saying it didn't happen.  I just can't remember it if it did.  And even so, it may have been overshadowed by the instances I mentioned, leading to myself and others forgetting it.

And all this might answer your question @BK1978.

[Lantern7]

From Reality Blurred: Ghost Island names and demographics revealed. Basically, if you're over the age of 40 and had been wanting to get on Survivor . . . you're gonna be so disappointed.

[Bryce Lynch]

On 6/17/2017 at 8:02 PM, azshadowwalker said:

Couldn't agree more. Brenda is hateful. The attempt to physically humiliate an older woman is pretty indicative of how older women are treated, in general, and I have no use for anyone who plays that game. Brenda is dead to me. 

I LOVED when Brenda got Dawn to take out her choppers and show that she is as hideous on the outside as on the inside.  Dawn voted off Brenda out of pure bitterness and pettiness because Brenda gave the family visit reward away, after making Dawn her first pick.  Brenda also let Dawn win the immunity challenge, but Dawn stabbed her in the back.  Fine, it's Survivor, but if you are going to act like that much of an ahole, you deserve all the bitterness you get back.  

Plus, Dawn claimed that she was strong and wouldn't have quit if Brenda hadn't found her teeth for her.  So, Brenda gave her a chance to put her money where her mouth was (no pun intended).  

What bothered me even more about Dawn was her constantly going on about what a horrible burden her SIX ADOPTED CHILDREN were.  "Poor, me, I have SIX ADOPTED CHILDREN!"  Well, honey, if you think children are such a burden, you  should have let them be adopted by decent human beings who would see them as a joy.  

[piequinn35]

What?! Dawn deserved what she got, she was a back stabber. Brenda did play well on her second try until Dawn back stabbed her.

[Lantern7]

Burnett & Co. still insist on reinventing the wheel for S35. Natural evolution or unnecessary mutation? You decide.

[ratgirlagogo]

Late posting this but:

http://ew.com/tv/2017/07/28/new-york-post-trump-survivor-cover/

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/7/31/16071448/ny-post-survivor-white-house-scaramucci-priebus

[Eolivet]

On 7/29/2017 at 3:22 PM, Lantern7 said:

Burnett & Co. still insist on reinventing the wheel for S35. Natural evolution or unnecessary mutation? You decide.

I hate this with the fire of a thousand blazing nuns. And it would've drastically impacted the last two seasons. Is this because a woman won again? Be honest, Survivor.

(not sure how much I can say about the article in this particular thread, so putting it behind spoiler tags)

Spoiler

I actually think this changes the winner of Millennials vs. Gen X (no way that Ken doesn't pick David if he has to do it in front of everyone with his ~integrity on the line, and without the backup of two other people voting, as well) and it puts Sarah's win dependent on if she can beat Tai in a fire-making challenge. A new twist should not change the winner of a season.

[LadyChatts]

When watching the HvsV reunion last night, Russell was saying the game was flawed because America doesn't get to vote on the winner.  Probst argued with him and said that's not how Survivor is or every has been, that it's a social experiment and how people work with and adapt to each other.  But isn't that basically what production is doing now?  First the new jury format (which I believe is more a result of MvsGX than KR), and now this.  I don't know if their motive is to eliminate weak players getting taken to the end that are there as goats, or what.  But it's not going to work.  If anything, it's going to screw someone's game if they feel obligated to take someone to the final 3 because of a deal they might have made, rather than force a tie and hope they don't win the tie breaker.  And it's not going to stop people taking weak players to the end, because there's been plenty of players since Survivor's start that were more than happy to just follow an alliance and be satisfied finishing 2nd or 3rd.  Nowadays I think people would rather be a character and try to get invited back again and again.  If this has to do with last season-well, obviously Brad would have picked Troyzan to go to the final 3, but are they really upset about him losing again?  There's still a chance Sarah would have won a tie breaker.  And from the jury speaks videos, it seems like Tai had a good chance of winning, even with the new jury format. 

Edited August 6, 2017 by LadyChatts

[Lantern7]

Looper goes over the worst movies of 2017 thus far, and they start with The Bye-Bye Man. Probably easier to warch than The Emoji Movie, but I still feel a little bad for J-Penn.

[Star Aristille]

31 minutes ago, Lantern7 said:

Looper goes over the worst movies of 2017 thus far, and they start with The Bye-Bye Man. Probably easier to warch than The Emoji Movie, but I still feel a little bad for J-Penn.

Conversely, I hate him and always will hate him, so learning he was in a movie considered among the worst makes me happy and content.

[Eolivet]

Hearts of Reality, which seems like a cross between a charity event and a convention where reality stars pretend they're famous, concluded this past weekend, and Survivor seemed well represented with players both old (Boston Rob, Sandra, Courtney, Todd, Keith Nale, Johnny Fairplay, among others) and new (Sarah from Game Changers, and 10 folks from Millennials vs. Gen X).

Jessica from mvgx had the most extensive coverage on her Twitter, though David, Jay, Adam, Figgy, Sunday, Bret and Ken from that season all posted about it in some way or another on social media (Chris and Michaela were there, too).

(And David's tweet about meeting Boston Rob is just ... the reason they need to keep casting fans.)

Oh -- and there was an article in People magazine about it (media!): 

Edited August 16, 2017 by Eolivet

[simplyme]

I stumbled across this recent article on Fiji's 20th player, the one who quit before the game even started:

https://medium.com/a-tribe-of-one/fijis-20th-player-130871f7b4b3

In case anyone else is interested.

[LadyChatts]

I think I'm more curious who they weren't sure on for Cook Islands that they might need to replace them.  

I forget about her until I see her name brought up as a joke whenever there's talk of a returning player season/twist. 

[azshadowwalker]

On 8/24/2017 at 9:33 PM, simplyme said:

I stumbled across this recent article on Fiji's 20th player, the one who quit before the game even started:

https://medium.com/a-tribe-of-one/fijis-20th-player-130871f7b4b3

In case anyone else is interested.

God, I hope they never get desperate enough to bring her back. If she couldn't handle being in a hotel room because her iPod was out of batteries, how would she handle being unable to get off the island? I can't believe she actually suggested that she should go back out there. 

Oh, yeah. Casting sucks. 

[LadyChatts]

http://www.cbs.com/shows/survivor/cast/

S35 cast officially revealed!

[Lantern7]

Oh shit, it's an ancestor of Arnold Judas Rimmer!

Meh. Any out-and-out headcases from the profiles alone? I'm lazy.

[LadyChatts]

Well, Roark's inspiration is Beyonce's daughter and her claim to fame is having a picture taken of her everyday of her life. Hobbies include reading Yelp reviews.  Simone's hobby is complaining, and she liked Michaela because she judged people (sounds more like another Corinne).  

Roark is a Max/Corinne recruit so I'm not surprised she seems to be trying so hard.  Oh, and Alan says no one will have played the game the way he plans on playing it (which is why he can't compare to past Survivors).

Edited August 30, 2017 by LadyChatts

[ByaNose]

I really like Desi. She's looks like the total package. I'm surprised they didn't cast 20 which has been the norm, right? 

[LadyChatts]

I think it depends on the theme and/or what CBS may want.  And regardless of what Probst says about picking the theme after the cast, they definitely go for the theme and cast those around it. 

It's starting a week later than it normally does, with only an hour premiere.  When was the last time they had an hour premiere?

Probst seems super excited for this season, so I can pretty much guess how I'm going to feel at the end.

ETA: So I've made it through the videos of the women, and I'm unimpressed.  Most put me to sleep, so I hope they are better on the show.  I didn't like Roark's bio, but she's one of the only women who stood out to me, along with Desi and Jessica.  Ashley shows some promise.  She doesn't want to depend on the men, so we'll see if that works out for her.  

Edited August 31, 2017 by LadyChatts

[Star Aristille]

18 hours ago, LadyChatts said:

http://www.cbs.com/shows/survivor/cast/

S35 cast officially revealed!

And I've just finished putting up threads for each one of them!:)

[Eolivet]

And Jeff Probst gave an interview to the Hollywood Reporter about the new season:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/survivor-jeff-probst-explains-everything-know-season-35-1033552

[LadyChatts]

I think Hustlers takes the trophy as being the dumbest tribe concept ever.

Also from the above: Jeff is excited by who winds up with the LA. 

http://ew.com/tv/2017/08/31/survivor-heroes-healers-hustlers-jeff-probst-players-to-watch/

Jeff singles out Dr. Mike, Desiree, Ben, Chrissy (calls her a triple threat-smart, has a successful career, and will lie about her age), Alan (is looking forward to him at TC), Patrick, Ryan, and Ali as his players to watch.

Edited September 1, 2017 by LadyChatts

[SVNBob]

According to an interview in Josh Wigler's new podcast (same person as the above linked Hollywood Reporter article and promoted therein, but linked here via RHAP), it turns out that Ali and Patrick were already acquainted with each other prior to Survivor.  They both attended Auburn at the same time.  How well they knew each other has yet to be determined.

[LadyChatts]

Maybe one of the secrets Jeff talked about the contestants having this year?

[Daisy]

On 8/6/2017 at 4:11 PM, LadyChatts said:

When watching the HvsV reunion last night, Russell was saying the game was flawed because America doesn't get to vote on the winner.  Probst argued with him and said that's not how Survivor is or every has been, that it's a social experiment and how people work with and adapt to each other.  But isn't that basically what production is doing now?  First the new jury format (which I believe is more a result of MvsGX than KR), and now this.  I don't know if their motive is to eliminate weak players getting taken to the end that are there as goats, or what.  But it's not going to work.  If anything, it's going to screw someone's game if they feel obligated to take someone to the final 3 because of a deal they might have made, rather than force a tie and hope they don't win the tie breaker.  And it's not going to stop people taking weak players to the end, because there's been plenty of players since Survivor's start that were more than happy to just follow an alliance and be satisfied finishing 2nd or 3rd.  Nowadays I think people would rather be a character and try to get invited back again and again.  If this has to do with last season-well, obviously Brad would have picked Troyzan to go to the final 3, but are they really upset about him losing again?  There's still a chance Sarah would have won a tie breaker.  And from the jury speaks videos, it seems like Tai had a good chance of winning, even with the new jury format. 

 

On 8/6/2017 at 3:54 PM, Eolivet said:

I hate this with the fire of a thousand blazing nuns. And it would've drastically impacted the last two seasons. Is this because a woman won again? Be honest, Survivor.

(not sure how much I can say about the article in this particular thread, so putting it behind spoiler tags)

  Reveal hidden contents

I actually think this changes the winner of Millennials vs. Gen X (no way that Ken doesn't pick David if he has to do it in front of everyone with his ~integrity on the line, and without the backup of two other people voting, as well) and it puts Sarah's win dependent on if she can beat Tai in a fire-making challenge. A new twist should not change the winner of a season.

i should have quoted the news re: the new final tribal too. 

I had "issues" with it - but i also like it, and i am going to assume if it can/will get better the more times it's done. however at the same time. as mentioned up thread. I don't mind  the other way - it's not always because of the "My question is - you suck" or Rats/Snakes, or "Pick a Number between 1 and 1000 (then realising that it was a reference to someone's favourite movie so it wasn't so 'out of the air."  - but you also get the moments that shock you - ie: Kat evil eyeing everyone - then standing up and going, yah you know, life too short to be bitter, i'm just gonna ask my question (and if i recall - a pretty good one too). 

 

I do think in the open format you could get more 'Stephen v. JT" dynamics like "um no, what?" 

I also think there could be more 'transparency" (like okay so I had this deal with A, and A had this deal with all of you so that's why A tried to get my idol, etc etc.)

re: the final five thing. Why?  like for god sakes. just go back to a final two. this way whoever wins immunity - picks whomever, and they go home anyway. I hate FInal 3s. the article did say it gets back to the "choose your final opponent" but you still have to go with a dumbass fire challenge.  i'm sort of glad i read this (i generally read NOTHING about survivor so i am virgin-eyes, but.. yah i read it LOL)

[Eolivet]

2 hours ago, Daisy said:

like for god sakes. just go back to a final two. this way whoever wins immunity - picks whomever, and they go home anyway.

I don't want to go back to a final 2, that's too much The Winner and The Goat for me. And final 3s have resulted in a few close final tribal councils -- because you can't just pick the goatiest goat to go with you (I'm reminded of Yul vs. Ozzy in Cook Islands, with Becky there, too.)

But it makes me nervous knowing that there are some winners who probably never win with this new rule. I suppose you might say that for final 2 vs final 3, but it's not nearly as apparent. You can win Survivor without winning a challenge. Sandra did it twice! If you can rub two brain cells together to make enough relationships to get you not voted out, your chance to plead your case for a million dollars should not rely on your ability to rub two sticks together.

[Daisy]

On 9/1/2017 at 11:40 AM, Eolivet said:

I don't want to go back to a final 2, that's too much The Winner and The Goat for me. And final 3s have resulted in a few close final tribal councils -- because you can't just pick the goatiest goat to go with you (I'm reminded of Yul vs. Ozzy in Cook Islands, with Becky there, too.)

But it makes me nervous knowing that there are some winners who probably never win with this new rule. I suppose you might say that for final 2 vs final 3, but it's not nearly as apparent. You can win Survivor without winning a challenge. Sandra did it twice! If you can rub two brain cells together to make enough relationships to get you not voted out, your chance to plead your case for a million dollars should not rely on your ability to rub two sticks together.

The thing is  for most Survivors (I did a post on this before) - it's not close. most winners blow out the other two sky-high. in my mind instead of Winner v Goat (which - we really didn't have for a lot of seasons 1  through 13/16) - you have Winner v. Goat + Goat. 

 

but i agree with you. what if you have a Becky/Sundra situation and CAN NOT do fire. like. holy crap. 

Edited September 2, 2017 by Daisy
clearing some things up.

[KimberStormer]

Yeah, Yul/Ozzy was a huge fluke.  First of all it was the first Final 3 so nobody was planning for it.  Secondly Yul had the single most ridiculous idol in the history of the game which not only could be used after the votes are read but STILL WORKED AT F4.  Without which, I think even Becky might have voted Yul out at F4, and it would be the triumphant crowning Ozzy always expected out of Survivor (and fair enough really, considering his challenge performance that season) and much more similar to the usual F3, a winner and two goats (I say this with all due love for Sundra.)

I think this change will be TERRRRRRRRRRIBLE and I hate it, it makes no sense to me at all, but ain't that true of them all.  I guess we'll see how it plays out.

[Daisy]

8 hours ago, KimberStormer said:

Yeah, Yul/Ozzy was a huge fluke.  First of all it was the first Final 3 so nobody was planning for it.  Secondly Yul had the single most ridiculous idol in the history of the game which not only could be used after the votes are read but STILL WORKED AT F4.  Without which, I think even Becky might have voted Yul out at F4, and it would be the triumphant crowning Ozzy always expected out of Survivor (and fair enough really, considering his challenge performance that season) and much more similar to the usual F3, a winner and two goats (I say this with all due love for Sundra.)

I think this change will be TERRRRRRRRRRIBLE and I hate it, it makes no sense to me at all, but ain't that true of them all.  I guess we'll see how it plays out.

Terry's was the same, right? I think that's it. 
I do agree with that . however. let's even say had it been final 2 and Yul v. Ozzy - I do think it's still 1 vote difference. Yul did say he deliberately held back on some challenges. (and i could see that). (also. if it was final two. yul/becky think they can take out Ozzy, going with the idea that Yul is holding back, woila. 

Okay so let's look  at this again - and we can see if the Third person makes a difference or not. 

Cook Islands: 5-4 Victory for Yul - (Becky is on the Jury, it's probably a 6-4 vote. still close)
Fiji: moot - Earl sweeps the votes
China: 4-2-1 vote. If Courtney is not there - does Amanda get Denise/James vote? I'd argue NOT - because Amanda IS there and they STILL don't vote for her.  (Amanda won the last tribal - so she probably KO's Todd - but it doesn't mitigate Courtney's tribal performance imo). 

Micronesia is a final 2. Vote is 5-3.  (excuse me while i fume at this for a moment. Poor Cirie)
Okay. Anyhoo. Obviously not a goat situation for Amanda though she played it like one

Gabon - 4-3-0 vote split -  if Sugar actually had closed out the game - is this different? if sugar didn't do like 50 percent of the things she did would any of the Onions vote for her? Dunno

 

Tocancins is a final 2. and Moot because JT sweeps. You could argue Erin gets 'hosed' because she didn't make an argument or if it was a final 3 set up Taj could have done something at final four - and thus - maybe eliminate the perfect game from JT. but again. moot. 

 

Samoa -7-2-0 split. Everyone hates Russell except John and Shannon, and Mick was useless. 

HvV - 6-3 -0 vote

Nicaragua - 5-4-0 split.

Redemption Island - 8-1-0 split. 

South Pacific - 6-4-0 split

One World - 7-2-0 split

Philippines - 6-1-1 split. (reminder - Malcolm was not in the final 3 so it could have been closer i bet had he been)

Caramoan  - John Sweeps the vote

Blood vs. water - 7-1-0

Cagayan - 8-1 (final 2 - but Woo was dumb. must point this out - and I don't think Woo smokes Kass either which is why I'm loathe to say "moot")

SJdS - 5-2-1 split. (Missy's only vote was Baylor. so no Missy - 5-3 split or 6-2 who knows)

Worlds Apart - 6-1-1

Cambodia/Second Chances - 10-0-0 Jeremy Sweeps. 

Kaoh Rong - 5-2 -0 split

MvGenX- 10-0-0 split (why i dunno)

Game Changers - 7-3-0 split. 

so i mean if the argument by a lot of people including production is that the Final 3 eliminates the "goat" factor, I'd argue - no it doesn't.  the third person either gets ZERO votes - or gets one vote. in the history of the final 3 - the 3 Juror member doesn't even get 2 votes. 

arguably - for a lot of seasons - it's so obvious that the winner is the winner - the other player is a goat too. I think honestly you'd be able to properly argue/debate with two people why they should/shouldn't. vs. three. i think with 1 v 1 - it's more. I did. vs. I did. the third player is always just there 


 

 

 

[LadyChatts]

I'm curious to hear Probst's explanation of the new final 3 twist.  I just want to see what spin he puts on it.  I was hesitant on the new jury format, but it did work out for the best, and hopefully eliminates anyone using sob stories to win.  This?  I can't see how I'll be thinking anything positive of it.  Those last challenges can be endurance, which can ultimatemly come down to luck.  So the best player in the game might lose because he/she lost their balance or (if they know about the twist ahead of time it might bring added pressure).  So a sure fire winner could get eliminate because of luck, and three of the worst players in the game could land in the final 3. 

Edited September 2, 2017 by LadyChatts

[Oholibamah]

23 minutes ago, Daisy said:

Terry's was the same, right? I think that's it. 
I do agree with that . however. let's even say had it been final 2 and Yul v. Ozzy - I do think it's still 1 vote difference. Yul did say he deliberately held back on some challenges. (and i could see that). (also. if it was final two. yul/becky think they can take out Ozzy, going with the idea that Yul is holding back, woila. 

Okay so let's look  at this again - and we can see if the Third person makes a difference or not. 

Cook Islands: 5-4 Victory for Yul - (Becky is on the Jury, it's probably a 6-4 vote. still close)
Fiji: moot - Earl sweeps the votes
China: 4-2-1 vote. If Courtney is not there - does Amanda get Denise/James vote? I'd argue NOT - because Amanda IS there and they STILL don't vote for her.  (Amanda won the last tribal - so she probably KO's Todd - but it doesn't mitigate Courtney's tribal performance imo). 

Micronesia is a final 2. Vote is 5-3.  (excuse me while i fume at this for a moment. Poor Cirie)
Okay. Anyhoo. Obviously not a goat situation for Amanda though she played it like one

Gabon - 4-3-0 vote split -  if Sugar actually had closed out the game - is this different? if sugar didn't do like 50 percent of the things she did would any of the Onions vote for her? Dunno

 

Tocancins is a final 2. and Moot because JT sweeps. You could argue Erin gets 'hosed' because she didn't make an argument or if it was a final 3 set up Taj could have done something at final four - and thus - maybe eliminate the perfect game from JT. but again. moot. 

 

Samoa -7-2-0 split. Everyone hates Russell except John and Shannon, and Mick was useless. 

HvV - 6-3 -0 vote

Nicaragua - 5-4-0 split.

Redemption Island - 8-1-0 split. 

South Pacific - 6-4-0 split

One World - 7-2-0 split

Philippines - 6-1-1 split. (reminder - Malcolm was not in the final 3 so it could have been closer i bet had he been)

Caramoan  - John Sweeps the vote

Blood vs. water - 7-1-0

Cagayan - 8-1 (final 2 - but Woo was dumb. must point this out - and I don't think Woo smokes Kass either which is why I'm loathe to say "moot")

SJdS - 5-2-1 split. (Missy's only vote was Baylor. so no Missy - 5-3 split or 6-2 who knows)

Worlds Apart - 6-1-1

Cambodia/Second Chances - 10-0-0 Jeremy Sweeps. 

Kaoh Rong - 5-2 -0 split

MvGenX- 10-0-0 split (why i dunno)

Game Changers - 7-3-0 split. 

so i mean if the argument by a lot of people including production is that the Final 3 eliminates the "goat" factor, I'd argue - no it doesn't.  the third person either gets ZERO votes - or gets one vote. in the history of the final 3 - the 3 Juror member doesn't even get 2 votes. 

arguably - for a lot of seasons - it's so obvious that the winner is the winner - the other player is a goat too. I think honestly you'd be able to properly argue/debate with two people why they should/shouldn't. vs. three. i think with 1 v 1 - it's more. I did. vs. I did. the third player is always just there 


 

 

 

This is an interesting summary of the F3 seasons, but it assumes the top 2 vote-getters actually end up in the F2 together. Had there been a F3 Immunity challenge and subsequent F2 in these seasons, wouldn't the final Immunity winner likely take the player who got 0 votes? That increases the "Goat" factor. Make it Ozzy v. Becky, Parvati v. Russell, Aubry v. Tai, or Chase/Fabio v. Sash, and we no longer have any close nail-biting votes. Maybe a Hannah/Ken, Cassandra/Dreamz, Spencer/Tasha, Albert/Coach or Carolyn/Will FTC would have been more interesting than what we got, but would they have been more satisfying? I think F3 is a good compromise between F2 where strong players can get screwed at F3 (i.e. Rob C, Kathy) and this ridiculous, unbalanced new twist they've cooked up.

[Daisy]

1 minute ago, Oholibamah said:

This is an interesting summary of the F3 seasons, but it assumes the top 2 vote-getters actually end up in the F2 together. Had there been a F3 Immunity challenge and subsequent F2 in these seasons, wouldn't the final Immunity winner likely take the player who got 0 votes? That increases the "Goat" factor. Make it Ozzy v. Becky, Parvati v. Russell, Aubry v. Tai, or Chase/Fabio v. Sash, and we no longer have any close nail-biting votes. Maybe a Hannah/Ken, Cassandra/Dreamz, Spencer/Tasha, Albert/Coach or Carolyn/Will FTC would have been more interesting than what we got, but would they have been more satisfying? I think F3 is a good compromise between F2 where strong players can get screwed at F3 (i.e. Rob C, Kathy) and this ridiculous, unbalanced new twist they've cooked up.

I'm tired right now (and closed all the windows LOL) and my Surivor-pedia mind can't recall too much for a lot of stuff. 
yes you could argue the final immunity winner takes the player who gets 0 votes - but then. who wins the final 3 challenge? what if it's Tai? (I DO think sometimes too it depends who wins - and who they take). i just think back to Richard - he knew he wasn't going to win if he took Rudy - but he could not Take Kelly. hence why he stepped down (and hopes Kelly wins because kelly knows she can't take Rudy either). 

YOU oops, you could argue the satisfying bit - and you could win there, but .. i don't know. there have been winners who won (John. comes to mind. Adam etc) who smoke the field. and i'm not satisfied with that - i'd rather have the drama of the vote ;)