Survivor

JtRentvvI can see that historically survivor has been very important to youTo me, survivor is entertainment. for my entertainment purposes I will stick to my preference for a F2. The last 3 standing is kind of anti-climatic Heads up. I also post to the threads for entertainment purposes.

JTRentvv wrote:

I_Hate_You88 wrote: W - at the hell kind of response is that?

The (apparently obscure) point being:Just because the TWO of you THINK F3's suck, doesn't change the REALITY that they are better for the show, and the Jury.

How are final 3s better? The only final 3 that was actualy good was in China, but that was only because it was such a great season anyways.

Having three in the final really detracts from the show. It's such a shame that a show that gets you so involved each week ends without a real one-on-one competition.

I'm glad that Charlie, Marcus, Randy and Corinne -- the FAKE Four--are not able to get the million because they have black hearts.They make Crystal look like an Angel. So I think the finally three should be Matty, Sugar and Ken. SHOULD.Bob doesn't deserve to be in the finally three. He has yet to actually play the game. Matty tried and just like Kathy to get an alliance going but couldn't find someone worthy. Who was worthy for him? That's hot it falls sometimes and for not getting an alliance he surely made it far. Sugar has voted for every single person who was out...meaning she has yet to have a throw away vote. Ken has made great moves to get people out and has made power moves.Those three should be in the finals...period. Bob and Suzie do not. They have no reason to be there other than bleeding hearts.I think, out of those three, that Sugar should win. But there are far too many angry people..

I_Hate_You88 wrote: How are final 3s better? The only final 3 that was actualy good was in China, but that was only because it was such a great season anyways.

For the several reasons I have already posted, but I'll restate them more succinctly here, just for you.1) The "winner" can't win by default by just dragging the most unlikeable #2 along with them.2) It gives the jury (typically) at least TWO valid contenders to choose between.3) It keeps us from getting a Brian/Clay F TC.4) Unlike the US Presidential Election, it is WAY more likely to give us someone to vote/root FOR, rather than vote AGAINST.5) Choice is GOOD.6) Terry Dietz vs. Danielle. 'Nuff said.So, are there any CONCRETE reasons you like F2, or is it just because you LIKE it?

ldquinn wrote: Having three in the final really detracts from the show. It's such a shame that a show that gets you so involved each week ends without a real one-on-one competition.

OK, HOW does it detract, exactly? The F3 is a one-on-one-on-one competition, which often QUICKLY devolves into a one-on-one competition. AND results in "better, more qualified" winners. Look at Brian Hydek(sp?) for example....

There is one main reason the F2 is better. It provides a chance for the other F3 players to knock off the winner-to-be. For example, in Fiji, it would have been exciting to see Dreamz and Cassandra to try to win final immunity and knock off Earl. This season, if the f3 is sugar, susie, and matty, which I think it will be, the final immunity challenge would at least give a chance to sugar and susie to knock off matty.Now I know this argument is completely countered by the f3 in cook islands, where either yul or ozzy would have killed becky in the jury. However, I feel that it should be f2 because it provides a chance to the underdogs, and it provides much more excitement.

Also, there are going to be dud final TCs with both F2s and F3s. That's just the way it is.We have already seen 2 dud F3s, (China and Fiji), and possibly one more this season, if Sugar and Susie make the F3. That's 3/4, or 75%.3/4 of the F2 seasons have not had dud TC's, I would say only about a quarter of them have been duds.

j_jammer wrote: Bob doesn't deserve to be in the finally three. He has yet to actually play the game.

Are you watching the same season the rest of us are?Bob, the guy who made not one, but TWO (non-stick) immunity Idols, AND sold them? THAT Bob doesn't deserve to be in the finally three?Or are you talking about the Bob that won the last FOUR challenges, as a HUGE underdog? THAT Bob doesn't deserve to be in the finally three?The Bob that single-handedly made the moves that set up the cracks in the Fang Alliance, and split up Kenny and Crystal?THAT'S the Bob that has yet to actually play the game? Or is there a DIFFERENT Bob playing this season, that I haven't seen?

He was never the underdog.He didn't make any moves that he was sure about. If it were not for Sugar he wouldn't have done the first immunity idol thing.

zekem834 wrote: Also, there are going to be dud final TCs with both F2s and F3s. That's just the way it is.We have already seen 2 dud F3s, (China and Fiji), and possibly one more this season, if Sugar and Susie make the F3. That's 3/4, or 75%.

Let's not count our Idol's before they are Hidden, shall we? And I disagree that China was a dud. Amanda's PERFORMANCE was a Dud, but she has shown she can Dud up an F2, also. And the Fiji F3 was AT LEAST as good as any Fiji F2 was going to be. So, 0/3 for dud F3's. And subtract one for the Aras/Danielle F2 which Terry SHOULD have been in, so that makes it -1/3 of the F3's have been duds.

zekem834 wrote: 3/4 of the F2 seasons have not had dud TC's, I would say only about a quarter of them have been duds.

I dispute this assertion, also.In an earlier post in this thread, I LISTED the 13 F2's, and by my count, 9/13 were duds. It's been a while since I took statistics, so I guess 9/13 COULD be "only about a quarter", but I'd like to see you take the list and assign Dud/Not Dud to each season, rather than just waving your hands to support your assertion. And, in MY book, the Brian/Clay F2 was a DOUBLE Dud, so it should count DOUBLE.Or, you are WELCOME to say your OPINION is F2's are better then F3's, but pronouncing it as fact will only perpetuate this discussion, because I will CONTINUE to demand you provide facts and reasoned analysis, which you CAN'T.

j_jammer wrote: He was never the underdog.

Wow. Just Wow.Being down 3 to 5, then 2 to 5, then ONE to 5 doesn't count as being an underdog?Now I'm not sure whether the difference is in the show we are viewing, or the dictionary we are using.Please enlighten me as to where my definition of "underdog" is in error, if you would.

j_jammer wrote: He didn't make any moves that he was sure about. If it were not for Sugar he wouldn't have done the first immunity idol thing.

Yes, the show has been FULL of Jury members each season thet only made moves they were "sure" about.Bob, in his "underdog" status, had to MAKE his luck, so he had to make moves that were UNSURE, but MIGHT improve his position. Have Kenny and Crystal done the same? No. And so we got the episode we got yesterday.

JTRentvv wrote:

j_jammer wrote: He was never the underdog.

Wow. Just Wow.Being down 3 to 5, then 2 to 5, then ONE to 5 doesn't count as being an underdog?Now I'm not sure whether the difference is in the show we are viewing, or the dictionary we are using.Please enlighten me as to where my definition of "underdog" is in error, if you would.

Underdog would mean not a chance in hell.He had more than a chance in hell....they liked him. They liked him well enough that Sugar protected him. No underdog gets protection. He's not an underdog.

JTRentvv wrote:

j_jammer wrote: He didn't make any moves that he was sure about. If it were not for Sugar he wouldn't have done the first immunity idol thing.

Yes, the show has been FULL of Jury members each season thet only made moves they were "sure" about.Bob, in his "underdog" status, had to MAKE his luck, so he had to make moves that were UNSURE, but MIGHT improve his position. Have Kenny and Crystal done the same? No. And so we got the episode we got yesterday.

Bob doesn't think of the consequences of his actions. Ken and everyone else does. he just does what is right for him at the moment.Flawed because he was mad that Sugar laughed at Randy. He wasn't mad at her, he was mad at how he conducted himself to get where he now was. If he were thinking of consequences he wouldn't have dealt with Kenny how he is dealing with him.If he was playing the game he'd tell Kenny that's the way the cookie crumbles get over it. But he hasn't and won't because he's not thinking ahead. He's enjoying the moment.Bob is a great guy, just not a great player. You're right he's won the challenges and rewards but he has not done right with those things to make sure he is in the final three.The final challenge will be endurance and he can't beat out Matty.

Survivor

Survivor Community Forum