-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Survivor: Heroes vs Healers vs Hustlers
- Thread starter RMichael21
- Start date
PUSH
Well-Known Member
Samoa - definitely should have won, but I see why he didn't. Absolutely no awareness of his social game, which is very important in a social game.
HvV - I see why Sandra won, but I believe Parvati should have won. She was the blend of Sandra and Russell. Strategic like Russell, but social like Sandra. I think she got a bad wrap because she stuck with Russell the whole way, but she had no other plays, as she was targeted from the first vote. Making it to the end alone should have written its own million dollar check.
GenerationX
Well-Known Member
I agree with PUSH that it was cool to see them add a new element to their typical endurance challenges.
I'm surprised it's taken this long to get a restaurant as a sponsor for the show. Any morsel of food gets rave reviews from the starving contestants.
It's been quite a few seasons since we've had a cast as easy on the eyes as this one (at least from my perspective). Let's not go and ruin it now. Two straight weeks of hot chick boots (Ali and Jessica) leaves us with only two remaining hot chicks (Desi and Chrissy). Stop the madness!
There are four very overt players in this game (Ryan, Chrissy, Joe, and Dr. Mike). They should make for a very interesting last half of the season.
I'm surprised it's taken this long to get a restaurant as a sponsor for the show. Any morsel of food gets rave reviews from the starving contestants.
It's been quite a few seasons since we've had a cast as easy on the eyes as this one (at least from my perspective). Let's not go and ruin it now. Two straight weeks of hot chick boots (Ali and Jessica) leaves us with only two remaining hot chicks (Desi and Chrissy). Stop the madness!
There are four very overt players in this game (Ryan, Chrissy, Joe, and Dr. Mike). They should make for a very interesting last half of the season.
krause
Well-Known Member
Yes this is becoming more and more important on these shows. You have to get to the end but also “jury management” which was HUGE if you watched the last season of Big Brother.
PUSH
Well-Known Member
You can't win if your fellow cast mates don't like you. Richard Hatch was not liked, and he knew he couldn't win, so he made Kelly the less likable person by making her vote off Rudy, who everyone wanted to win. Go down the list, there's not one winner that was absolutely despised by the cast. Russell was despised by the cast in all three of his seasons, which is why he didn't win the first two. Russell never got that part of the game, which is why he didn't win. He thinks about his moves, and how it affects his game. Winners think about that, but also think about the other players' games and how they will respond.
krause
Well-Known Member
Yep, exactly. Maybe it’s not “bitter jury syndrome” so much as it is a flaw in that persons game.
flynnibus
Premium Member
The game's slogan is not "Last person you like the most"
Its outwit, outlast, outplay - They've instead let it evolve to the "social game of trying to make the jury like you" and its less about a jury of peers picking the best person who outwitted, outlasted, and outplayed. Probst is big on it the 'evolution' of the jury as a good thing, doesn't mean I have to agree with him.
Russell wasn't obtuse to people not liking him - he just believed it didn't matter, and that you had to respect what he pulled off. Instead, people get emotional and can't see past their own anger for being outplayed. That's why we call it the 'bitter jury' - they can't get past their own loss.
Its outwit, outlast, outplay - They've instead let it evolve to the "social game of trying to make the jury like you" and its less about a jury of peers picking the best person who outwitted, outlasted, and outplayed. Probst is big on it the 'evolution' of the jury as a good thing, doesn't mean I have to agree with him.
Russell wasn't obtuse to people not liking him - he just believed it didn't matter, and that you had to respect what he pulled off. Instead, people get emotional and can't see past their own anger for being outplayed. That's why we call it the 'bitter jury' - they can't get past their own loss.
krause
Well-Known Member
I think we’re all on the same page here? I’m not disagreeing with anything that’s been said, just in case it seemed like I was. I enjoy the discussion 
I think the game has “evolved” (mostly by being in season 35, all the advantages/disadvantages being handed out, and all the editing which doesn’t always allow us to see the whole story) and what began as bitter jury syndrome back when Russell was ROBBED of his win, has become a bigger part of the game that potential winners have to keep in balance (vote out the right people but don’t them off in the process) with the other elements. The jury management has become part of the “outplay”. Not saying I like it or that the jurors shouldn’t get over it and see things as the game that it is, just seems to be the way that it is now.
I think the game has “evolved” (mostly by being in season 35, all the advantages/disadvantages being handed out, and all the editing which doesn’t always allow us to see the whole story) and what began as bitter jury syndrome back when Russell was ROBBED of his win, has become a bigger part of the game that potential winners have to keep in balance (vote out the right people but don’t them off in the process) with the other elements. The jury management has become part of the “outplay”. Not saying I like it or that the jurors shouldn’t get over it and see things as the game that it is, just seems to be the way that it is now.
PUSH
Well-Known Member
Like I've said a million times: Russell should have won Samoa. Heroes vs Villains, maybe there are better cases for Parvati or Sandra. Russell did things to intentionally make people mad. He was very strategic, but intentionally ing people off when it wasn't necessary is not the best strategy to get people's votes in the end. Because as much as some people might not like it, this is mainly a social game, and if you are absolutely hated, no normal person is going to give you a million dollars.
And being on the island for 30+ days with someone like Russell is totally different than seeing it on TV. I've heard from contestants, and even Jeff, that Russell is flat out a horrible human being (or words like that). I'm sure spending all that time with him would turn most people against him. And I'm sure he was constantly telling people he was better than them and that they were lesser.
And being on the island for 30+ days with someone like Russell is totally different than seeing it on TV. I've heard from contestants, and even Jeff, that Russell is flat out a horrible human being (or words like that). I'm sure spending all that time with him would turn most people against him. And I'm sure he was constantly telling people he was better than them and that they were lesser.
GenerationX
Well-Known Member
The potential for the jury to be sore losers and bitter is something that has to be taken into account. This is another reason why you have to get "nice" people out so that they do not make the final two or three. You can't risk a bitter jury. I agree Russell should have won his first season, but he completely missed this point.
The interesting part of jury management to me is trying to get your alliance members on the jury and make it look like you had no part in it.
The interesting part of jury management to me is trying to get your alliance members on the jury and make it look like you had no part in it.
krause
Well-Known Member
I think a big part of it too is owning your game. Russell played a villainous game but he owned it and that’s why he should have won. Other people (the best example I can think of is Paul on the last BB if you watched that) backstab their alliance members and try and play it off like it wasn’t their fault and don’t a) apologize for the backstab (because these bitter jurors seem to always feel like they deserve an apology for a game move) but also b) explain properly why it was a part of their strategy.
Guess that’s why we still watch 35 seasons in
PUSH
Well-Known Member
Biggest part of the final TC is owning your game, not defending yourself. A prime example is Micronesia. Amanda defended herself. Parvati took ownership for her actions. Not saying that's the only reason Parvati won, but she definitely came off better at the final TC than Amanda.I think a big part of it too is owning your game. Russell played a villainous game but he owned it and that’s why he should have won. Other people (the best example I can think of is Paul on the last BB if you watched that) backstab their alliance members and try and play it off like it wasn’t their fault and don’t a) apologize for the backstab (because these bitter jurors seem to always feel like they deserve an apology for a game move) but also b) explain properly why it was a part of their strategy.
Guess that’s why we still watch 35 seasons in
PUSH
Well-Known Member
Also, I hear the final TC is going to be very entertaining, and very up-in-the-air this season. I hope that's a good thing, and not a bad thing of nobody deserving sitting there. They are also going to do it like they did in Game Changers, with a more open dialogue, rather than a Q&A format. I think it allowed people to debate and voice their opinions more to bring out the real issues. It let me clearly see how the jury viewed the game, whereas the old format I didn't get a great feel for how someone was voting, or what they were basing their vote on.
flynnibus
Premium Member
The open dialogue format sucked... it allowed some topics or individuals to dominate the discussion in a lop sided way.
jury members are equals... don't let one or two bully the discussion and leave less vocal people in their dust. At the same time, don't let one finalist interrupt and bully the other denying them their platform.
Go back to the early format... opening statements, questions, then give them a closing staement. They have to give finalists a format where they can address questions or sentiments that arose during the TC. Jury gets a spot to ask a question or make a statement... after that... sit down and shut up. IMHO
jury members are equals... don't let one or two bully the discussion and leave less vocal people in their dust. At the same time, don't let one finalist interrupt and bully the other denying them their platform.
Go back to the early format... opening statements, questions, then give them a closing staement. They have to give finalists a format where they can address questions or sentiments that arose during the TC. Jury gets a spot to ask a question or make a statement... after that... sit down and shut up. IMHO
krause
Well-Known Member
Yeah I agree the format they did with Game Changers was a nice change but certain people definitely dominated the conversation and of course they talk for hours and edit it down to 10 minutes or so they’re only going to show the most argumentative parts. There needs to be some kind of balance because the same questions every season are getting kind of stale. I do like on Big Brother how they show the jury talking about things beforehand although their actual questioning of the contestants is pretty stale as well. Hopefully they’ll come up with something good.
artvandelay
Well-Known Member
A lot of drone shots in this episode.
artvandelay
Well-Known Member
This season is starting to heat up. You have 3 good strategists in Chrissy, Ryan, and Dr Mike and then then a “seat of your pants” player in Joe who is unpredictable. I also like how Lauren is laying low. I see her bouncing back and forth between sides like Sarah did last season.
In Dalton Ross’s interview with Jeff Probst, Jeff hinted at a new advantage is about to be introduced into the game this week.
In Dalton Ross’s interview with Jeff Probst, Jeff hinted at a new advantage is about to be introduced into the game this week.
PUSH
Well-Known Member
Another case of Jeff making Tribal Council a more emotional moment than it actually was.
Not sure why they went with Desi in the revote. They're so worried about Joe with an idol, that when you know he doesn't have one, they don't vote him out?
Nice play by Lauren, though, with the advantage. I think she's my favorite now.
Ryan was very swift with his idol snag, but looks like next week he blabs to a couple people. Could be a classic case of "I have an idol, but I can't keep it to myself because I'm so excited about it."
Ashley was practically nonexistent in tonight's episode. She was my winner pick, but she's very blah and uninteresting.
I really liked the reward twist with the individual portions, and the immunity clue. I'm surprised it took until Ryan before the plate was hidden. Although, I guess I never thought about it until he did it, so I would have done the same thing.
Not sure why they went with Desi in the revote. They're so worried about Joe with an idol, that when you know he doesn't have one, they don't vote him out?
Nice play by Lauren, though, with the advantage. I think she's my favorite now.
Ryan was very swift with his idol snag, but looks like next week he blabs to a couple people. Could be a classic case of "I have an idol, but I can't keep it to myself because I'm so excited about it."
Ashley was practically nonexistent in tonight's episode. She was my winner pick, but she's very blah and uninteresting.
I really liked the reward twist with the individual portions, and the immunity clue. I'm surprised it took until Ryan before the plate was hidden. Although, I guess I never thought about it until he did it, so I would have done the same thing.
GenerationX
Well-Known Member
Mrs. GenX and I have no access to spoilers, but she is speculating that the big intrigue Probst alludes to in the latter part of the season is Joe and Ben actually physically fighting. As in other Survivors and camera crew have to break them up, fighting. That, of course, would be awesome.
Put a black costume on Devin, and you have Kylo Ren.
It looks like Ryan finally makes a mistake next week with a case of run-off-at-the-mouth syndrome. That's the kind of thing I would expect from Cole the Dolt, not Ryan with his winner's edit and all.
The reward part of the reward challenge played out well. Kudos to the evil geniuses behind-the-scenes figuring out new ways to keep these scenes interesting.
Put a black costume on Devin, and you have Kylo Ren.
It looks like Ryan finally makes a mistake next week with a case of run-off-at-the-mouth syndrome. That's the kind of thing I would expect from Cole the Dolt, not Ryan with his winner's edit and all.
The reward part of the reward challenge played out well. Kudos to the evil geniuses behind-the-scenes figuring out new ways to keep these scenes interesting.
