Todd is very good, but not GOAT material imo. He made a massive blunder in not booting JRB and James the other way round, and he would have lost if Amanda hadn't imploded at F4 but he thinks about the game at a high level, and he'd definitely be worth inviting back for a future ASS.
Also, Clovis, please don't restart your feud with Kart. I disagree with him about a lot too (because I'm a raging Russtard) but that's completely unconnected to whether or not he's a moron, and he's clearly not.
Russell is leaps and bounds above Shane (and most of the people Kart would rate highly I imagine): he may always falter in the endgame and his jury management, but at least he can consistently get himself to the point where those things even become relevant, unlike the vast majority of players. Shane was incredibly entertaining, but not because he was some sort of master strategist.
Quote:
I could get behind Todd as GOAT. As much as I think different playing styles can be successful, I still think Todd's is optimal. Align with someone else who is trying to play the game as well, and is loyal, but who you can definately beat at the end. Then, the two of you have your own little side alliances (as in people who give you information or who trust the information you give them) as you slay the competition together. Be likeable and show your competitors respect even if you don't have much for them. It's a winning recipe, I think.
I think this works a lot better in theory than in practice. Somebody who is able to play the game well enough that you'd feel threatened by them might be good as a short-term ally, but they'll identify you as a strategic threat and try to eliminate you when it's convenient; Amanda was definitely loyal initially, but Todd doesn't win China unless she makes the bizarre play of targetting Denise at F4. Being generally likeable is good, but it's hardly a 'playing style', it's just obvious.
Everybody (rightly) talks about people like Cirie, Heidik, Rob C. etc. as GOAT candidates, but person I think should be mentioned more is Stephen Fishbach. He was placed in a season with an incredibly warped social dynamic (everybody post-merge with the exception of Tyson, Erinn and himself was playing for JT to win rather than themselves), and yet still put himself in the best position to win (i.e. either he or Erinn wins F3 immunity challenge). His comments on Sucks and his blog make clear that he has a very analytical and mature approach to the game, and I think he'd be a favourite in any future season he was on.
Last edited by SavageTilt; 10-04-2010 at 11:36 AM.