Eh that’s old news.
-
Welcome to the discussion forums. To get posting, register an account.
Survivor: Heroes v Villains - Episode 19
- Thread starter Brekkie
- Start date
Melore
Tiny Member
But then she didn't even vote George herself! Wtf.
Old news but its completely changed the outcome of the game.
George still taking advantage of everything
Zcsund1234
Well-Known Member
Did she not? I didn't even see the vote reveals, final words or the next time thanks to my shitty Apple TV. That is a huge misplay on her end. She probably tried to save face incase George survived. But if her true intention was to have George gone, why would she not just go for it? Why aim for your second preference to go home?
Her vote was hinging on Nina who she must have read wasn't with her.
Zcsund1234
Well-Known Member
Dominating is not equal to optimally. George only lasts so long because everyone knows he's an easy vote out at the final hurdle. He will never win the final immunity challenge which has been said how many times now? He has positioned himself to get to the end with the newbies who I have absolute no doubt will team up to blindside him. Each time he plays he plays a runner-up game at best. The game rewards those who play low key and don't piss off the jury.
Gerry is okay, does what needs to be done. But I cannot see him winning a vote. Much like George he is positioning himself to a guaranteed loss. I personally look at the game of Survivor as a social positioning game. The whole "resume" thing is a bit overblown and only seems to come into play when there's returnees involved.
I do agree with most of this assessment of George’s game but I think that it’s down to a bit of a fault with how Australian jury votes.
This may seem ridiculous, but for me personally, winning does not necessarily equal playing the best game…. I guess in some ways it means they have played it correctly with the people they are playing with.
I don’t know how to properly articulate what I mean.
But I legitimately think in terms of the strategy side of the game, George has a very impressive resume. And it’s the type of game I guess I enjoy watching the most.
I think David may be the only Australian winner I think truly embodies the best gameplay combined with a win.
…can’t say that I’m upset that Hayley has gone… thanks for all the posts everyone… nite all… sleep tight and good dreams… cheers.
Zcsund1234
Well-Known Member
I can hands down agree George has played the best game in terms of dominating who goes each round. But IMO the game of survivor is essentially human chess. It's making moves that aren't "flashy" but more so just position you closer to a win. You may lose pieces (pawns) along the way but eventually once you reach checkmate you've won. It's not about dominating and making big moves IMO it's just simply doing what needs to be done correctly.
The thing with Survivor (and Big Brother for the North American fans) is that with the jury involved there becomes an increased importance of the human element. The jurors will vote how they vote, that's their choice. It's the player's responsibility to rationalise their game to the jurors and appease them if they have to. If a juror is bitter at you it is up to you to fix that. Jury management is so vital for your game. It literally makes or breaks it.
From studying psychology I probably focus too much on the social aspect of these shows. But to me, the jurors are likely to be bitter, salty, jealous or annoyed, what ever you wanna call it. Even if taking them out was right for the finalist's game, an angry juror will go on a power trip with their vote. Almost every human has a complex, some jurors will almost force the finalist to apologise, admit regret or just simply admit what they did was wrong. As human beings the jurors will want to feel relevant and powerful to some degree. It is up to the player to maintain a good relationship with the jury in order to get their vote.
You can be the most physically dominating player and win the challenges, you can be the smartest player and get to the end without any struggles. But if you do not bother to get to know these players, if you do not treat them with respect and if you do not humble yourself at FTC you will not win. I think players like Pia and David really did show that. Hayley as well IMO, I don't care that she got twist saved.
In a perfect world I'd love to see juror's vote for the biggest flashy player. But, in reality when a game involves humans, emotions do come into play. It is why I utilise the social aspect in my every day life. I go to work making sure I bond well with the staff, and I make sure at uni to be kind to those in my class when doing group work especially. People will not give their all to you if they do not respect you.
That's how I perceive the game of survivor. Everyone will have their own opinion. This is mine. For me, Hayley is the most well rounded player of Survivor AU.
Last edited:
JimJam
Well-Known Member
Hayley was very gracious and philosophical in defeat! Other observations… Loved Liz’s cucumber comment - haha! Simon looks like a little kid getting a gold star from his teacher when he wins immunity. That was very sneaky of him to throw out the rice. If he also manages to rally everyone against George, that is very well played; under estimated by everybody!
Meglos
HAVE A NECTARINE, GONK
Me too.
He's terrible at Survivor, which is sad for such a superfan.
But his enthusiasm is contagious and he seems like he'd be nice outside of the game.
Plus I want his body (and the double entendre is intentional, I mean it both ways)
Hayley really believed her own hype. She thought she was going to win the crown for the 2nd time
George has received death threats as well.
What sad sacks send death threats to people on a reality TV show.