|
Post by bbg95 on Jun 12, 2020 14:43:17 GMT -5
In retrospect, Denise should have voted out Tony of course because of how he went on to dominate the game. But at that point of the game, Tony had expertly lowered his threat level by just hanging out at camp, being wacky, and making friends with everyone. I think Jeremy was the right vote at that point for Denise because he's a major threat that has to go at some point, she proves her loyalty to Sandra, and she signals her willingness to work with the original Dakal players. I think the hierarchy of the best vote for Denise in that situation was: Jeremy > Tony > Kim > Sandra. I do agree with you that keeping Sandra around would have been better for Denise than voting her out, and much better than voting her out and burning her idol on Jeremy. I think a lot of this is hindsight bias. I think it's pretty clear she didn't feel like she could trust Sandra (rightfully so). Jeremy was probably the player she trusted the most at Dakal 2.0, considering they were the only two Sele. If Jeremy goes, Denise probably feels like she's next if they lose again. Additionally, I understand he was a big threat, but if she wanted to form an ally at that point, Jeremy makes the most sense. Kim was on the outs and the swing vote. I'm not sure why you would target her over Sandra? She obviously had no power in the game. I would also point out that Sandra took a big gamble by giving the idol for stupid Fire Tokens, which literally no one understood. If Fire Tokens had turned out to be more valuable, Sandra's move in hindsight doesn't look as bad. Ugh, Fire Tokens... Edit: Didn't see @avid 's post before posting this. A few of the same points. See, I actually think the argument to vote off Tony is hindsight (see my other post). As I said, I don't think that Denise and Jeremy were that close just because they started on the same tribe. If memory serves, she was mostly aligned with Adam in the original version of Sele, while Jeremy was working with Michele after Natalie got taken out first (both groups worked together on the Ethan vote). Also, if Denise doesn't stupidly burn her idol on Jeremy, she can use Sandra's to get through that vote and then her own to protect herself if they lose again. But we can agree to disagree. The argument to target Kim over Sandra is that Sandra wanted to work with Denise and gave her an idol. Also, just because Kim was on the bottom of the original Dakal, that doesn't mean that she wouldn't be a dangerous player once the merge happened. I think Jeremy and Tony make more sense than Kim but Sandra makes even less sense. You make a fair point about Sandra and the fire tokens, and she was a player who had reason to believe that they would be valuable, since she spent one token to purchase an idol, though I think that she still should have just played the idol (it was expiring that tribal) and gone from there.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Jun 12, 2020 14:47:46 GMT -5
Mount Rushmore only has 4 faces on it Which is why I didnt say that I can't leave Sarah or Kim off. Kim played the best game you will ever see. Sarah changed the game. She played the most cut throat modern survivor game by a female and still managed to win (cries in Chrissy) and made it to the end of an all winners season where she was the first vote choice of the majority of the cast. She's the second best social player in modern survivor after Kim. I'm really not a Sarah fan lol... I can respect her track record, but it ends there for me. I think some of her tactics in Game Changers crossed the line and I think she is a very cocky player (some of her pre-game interviews were really cringe). I also found her WaW "gender bias" speech to be untimely (valid speech, just not for her situation). If she had voted out Tony, I would be a bigger fan of hers. Given he orchestrated the Sophie blindside, I don't know why she felt so loyal to him (again, unique WaW dynamics).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2020 14:53:05 GMT -5
Which is why I didnt say that I can't leave Sarah or Kim off. Kim played the best game you will ever see. Sarah changed the game. She played the most cut throat modern survivor game by a female and still managed to win (cries in Chrissy) and made it to the end of an all winners season where she was the first vote choice of the majority of the cast. She's the second best social player in modern survivor after Kim. I'm really not a Sarah fan lol... I can respect her track record, but it ends there for me. I think some of her tactics in Game Changers crossed the line and I think she is a very cocky player (some of her pre-game interviews were really cringe). I also found her WaW "gender bias" speech to be untimely (valid speech, just not for her situation). If she had voted out Tony, I would be a bigger fan of hers. Given he orchestrated the Sophie blindside, I don't know why she felt so loyal to him (again, unique WaW dynamics). I think Sarah crossing the line in GC is why I'm a fan of hers. I think the Sierra move is an all time Survivor move. She did what she had to do to get to the end. I agree with you about Tony. She's said on IG live that she wanted to ensure her or Tony won. That was most important to her throughout the game. That's why she never considered voting him out. She believed she convince the jury of her story over his, which we know not to be true but that was her mindset. I think they were so loyal because they're friends outside of the game and they knew they were each others best bet to get to the end. A pair is a strong voting block.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Jun 12, 2020 14:57:54 GMT -5
I think a lot of this is hindsight bias. I think it's pretty clear she didn't feel like she could trust Sandra (rightfully so). Jeremy was probably the player she trusted the most at Dakal 2.0, considering they were the only two Sele. If Jeremy goes, Denise probably feels like she's next if they lose again. Additionally, I understand he was a big threat, but if she wanted to form an ally at that point, Jeremy makes the most sense. Kim was on the outs and the swing vote. I'm not sure why you would target her over Sandra? She obviously had no power in the game. I would also point out that Sandra took a big gamble by giving the idol for stupid Fire Tokens, which literally no one understood. If Fire Tokens had turned out to be more valuable, Sandra's move in hindsight doesn't look as bad. Ugh, Fire Tokens... Edit: Didn't see @avid 's post before posting this. A few of the same points. See, I actually think the argument to vote off Tony is hindsight (see my other post). As I said, I don't think that Denise and Jeremy were that close just because they started on the same tribe. If memory serves, she was mostly aligned with Adam in the original version of Sele, while Jeremy was working with Michele after Natalie got taken out first. Also, if Denise doesn't stupidly burn her idol on Jeremy, she can use Sandra's to get through that vote and then her own to protect herself if they lose again. But we can agree to disagree. You make a fair point about Sandra and the fire tokens, though I think that she still should have just played the idol (it was expiring that tribal) and gone from there. I don't think she should have voted off Tony. I agree with you. Tony was a bit chaotic and UTR at that point of the game. Denise and Jeremy might not have been that close, but your default "alliance" when you go into a swap is always the castaways from your previous tribe. Also, IIRC Sele whispered right before the swap "Sele strong." Voting out your own can alienate you from your entire previous tribe at the next swap or merge (see: Wendell and Nick). I think the reason she played her idol on Jeremy is because she didn't trust Sandra (which again, makes sense). She thought Sandra, knowing that Denise had the idol, might vote for Jeremy, the other Sele. In fact, Sandra even told her to vote for Jeremy or Tony. It was "stupid" in hindsight because everyone voted for Denise, but I understand why Denise did it. If Sandra had thrown a vote for Jeremy, then all of a sudden it's genius.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2020 15:03:53 GMT -5
My hopes aren't very high but I hope we get a season this fall. I think moving to a location within the United States would be a good change of pace. But I'm not sure if there's any way to get all of the production done while being safe.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Jun 12, 2020 15:05:11 GMT -5
I'm really not a Sarah fan lol... I can respect her track record, but it ends there for me. I think some of her tactics in Game Changers crossed the line and I think she is a very cocky player (some of her pre-game interviews were really cringe). I also found her WaW "gender bias" speech to be untimely (valid speech, just not for her situation). If she had voted out Tony, I would be a bigger fan of hers. Given he orchestrated the Sophie blindside, I don't know why she felt so loyal to him (again, unique WaW dynamics). I think Sarah crossing the line in GC is why I'm a fan of hers. I think the Sierra move is an all time Survivor move. She did what she had to do to get to the end. I agree with you about Tony. She's said on IG live that she wanted to ensure her or Tony won. That was most important to her throughout the game. That's why she never considered voting him out. She believed she convince the jury of her story over his, which we know not to be true but that was her mindset. I think they were so loyal because they're friends outside of the game and they knew they were each others best bet to get to the end. A pair is a strong voting block. I need to brush up on my Survivor "gossip" apparently, but I remember Andrea disclosing some strange emotional manipulation by Sarah, specifically towards Andrea and Culpepper. Something to do with wedding rings. Regardless, I respect her track record. And your second paragraph is my issue with WaW. I think stuff like that ruined true Survivor gameplay IMO.
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jun 12, 2020 15:10:03 GMT -5
See, I actually think the argument to vote off Tony is hindsight (see my other post). As I said, I don't think that Denise and Jeremy were that close just because they started on the same tribe. If memory serves, she was mostly aligned with Adam in the original version of Sele, while Jeremy was working with Michele after Natalie got taken out first. Also, if Denise doesn't stupidly burn her idol on Jeremy, she can use Sandra's to get through that vote and then her own to protect herself if they lose again. But we can agree to disagree. You make a fair point about Sandra and the fire tokens, though I think that she still should have just played the idol (it was expiring that tribal) and gone from there. I don't think she should have voted off Tony. I agree with you. Tony was a bit chaotic and UTR at that point of the game. Denise and Jeremy might not have been that close, but your default "alliance" when you go into a swap is always the castaways from your previous tribe. Also, IIRC Sele whispered right before the swap "Sele strong." Voting out your own can alienate you from your entire previous tribe at the next swap or merge (see: Wendell and Nick). I think the reason she played her idol on Jeremy is because she didn't trust Sandra (which again, makes sense). She thought Sandra, knowing that Denise had the idol, might vote for Jeremy, the other Sele. In fact, Sandra even told her to vote for Jeremy or Tony. It was "stupid" in hindsight because everyone voted for Denise, but I understand why Denise did it. If Sandra had thrown a vote for Jeremy, then all of a sudden it's genius. Fair enough. I don't 100 percent agree with you on everything, but you make reasonable points. The one thing I would say is that in a returnee season like this, pre-game alliances and real-life friendships often trump original tribal designations (I do agree with you that in a season of all newbies, players will often default to their original tribes). Married couple Boston Rob and Amber are the most obvious example of this. They started on different tribes, but Amber was targeted first because a lot of people feared what they could do if they both made it to the merge. According to interviews I've seen with Sandra, she and Denise are friends in real life, so that was one of the reasons Sandra thought they could trust each other.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2020 15:11:41 GMT -5
I think Sarah crossing the line in GC is why I'm a fan of hers. I think the Sierra move is an all time Survivor move. She did what she had to do to get to the end. I agree with you about Tony. She's said on IG live that she wanted to ensure her or Tony won. That was most important to her throughout the game. That's why she never considered voting him out. She believed she convince the jury of her story over his, which we know not to be true but that was her mindset. I think they were so loyal because they're friends outside of the game and they knew they were each others best bet to get to the end. A pair is a strong voting block. I need to brush up on my Survivor "gossip" apparently, but I remember Andrea disclosing some strange emotional manipulation by Sarah, specifically towards Andrea and Culpepper. Something to do with wedding rings. Regardless, I respect her track record. And your second paragraph is my issue with WaW. I think stuff like that ruined true Survivor gameplay IMO. Ngl I forgot Andrea was on that season. Yea Andrea was upset with Sarah, I remember that now. I think the wedding ring thing was a final three deal with Brad but im not 100% I think we can put the blame on that on the producers. Sarah/Tony and Jeremy/Nat should have *never* been on the same starting tribe. It's not fair to them or the rest of the cast
|
|
|
Post by donut on Jun 12, 2020 15:14:08 GMT -5
I'll bite.
My "unbiased" Survivor Mount Rushmore: Sandra, Tony, Kim, Parvati
My "biased" Survivor Mount Rushmore: Kim, Todd, Parvati, Earl or Tom
(I debated switching out Parvati for both Earl and Tom because sometimes I still hate her for beating Amanda twice)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2020 15:16:19 GMT -5
I'll bite. My "unbiased" Survivor Mount Rushmore: Sandra, Tony, Kim, Parvati My "biased" Survivor Mount Rushmore: Kim, Todd, Parvati, Earl or Tom (I debated switching out Parvati for both Earl and Tom because sometimes I still hate her for beating Amanda twice) I was upset when I found out Earl wasn't going to be on WaW (family matters) Todd is an interesting choice
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jun 12, 2020 15:20:51 GMT -5
I'll bite. My "unbiased" Survivor Mount Rushmore: Sandra, Tony, Kim, Parvati My "biased" Survivor Mount Rushmore: Kim, Todd, Parvati, Earl or Tom (I debated switching out Parvati for both Earl and Tom because sometimes I still hate her for beating Amanda twice) I was upset when I found out Earl wasn't going to be on WaW (family matters) Todd is an interesting choice I love Todd. I think he's my favorite player who has only played once. I could not have been more impressed with his performance in China.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Jun 12, 2020 15:22:58 GMT -5
I'll bite. My "unbiased" Survivor Mount Rushmore: Sandra, Tony, Kim, Parvati My "biased" Survivor Mount Rushmore: Kim, Todd, Parvati, Earl or Tom (I debated switching out Parvati for both Earl and Tom because sometimes I still hate her for beating Amanda twice) I was upset when I found out Earl wasn't going to be on WaW (family matters) Todd is an interesting choice I think you could make an argument for Earl or Tom to be on the "unbiased" Mount Rushmore. Both played such good games. I just leaned towards players who had played more than once, and then gave Kim the spot for the most dominant single season performance. Todd played such a good strategic and social game, and then had arguably the best FTC performance EVER. I also resonate a bit with the gay mormon background. I feel bad for the guy - he hasn't had the easiest time since China. Given his alcoholism issues, I don't think he'll ever be back, but I think he would kill in a returnees/all-Winners season.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,447
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jun 12, 2020 15:26:57 GMT -5
Here is my list of best players - I only considered players that played more than once. Tier 1: 1. Boston Rob. There are 4 in my top tier and he is the only one that I really liked or rooted to win. But what really sets him apart from the other 3 - he was a challenge beast while none of the other 3 were great at challenges. Not that 'survival' skills is very high on my list - but even there he shines well ahead of the other 3. His arrogance was his downfall - but he was also very entertaining at times on his confessionals. 2. Tony Vlachos. No getting around the 2 wins against top competition. Not a single vote against him (that counted) in Season 40. His 'strategy' play exceeds everyone else. I guess I grew to liking him - he was/is darn funny. 3. Parvati Shallow. I still consider her S20 one of the best seasons every played. Her biggest strike - she just wasn't any good in S13 - but at least she made the merge. 4. Sarah Lacina. Her play in S34 and S40 was steller - and against all-star casts. I never rooted for her - I didn't find her confessionals to be interesting, but her play stands out. Does your Tier 1 change if you include players who only played once? No - Kim and Yul were the two players that only played once (until S40) that I considered 'great'. Of my top 4 - only Tony won his 1st time while the other 3 got much, much better the 2nd time they played. Yul and Kim had bigger targets having won their first time (maybe). I stopped at 4 - because I think those 4 set themselves ahead of the rest in terms of winning, being relevant multiple times, strategically advancing the game.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,447
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jun 12, 2020 15:38:03 GMT -5
I need to brush up on my Survivor "gossip" apparently, but I remember Andrea disclosing some strange emotional manipulation by Sarah, specifically towards Andrea and Culpepper. Something to do with wedding rings. Regardless, I respect her track record. And your second paragraph is my issue with WaW. I think stuff like that ruined true Survivor gameplay IMO. Ngl I forgot Andrea was on that season. Yea Andrea was upset with Sarah, I remember that now. I think the wedding ring thing was a final three deal with Brad but im not 100% I think we can put the blame on that on the producers. Sarah/Tony and Jeremy/Nat should have *never* been on the same starting tribe. It's not fair to them or the rest of the cast S34 had so many 'great' players. I really liked Andrea and was a bit confused that she acted more personal after being voted out than her prior seasons. What I liked about her - she was willing to make any move and hold no grudges. What was the 'wedding ring' thing? I wasn't aware of Sarah crossing a line. Sarah and Tony being rock solid allies is/was a huge advantage. I don't know if this should diminish them - but I tend to say no because it should have been apparent to the rest of the experienced players to get them out. It is a testament to those two that they didn't have that target on them. I mean Rob and Amber were lock solid allies - but that just made them easy players to get out sooner than later.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2020 15:44:09 GMT -5
Ngl I forgot Andrea was on that season. Yea Andrea was upset with Sarah, I remember that now. I think the wedding ring thing was a final three deal with Brad but im not 100% I think we can put the blame on that on the producers. Sarah/Tony and Jeremy/Nat should have *never* been on the same starting tribe. It's not fair to them or the rest of the cast S34 had so many 'great' players. I really liked Andrea and was a bit confused that she acted more personal after being voted out than her prior seasons. What I liked about her - she was willing to make any move and hold no grudges. What was the 'wedding ring' thing? I wasn't aware of Sarah crossing a line. Sarah and Tony being rock solid allies is/was a huge advantage. I don't know if this should diminish them - but I tend to say no because it should have been apparent to the rest of the experienced players to get them out. It is a testament to those two that they didn't have that target on them. I mean Rob and Amber were lock solid allies - but that just made them easy players to get out sooner than later. Reality TV World: Were you shocked Brad took you to the end instead Tai? It was obviously a surprise to viewers given we later found out he would have won the whole game had he brought Tai and Troyzan to the Final 3. Sarah Lacina: Yeah, so, I remember sitting in one of my interviews going, "How is my name off the chopping block? How are we debating between Troyzan and Tai right now, and I'm not being debated on?" What didn't get shown is that I ruined my word so bad with these guys that I had to go to, like, material items. And I wear this bracelet that I wear every single day, and that I obviously wore out there and I wore on my first season, and so I offered it up as a sign of, "Here, if I'm lying to you guys and the vote doesn't go the way I'm saying it's going to go, then take my bracelet and throw it into the ocean. That's the only thing I can offer up right now if you don't believe what comes out of my mouth." So we do that, and in fact we did that at the [Michaela Bradshaw] vote out, and then that solidified some trust with them and me. Well, I really needed to seal the deal that they would take me to the end, and so myself, Brad and Troyzan actually all exchanged items. I actually had Brad's wedding ring and obviously we can all see how much he loves his wife. And so for the simple fact I had Brad Culpepper's wedding ring, and if he votes me out, he knows that wedding ring is going to the bottom of the ocean. It was a move I had to make to solidify that they would not vote me out. And so, in that aspect, I'm not surprised that he kept me, because you guys didn't know that that had happened.
|
|