Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
Tara Ariano

S33.E10: Million Dollar Gamble

Recommended Posts

Jessica's and Chris' interviews are interesting and do shed more light on the situations we've been discussing. Jessica says that she was afraid of changing her vote making her look like a flipper -- and her opinion that flippers were being targeted by both sides. There is also some suggestion that David was aggressive at TC, possibly to try get votes directed at himself so that he could play his idol.

Chris Hammond in Parade

Jessica Lewis in Parade

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

2 hours ago, BarneySays said:

I think that what has made this season so enjoyable is that these are the most irrational of players.  Any other time, one of them would have decided it was wiser to change their vote than to go to rocks.  Of course, Jess regrets her folly now. 

Actually, she doesn't. See the quotes from an interview in her thread. She's aware that if she'd flipped, her game would have been completely dead. As difficult as it was to not flip and chance rocks, it was the right decision for her. Unfortunately, she was the one who got the black rock.

Still, that was a 1 in 6 (17ish%) chance of her game ending versus pretty much a 100% chance of not being able to win if she flipped. She was playing to win, not for three more days.

I don't see her decision as folly at all. It only appears that way because she actually got the black rock, but she had a greater than 83% chance of drawing a white rock instead.

  • Like 15

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, BarneySays said:

I think that what has made this season so enjoyable is that these are the most irrational of players.  Any other time, one of them would have decided it was wiser to change their vote than to go to rocks. 

I don't believe "irrational" means what you seem to think it means.

1 hour ago, iMonrey said:

I think the line was firmly drawn in the sand and neither side wanted to go back to camp as the minority alliance. That's why both sides stubbornly refused to change votes, even if it meant picking rocks. Yeah it might save their necks but if they switch their vote they wind up in the bottom four and will probably get picked off anyhow.

Now this is rational.  So is this:

57 minutes ago, simplyme said:

Actually, she doesn't. See the quotes from an interview in her thread. She's aware that if she'd flipped, her game would have been completely dead. As difficult as it was to not flip and chance rocks, it was the right decision for her. Unfortunately, she was the one who got the black rock.

Still, that was a 1 in 6 (17ish%) chance of her game ending versus pretty much a 100% chance of not being able to win if she flipped. She was playing to win, not for three more days.

I don't see her decision as folly at all. It only appears that way because she actually got the black rock, but she had a greater than 83% chance of drawing a white rock instead.

Yes, people are being extremely guilty of what poker players call "results-based thinking".  As in, "Of course when I bet those pocket kings hard, the guy with ace-eight offsuit hit his ace.  I should have just folded them preflop."  You've got to play the percentages, and specifically the percentages to win the game, not just to guarantee yourself three more days.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, SlackerInc said:

You've got to play the percentages, and specifically the percentages to win the game, not just to guarantee yourself three more days.

Exactly! I love rocks because it's the exact opposite of three-more-days/anyone-but-me gameplay. It's playing to win by taking a calculated risk - in this case, if you pick rocks, you have a 1/6 chance of going home, and a 1/2 chance of taking out someone in the opposite alliance... or you flip and guarantee your alliance is in the minority and that you'd get zero votes at FTC, which you won't make anyway, because your alliance is in the minority, and no longer your alliance - and the other one doesn't need you. 

Jessica's post-game interviews suggest the only thing she regrets is picking up the first rock she touched - and rightly so.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/25/2016 at 11:44 PM, JudyObscure said:

What a marvelous idea.

 

Whoa!  I hate that sort of religious bigotry.  Now, I wonder if he wants all our American Muslims deported.

If find this stance (intolerance) on Christians/Christianity from people who identify as being 'liberals'/left odd considering how they invariably and vehemently stick up for Islam. Whilst is true that some people who claim to be Christians hold views that would be offensive to members of the LGBT  community however it pales in comparison to how gays are viewed and treated in the vast majority of Muslim countries (i.e in some Muslim countries homosexuals are still executed) and/or Muslim communities in general.  Yet left leaning individuals come to defense of the 'Religion of Peace' at the drop of a hat and have no problems rubbing shoulders with followers of that faith.  *shrugs*

Edited by Synth
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

On 11/23/2016 at 10:25 PM, Ms Blue Jay said:

I like David.  David only marvels at himself in private.  If he even does.  Does he?  It's Jeff that chooses to bring this up.  What really shocked me, was that Zeke kind of turned on him at tribal.  I get that they're mortal enemies or whatever, but what the fuck was with Zeke being all like, "What, are you gonna cry?"  David had zero reaction, he just diplomatically smiled.  

I'm not totally sticking up for them because I thought they were mean too, but the fact that Zeke said it makes me wonder if David only marvels at himself in private, or if it's a running theme with him (edited out for our viewing pleasure) that the rest of them are tiring of.

On 11/24/2016 at 0:46 AM, blackwing said:

Is it bad that I continue to hate Taylor even though we only see him on the jury?  I didn't think it possible, but with his Miley Cyrus shaved only on one side haircut, he looks more douchetastic than ever.

If feeling that way is wrong, I don't want to be right :)  I had what I thought was an irrational dislike of that doofus from the second he appeared on my TV; this far into the season I now find myself perfectly rational :)  Did anyone else think that they are amusing themselves at Ponderosa by gluing the hair Taylor shaved onto Chris' head?  He seemed a lot less bald at TC!

On 11/24/2016 at 9:22 AM, AZChristian said:

My first thought was that Brett came out of a closet that he just built on the way to the reward. In other words, he told Zeke was gay as a way to bond.  But is he really?  I'm honestly not sure.  If he's fought his whole life to keep that a secret (Boston cop, ex-military), is he going to be so matter-of-fact about telling someone on national TV with a camera in his face?  He may be gay as much as he is a funeral director.

I think it's the generational thing he says it is - my gay friends are all @age 48-65, and none of them care that people know it, but they don't go around announcing it.

On 11/24/2016 at 10:46 AM, waving feather said:

I like both equally. A player can do both depending on their circumstances (which are sometimes out of their control, like a tribe swap). Laying low as a choice to take the target off you is not a "goat" to me. Laying low because you are lazy and not seizing the opportunities presented to you makes you a "goat". Big moves for the sake of making them doesn't impress me either. Like Adam, always talking about making moves that sometimes don't make sense. But lately he's cooled off on that so that's good.

This season has less goats than usual. Everyone came to play. The only ones I can think of is Bret, Sunday and maybe Will.

I'm giving Will a pass on everything because he is just a high school boy - getting on Survivor and making it past the merge is awesome for him!  For everyone else, it's up to what the jury wants in the end.  I still think Amber is the biggest goat to ever tag along to FTC, but she won because people hated her boyfriend.

On 11/24/2016 at 0:19 PM, Ms Blue Jay said:

Boston Rob is not enough for you?  He's been on like 5 seasons of Survivor and Amazing Race too, right?  I like him and I don't even WANT to like him. I hate how much I like him.  Anyways, he's like the prototypical reality show personality that people like, and yeah I think he's from Boston.

I was surprised that Zeke didn't care that Chris was ousted?  And then I was surprised that Bret didn't care either?  There was a lot I didn't understand this episode.

The very one!  I love him in spite of myself too, but I actually didn't like him at all on his first 2 seasons of Survivor, and only got on board his train on his first AR.

I think the reason no one really cared that Chris was ousted was what Bret said at TC - they all realize that they are playing for themselves.

On 11/24/2016 at 0:25 PM, laurakaye said:

There we go!  That's who he reminds me of!  I understand the Jay/Ramirez comparison, but I don't like it.  Jay seems like a decent person, a good kid.  I think I'm rooting for Jay to win the whole thing right now.  He got a bad rap with his connection to Tayls, but I think Jay's got a lot more smarts and intuition than anyone on the Millennials tribe.  Even though everyone knows he has an idol now, I'd love it if he could just coast through a couple more TC's and not have to play it, as he sits back and watches everyone else go after each other with a wee smirk on his face.

I am rooting for him too!  I think he's got more going on because he works in real estate, rather than barista/surfing instructor/etc. that the rest of them all seem to do.  He's used to dealing with a larger variety of people and having to find something to like about them and suck up what he doesn't like to make a living.

On 11/24/2016 at 7:37 PM, Lingo said:

@AliShabaz: Well no. Like I said, the tie-break rules were different in at least Seasons 1-4. They do change rules between seasons sometimes. I have no reason to believe these particular rules were made up on the spot mid-filming at any point. In fact, When Tom and Ian were discussing the possibility of a tie in Season 10 they knew it would come to rocks if the tie held up, and the details of how that would go down, even though it hadn't yet occurred in a TC up to that point. So they managed to avoid the tie (someone flipped, I don't remember who). The most likely reason they knew the tie-break rules is because it was in the rules they are given to read before the season begins.

I know Probst sometimes improvises things in novel situations, such as when he allowed two tribes to negotiate an end to a reward challenge once when it had come to a stalemate and everyone was exhausted. But I think the voting rules are pretty much all lawyered out in detail in advance, so to speak.

I read years ago (probably here or, more likely, on PTV) that the reason each season has a new name is so that Mark B. can call each a pilot and avoid lawsuits if the rules are different from season to season.  But they do lock down the rules before each season starts, with the exception apparently of Jeff giving in to unanimous tribe/cast requests once in a while.

On 11/25/2016 at 6:37 PM, Stinamaia said:

My problem with Michelle is not that she is a Christian. It that she is a creationist.  I do have a problem talking to creationists because it comes up in conversation and that makes it difficult for both sides.  I also have a problem because most creationists insist that their belief be taught as science in schools and also do not want evolution to be taught. I feel this imposes their religious beliefs on me and others.  There are other issues too,  but I don't know that Michelle holds any of those beliefs although it's not far fetched to suppose she does.  

Actually, what creationists want is for creationism and evolution to both be taught, with the evidence and the opposition to each theory being presented.

On 11/27/2016 at 0:26 PM, iMonrey said:

So I see that the editors still lovingly spend time on Taylor even though his ass was booted last week. Which supports the very strong likelihood he'll be back for another season because the show thinks he's just hilarious. That also supports my theory that a lot of the crap he pulled was being egged on by the producers telling him what a great character he was and how much the audience was going to love him. He just seems really proud of every goofy thing he says or does.

Ugh!  Say it isn't so!!!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Synth said:

If find this stance (intolerance) on Christians/Christianity from people who identify as being 'liberals'/left odd considering how they invariably and vehemently stick up for Islam. Whilst is true that some people who claim to be Christians hold views that would be offensive to members of the LGBT  community however it pales in comparison to how gays are viewed and treated in the vast majority of Muslim countries (i.e in some Muslim countries homosexuals are still executed) and/or Muslim communities in general.  Yet left leaning individuals come to defense of the 'Religion of Peace' at the drop of a hat and have no problems rubbing shoulders with followers of that faith.  *shrugs*

You're right, there's a lot of inconsistency in this regard on the left.  But not all of us.  Famous liberal atheists like Bill Maher and Sam Harris, and unfamous people like me who love them both, do not defend Islam at all.

20 minutes ago, princelina said:

Actually, what creationists want is for creationism and evolution to both be taught, with the evidence and the opposition to each theory being presented.

Which is an absurd thing to want.  If we do that, we may as well teach about "turtles all the way down" while we're at it.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/26/2016 at 3:14 PM, SVNBob said:

Except in Survivor, where it sometimes means "everyone except one".  People voted out when everyone else votes for them (a 7 to 1 vote, say) are voted out "unanimously".

Well, Todd (and Amanda? Was she there when it happened? Probably...) gave him one and told him how to find the other, so he didn't need to tell him/them.  And some of the others found them in his pants, so they kinda knew without him saying anything.  So I don't know if James really counts for "not telling anyone you have an HII."

Er, no, these idols were way too big to fit in anyone's pants. Sorry to burst your bubble :) 

On 11/27/2016 at 11:29 PM, peachmangosteen said:

I agree with this, but it seems like Bret is purposefully keeping that from the remaining players for whatever reason and it's not just a 'it didn't come up' type thing, so essentially he is kinda closeted on Survivor.

Am I such a weirdo that I absolutely do not care what anyone's sexual preference is? I feel for Bret's "need to hide" way back then, but, and seriously, is it still anyone's business besides the people involved? It feels so outdated to me to still be talking about if someone is gay or not. Who cares? Really. Who cares?  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, SlackerInc said:

Which is an absurd thing to want.  If we do that, we may as well teach about "turtles all the way down" while we're at it.

Not really - there's evidence for both.  I don't know how to post links but you can google it if you're interested :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

You know, reading all the posts for all episodes, I'm starting to think we all see what we want to see - or in some cases what we don't want to see :) 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, NutMeg said:

Er, no, these idols were way too big to fit in anyone's pants. Sorry to burst your bubble :)  

Not while he was wearing them. He wrapped them up in a spare pair of pants and people snooping unwrapped them. Sorry to burst your bubble. ;)

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Exactly.  From the original TWoP recap by Linda "Miss Alli" Holmes:

Quote

That night, Jaime goes through James's bag, hoping to find something.... But right or wrong (more of the latter), in the darkness, Jamie goes through the bag enough to ascertain that James has two of the squares like the one she and Erik have, which are wrapped in his clothes. She knows that James was just kidnapped, so she knows he has fairly well-developed information about the hidden idols, so if he has these wrapped up, she's pretty confident that idols are what they are. "He has two of them," she emphasizes to Erik.

But given said clothes (specifically pants) were in his bag, it could be equally said that he hid the idols in his bag.  However, the point was that people knew he had those idols without him having to tell anyone.  As opposed to Adam this season, who has an Idol that apparently no one knows about because he hasn't said a word about it since finding it.

Edited by SVNBob
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Hell I've forgotten Adam has an idol. And he's been such a mess at recent tribal councils that I bet the other players are probably convinced he doesn't have one, which I guess, great for him.

Edited by truthaboutluv
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, NutMeg said:

Am I such a weirdo that I absolutely do not care what anyone's sexual preference is? I feel for Bret's "need to hide" way back then, but, and seriously, is it still anyone's business besides the people involved? It feels so outdated to me to still be talking about if someone is gay or not. Who cares? Really. Who cares?  

Sadly, some people still care.  Although I'm not sure anyone on this season of Survivor does.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, NutMeg said:

Am I such a weirdo that I absolutely do not care what anyone's sexual preference is? I feel for Bret's "need to hide" way back then, but, and seriously, is it still anyone's business besides the people involved? It feels so outdated to me to still be talking about if someone is gay or not. Who cares? Really. Who cares?  

A lot of people do care, sadly. 

9 hours ago, NutMeg said:

You know, reading all the posts for all episodes, I'm starting to think we all see what we want to see - or in some cases what we don't want to see :) 

Well, yes. Exactly!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/25/2016 at 6:26 AM, Haleth said:

I thought I was the only one who didn't get the Ken love.  Yeah, he's nice to look at but in my book that doesn't deserve a win.  He really hasn't done anything strategic that I can remember and he hasn't shown himself to be good at most challenges.

Are you kidding? Next to Chris, he's the best at physical challenges. He already won individual immunity, and I'll bet he wins it again. Earlier in the game, whenever there was anything involving strength or endurance or throwing at targets, Ken was always the go to guy, and he'd get it done. During one challenge, he was the ONLY person throwing the ball for his team. Everyone else just stood around like a bunch of lazy asses and watched. Also, Ken is one of the few people who actually works around camp. My gal oohs and aahs when she sees him chopping coconuts because of the pectoral action. It's enough to make a guy jealous!

On 11/25/2016 at 4:37 PM, Stinamaia said:

My problem with Michelle is not that she is a Christian. It's that she is a creationist.

And she believes in dragons and probably fairies and trolls and little tiny green men too! Not missing her AT ALL!

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post

Quote

Probst keeps telling us just how fabulous and fantastic the game of Survivor is. Well ... how fabulous can it be if the winner is, in part, selected by some purely random event? That smells like complete bullshit to me!

Randomness has always been a significant part of this show- from the very beginning, with the selection of tribes, to complete randomness like the direction of a sudden wind during a competition.  I understand the frustration over it, but it has always played a role.

Quote

I think Bret is so much smarter than people give him credit for being.  So much so, that I didn't believe any word coming out of his pie hole, when he had his conversation over a beer with Zeke.  There is no question that in my mind that he can read the room rather easily.  Given his line of work, he would have to be able to do that.

I would posit that he learned to read the room as a young gay man, observing cues and monitoring his conduct to not expose himself as gay.  I generally agree that he is playing a smart game thus far. 

  I don't believe "irrational" means what you seem to think it means.

Whoa.  I assure you I am quite well-versed in the meaning of "rational" and I was applying it in its game theory sense.  The rational move is the smart move, the move with the least risk of loss.  In this case, it was most certainly irrational for each of the players to risk their life in the game on a random draw.  The fact that Jessica didn't want to be seen as responsible for hannah leaving does not make her decision rational.  It explains her reasoning, nothing more. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

I just watched Jessica's Ponderosa and I got to say, who is this woman? The only thing I remember from Jessica is her all time confused face like a person who is in a foreign country and doesn't know the language. In ponderosa she is smiling, making jokes and has a hundred tattoos! Where was this woman all along? Why did we never see her smile in the game?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/24/2016 at 9:38 AM, ghoulina said:

Sure. I think replying, "Everyone in David's alliance raise your hands" would have sufficed. Taunting, "Are you going to cry now?" was so immature and below the belt. No respect for that. 

It seems to be David's go to play, when the going gets tough he whips out the manipulative tears and faux insecurity.   I'm sure there are a few people on the tribe that see through it and are pretty sick of it by this point.

Edited by Boilergal
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, BarneySays said:

Whoa.  I assure you I am quite well-versed in the meaning of "rational" and I was applying it in its game theory sense.  The rational move is the smart move, the move with the least risk of loss.  In this case, it was most certainly irrational for each of the players to risk their life in the game on a random draw.  The fact that Jessica didn't want to be seen as responsible for hannah leaving does not make her decision rational.

It most certainly was not irrational, for the reasons several people explained here (and anyone well versed in game theory or behavioral economics will tell you that risk aversion or fear of loss is a classic example of irrationality in choice dynamics).  Or, for that matter, as Jessica expressed quite well herself, as quoted in her thread.  Based on your inaccurate characterization of her explanation, you either didn't read that, or utterly failed to understand it, despite her spelling out her thinking very clearly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/27/2016 at 11:21 PM, LanceM said:

Yeah I am not sure what Bret's drinking beer on a reward or the way he is acted on Survivor has anything to do with his job as a police officer.  A job for which he has been honored by the state of Massachusetts with heroism back in 2014.

Lots of cops get medals . The cops who murdered the sons of two different close friends were given medals, too. And I would say his choice to be a blatant bully on this episode has a lot of bearing on his job and how he treats people. That wasn't game. That was being a dick because he knew he could get away with it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

I thought I was the only one who didn't get the Ken love.  Yeah, he's nice to look at but in my book that doesn't deserve a win.  He really hasn't done anything strategic that I can remember and he hasn't shown himself to be good at most challenges.

We're 10 episodes in now and I've yet to discern any personality on this guy whatsoever. He is utterly lacking a personality. You can read all you want into his behavior (he's "quiet" or "shy" or "introspective") but all I see is someone who is personality deprived.

Quote

I think Bret is so much smarter than people give him credit for being.  So much so, that I didn't believe any word coming out of his pie hole, when he had his conversation over a beer with Zeke.  There is no question that in my mind that he can read the room rather easily.  Given his line of work, he would have to be able to do that.

Anyone who thinks police officers must be evil geniuses who have superhuman powers of perception haven't known many cops in their lives. Not trying to disparage cops or anything, it's just that I've met more cops like Chief Wiggum on The Simpsons than I have cops like James Bond. And frankly Bret strikes me as more of the former. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Quote

We're 10 episodes in now and I've yet to discern any personality on this guy whatsoever. He is utterly lacking a personality. You can read all you want into his behavior (he's "quiet" or "shy" or "introspective") but all I see is someone who is personality deprived.

I definitely see a personality. He strikes me as being an introvert, an observer, but he's definitely shown personality. We've seen his caring side (asking about David's well-being), his humour (his sarcastic answer to Figgy when she told everyone her and Taylor were a thing), his dorky/cheeseball side (the sunrise with Hannah), so it's there...it just may not be everyone's cup of tea.

It is my cup of tea ;)

  • Like 20

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

It seems to be David's go to play, when the going gets tough he whips out the manipulative tears and faux insecurity.   I'm sure there are a few people on the tribe that see through it and are pretty sick of it by this point.

I hear ya.  His whole "I'm so incompetent" shtick is really a manipulative way of insulating himself from criticism.  More importantly, he uses it to excuse himself from putting in any effort on tasks that he simply appears to be too lazy or uninterested to fully engage.  I find that kind of behavior the worst.  I would much prefer someone who is inept, but clearly gives it their best effort.  I never get that impression with David.  He seems to half-ass it because he doesn't have the oomph to actually exert any effort. 

Edited by BarneySays
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Boilergal said:

It seems to be David's go to play, when the going gets tough he whips out the manipulative tears and faux insecurity.   I'm sure there are a few people on the tribe that see through it and are pretty sick of it by this point.

Except he DIDN'T cry when they were being nasty to him. He just kind of smiled and shook his head. The only recent time I remember him tearing up was when everyone was encouraging him to play, despite feeling like the weakest on the tribe. It was a POSITIVE moment, not a tough moment. 

  • Like 19

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Boilergal said:

It seems to be David's go to play, when the going gets tough he whips out the manipulative tears and faux insecurity.   I'm sure there are a few people on the tribe that see through it and are pretty sick of it by this point.

 

1 hour ago, BarneySays said:

I would much prefer someone who is inept, but clearly gives it their best effort.  I never get that impression with David.  He seems to half-ass it because he doesn't have the oomph to actually exert any effort. 

I literally see the exact opposite. It's so interesting to me how half the viewers seem to see David positively and half so negatively. I wonder if the same is true of the players and maybe Bret and Zeke actually think David is faking all this stuff. That doesn't really track with what Bret's saying in confessionals, but he could be lying there because he suspects David will get a good edit and he doesn't want to look bad by saying he doesn't believe David's sincere.

Thinking more about this I actually really do think Zeke is thinking along the lines of the viewers who think David is using all his tears as manipulation/is faking being bad at comps because I remember that time during David's hilariously bad performance in that one challenge where Zeke said, "Is he throwing this?"

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, peachmangosteen said:

 

I literally see the exact opposite. It's so interesting to me how half the viewers seem to see David positively and half so negatively.

I feel like viewers disagree a lot but this season has had a few (more than what's usual) players like that - Hannah, Michaela, Jay, Ken, Michelle, Zeke. It's like they've cast this bunch of oddballs and we're not really sure how to take them. I'm really enjoying it. 

  • Like 15

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/25/2016 at 6:37 PM, Stinamaia said:

My problem with Michelle is not that she is a Christian. It that she is a creationist.  I do have a problem talking to creationists because it comes up in conversation and that makes it difficult for both sides.  I also have a problem because most creationists insist that their belief be taught as science in schools and also do not want evolution to be taught. I feel this imposes their religious beliefs on me and others.  There are other issues too,  but I don't know that Michelle holds any of those beliefs although it's not far fetched to suppose she does.  

Do we even know if she is a creationist?  Can someone point me to a tweet or a quote from her where she states this opinion?  Because I haven't seen one. It seems to me that people are making an assumption that she is based on a secret scene where she expresses her belief that dragon like creatures might have been real and Zeke ridicules her for it. For all we know her belief about dragons might not be religious based at all but just based on the fact that the woman is fascinated with dragons. Look it would not surprise me at all if she was a creationist but until I actually see a quote from her stating this opinion I am not going to treat it as a fact.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

5 hours ago, MissEwa said:

I feel like viewers disagree a lot but this season has had a few (more than what's usual) players like that - Hannah, Michaela, Jay, Ken, Michelle, Zeke. It's like they've cast this bunch of oddballs and we're not really sure how to take them. I'm really enjoying it. 

This is what happens when they cast actual fans and not models/actors. Take note, Probst!

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, MissEwa said:

I feel like viewers disagree a lot but this season has had a few (more than what's usual) players like that - Hannah, Michaela, Jay, Ken, Michelle, Zeke. It's like they've cast this bunch of oddballs and we're not really sure how to take them. I'm really enjoying it. 

I tend to root for the oddballs, but it's surprising how they trigger the hate.  Frankly I'm enjoying a season without implants and actors. 

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post

Models and actors made for one of the greatest seasons, Cook Islands, I don't really think that's what matters, personally.  Casting non-models and non-actors has sometimes led to dreadful seasons (for me) in the past.  Sometimes there's a good cast and sometimes there's a bad.  This one was interesting to me.... I still don't think it's "great" though.  I'd say middle of the pack for me.

Quote

 Whilst is true that some people who claim to be Christians hold views that would be offensive to members of the LGBT  community however it pales in comparison to how gays are viewed and treated in the vast majority of Muslim countries (i.e in some Muslim countries homosexuals are still executed)

GLAAD finds the term homosexual outdated, if you're interested.  http://www.glaad.org/reference/offensive

I don't think someone can just objectively state Jessica going to rocks is rational and smart gameplay.  For me it's still a subjective opinion.  Personally I'd be more inclined to do the 3 more days thing.  The game can change at any point - the game is certainly 'irrational' with merges, team splits, people randomly going home through illness or quitting the game, etc.  Also, if your goal is to make as much money as possible in the game, then yes, I think it's stupid to leave the game earlier than later.  Personally I'd hold on as long as I could.  I don't think we can declare who can be a winner versus not so early in the game.  

Edited by Ms Blue Jay
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, ghoulina said:

Except he DIDN'T cry when they were being nasty to him. He just kind of smiled and shook his head. The only recent time I remember him tearing up was when everyone was encouraging him to play, despite feeling like the weakest on the tribe. It was a POSITIVE moment, not a tough moment. 

Maybe it's just me, but it seems like David cries in EVERY episode about one thing or another.  I think emotional manipulators are bullies in their own way - cry to make others feel guilty and get what you want.   Whether it's sympathy, attention, or getting others to back off calling you out on your cruddy behavior.  It's just my opinion, but I feel that David uses this tactic quite frequently, and that is why Zeke said what he did.

Edited by Boilergal
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

It's just you. David has most definitely not cried in every episode. (Not saying that you're not justified in disliking him. To each their own. But the crying in every episode is simply not true.)

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, I can't remember David crying other than this last episode.

Plus, I tend to think if he was crying 24/7 and/or really grating on other players' nerves,  people would be more vocal in their exit interviews about him. But for the most part, it's been positive. 

To each their own, but I'm not getting the vibe that he's being an emotionally manipulative person.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post

I think David has cried before but it's mostly been in confessionals. So I can't really see it as manipulating others. It really was just these past two episodes that we saw him being emotional in front of the other players. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, peachmangosteen said:

Thinking more about this I actually really do think Zeke is thinking along the lines of the viewers who think David is using all his tears as manipulation/is faking being bad at comps because I remember that time during David's hilariously bad performance in that one challenge where Zeke said, "Is he throwing this?"

I thought it was Adam who suggested that David was throwing a challenge.

I'm in the camp that David is sincere and not trying to get attention or a good edit by crying.  As far as the edit goes, can the players even remotely guess what their edit is going to be in the first place?  They're filmed and interviewed for hours, they have no way of knowing what 12-second sound bite is going to air.

When David said that his irrational fear of death morphed into a fear of life, he kinda got to me.  He seems like a smart, well-educated guy who decided to toss his comfort zone out the window and play this game.  I have to respect that, because I think it's real.

 

1 hour ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

Models and actors made for one of the greatest seasons, Cook Islands, I don't really think that's what matters, personally.  Casting non-models and non-actors has sometimes led to dreadful seasons (for me) in the past.  Sometimes there's a good cast and sometimes there's a bad.  This one was interesting to me.... I still don't think it's "great" though.  I'd say middle of the pack for me.

+++++1.  I am forever comparing each season to Cook Islands.  This season actually reminds me a lot of CI, in that I cannot wait for Wednesday nights at 8pm EST.

In fact, I just recently (reluctantly) threw away my old, dusty VCR tape that contained most of CI.:)  

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, MissEwa said:

I feel like viewers disagree a lot but this season has had a few (more than what's usual) players like that - Hannah, Michaela, Jay, Ken, Michelle, Zeke. It's like they've cast this bunch of oddballs and we're not really sure how to take them. I'm really enjoying it. 

I agree.

18 minutes ago, laurakaye said:

I thought it was Adam who suggested that David was throwing a challenge.

No, it was Zeke. Adam was never in a tribe with David until merge. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

+++++1.  I am forever comparing each season to Cook Islands.  This season actually reminds me a lot of CI, in that I cannot wait for Wednesday nights at 8pm EST.

I don't know. Maybe it was a good season while I watched it but I just Googled the cast of that season and the only people I really remember are Ozzy and Yul. That was also that awkward season where they divided everyone by race, right? Can't say I count that season as one of my favourites.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Boilergal said:

Maybe it's just me, but it seems like David cries in EVERY episode about one thing or another.  I think emotional manipulators are bullies in their own way - cry to make others feel guilty and get what you want.   Whether it's sympathy, attention, or getting others to back off calling you out on your cruddy behavior.  It's just my opinion, but I feel that David uses this tactic quite frequently, and that is why Zeke said what he did.

Haha.  I'm sorry, but this reminds me of, "I abuse you, because you cry!" type talk.

I'm not denying that people have fake-cried before.  Some have.  Obviously I've seen toddlers do it.  But I've NEVER seen David do anything remotely like that.  Please point to such a scene.  The only time I've ever seen David cry is when Jeff brings up a super-emotional topic for him, and then after a few minutes of trying not to, he cries.  How is this David bullying the tribe?  I'd love more evidence.

3 hours ago, Rachel RSL said:

I don't know. Maybe it was a good season while I watched it but I just Googled the cast of that season and the only people I really remember are Ozzy and Yul. That was also that awkward season where they divided everyone by race, right? Can't say I count that season as one of my favourites.

I guess it depends whether you find castmates like Parvati, Johnathan Penner, and Cao Boi memorable.  

It is definitely in my top 5 seasons of all time.  Of the top of my head I'll call it my second favourite after Borneo. 

Edited by Ms Blue Jay
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

Well, given the fact that he got to go on the reward without having to participate - and that it was a grueling challenge to boot - I can definitely see the others being irked by David enough to make those type of comments and not necessarily due to him crying all the time.

Also, I think it's important to take who said it into context. Bret and Zeke. David had a big part in voting out Chris, someone who Bret was very close to. David and Zeke have a very contentious relationship at this point in the game and David pretty much attempted to out the Zeke alliance. Now, this doesn't change my opinion on what happened, but I can see it from the standpoint of maybe Bret and Zeke were trying to egg David on for him to slip up and say something that would piss others off or they really considered it a form of sports trash talking.

Clearly Zeke wanted to elicit a negative response from David, hence why he made the crying comment.

I know mileages vary, but I'm honestly not seeing the evidence that David is crying all the time and that everyone's fed up with him/feeling manipulated by him. In fact, if that's his plan, why not whip out tears for the jury? Instead, he remained calm and collective and simply stated that was a personal attack. 

Edited by JaggedLilPill
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

4 hours ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

I don't think someone can just objectively state Jessica going to rocks is rational and smart gameplay.  For me it's still a subjective opinion.  Personally I'd be more inclined to do the 3 more days thing.  The game can change at any point - the game is certainly 'irrational' with merges, team splits, people randomly going home through illness or quitting the game, etc.  Also, if your goal is to make as much money as possible in the game, then yes, I think it's stupid to leave the game earlier than later.  Personally I'd hold on as long as I could.  I don't think we can declare who can be a winner versus not so early in the game.

I agree that the rationality of Jessica's (and, frankly everyone's decision [they all made the same decision, Jessica is simply the one who got bit in the ass by it]) depends entirely on their time-frame.

From the perspective of "surviving this TC", then I don't think there's any question that going to rocks is irrational.  You're trading a 0% chance of being eliminated (and thus 100% certainty of safety) for a 16.667% chance of being eliminated (thus reducing your survival odds from 100% to 83.3%).

From the perspective of "winning $1 Million", then there are a whole lot more contingencies to factor in, along with the probabilities of each contingency occurring.  And any player's assessment of those probabilities is necessarily going to be quite imprecise because none of them have perfect knowledge.

If in Jessica's mind flipping = losing, then going to rocks could be rational.  Flipping to avoid rocks would've reduced her chances of winning $1 Million (again, in her mind) to 0%.  Going to rocks provided some chance greater than zero.

We can debate whether Jessica's assumption that flipping = losing was accurate.  but that doesn't make her decision irrational, given the information and assumptions available to her.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

One thing I'm curious about is how do they decide seating arrangement? I feel like even from the little bits of TC that we were shown, who was sitting next to whom may have impacted the game and certainly impacted the ability to pressure players. If it is decided by vote order, with Will voting first followed by Sunday and then Brett, that isolates Will from being pressured the way Jessica was by having two alliance members between him and anyone else. There was also no time to influence Will, who was the most likely to flip on that side imo, since he voted first and Jessica almost last. (And of course, Jessica did get the black rock o doom, so focusing on her and people pressuring her made for good TV.)

I just realized that I don't know for sure how seating is decided and I don't think it's player's choice. That started me thinking on how seating could factor in. (Could. I'm certainly not willing to say the whole game would have changed had Will or Jessica been seated elsewhere. It's just another tiny Survivor variable.)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

I guess it depends whether you find castmates like Parvati, Johnathan Penner, and Cao Boi memorable.


Ah, yes. Parvati I remember, of course! Didn't recognize her in the pic. Although, I mainly remember her for Heroes vs Villains. She was badass on that season.

Edited by Rachel RSL · Reason: Parvati is not a cheese.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, simplyme said:

One thing I'm curious about is how do they decide seating arrangement? I feel like even from the little bits of TC that we were shown, who was sitting next to whom may have impacted the game and certainly impacted the ability to pressure players. If it is decided by vote order, with Will voting first followed by Sunday and then Brett, that isolates Will from being pressured the way Jessica was by having two alliance members between him and anyone else. There was also no time to influence Will, who was the most likely to flip on that side imo, since he voted first and Jessica almost last. (And of course, Jessica did get the black rock o doom, so focusing on her and people pressuring her made for good TV.)

I just realized that I don't know for sure how seating is decided and I don't think it's player's choice. That started me thinking on how seating could factor in. (Could. I'm certainly not willing to say the whole game would have changed had Will or Jessica been seated elsewhere. It's just another tiny Survivor variable.)

I remember Boston Rob saying that it is crucial to notice who sits next to whom in tribal council and this could show the alliances or people who work with other people so I'm pretty sure the players decide where to sit.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, himela said:

I remember Boston Rob saying that it is crucial to notice who sits next to whom in tribal council and this could show the alliances or people who work with other people so I'm pretty sure the players decide where to sit.

Wow. That's... interesting. The seating this last TC makes no sense to me then.

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe it's just something random like that's the order they happened to walk into TC in so that's the order they sat in?

Edited by Rachel RSL
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, simplyme said:

One thing I'm curious about is how do they decide seating arrangement? I feel like even from the little bits of TC that we were shown, who was sitting next to whom may have impacted the game and certainly impacted the ability to pressure players. If it is decided by vote order, with Will voting first followed by Sunday and then Brett, that isolates Will from being pressured the way Jessica was by having two alliance members between him and anyone else. There was also no time to influence Will, who was the most likely to flip on that side imo, since he voted first and Jessica almost last. (And of course, Jessica did get the black rock o doom, so focusing on her and people pressuring her made for good TV.)

I feel like I've heard that they aren't allowed to talk during the voting portion of TC and if that's the case then this is moot. However, I completely agree with you on wondering about how the seating arrangements are decided and how they could potentially affect the game. Like what if Michelle wasn't sitting right beside Hannah during the TC when Mari was booted? Would Michelle have just screamed over people to tell Hannah to vote out Mari? I doubt she would have. Although in that case it wouldn't have mattered and Mari still would have gone, but still.

4 hours ago, himela said:

I remember Boston Rob saying that it is crucial to notice who sits next to whom in tribal council and this could show the alliances or people who work with other people so I'm pretty sure the players decide where to sit.

I thought he talked about it being important to note who sleeps next to who at camp.

Edited by peachmangosteen
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size