Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread

05-22-2020 , 01:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by housenuts
Think I wrote this before but if I was on the show I'd always intentionally bastardize the spelling of ppl's names
Would be funny if there there were 2 people with similar names.
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
05-22-2020 , 02:49 PM
I love that Tarzan and Troyzan played in one season
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
05-23-2020 , 12:55 AM
I just saw a tweet that said Michele is/was on a Friday night poker game on pokergo.
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
05-24-2020 , 02:16 PM
Not much in this Kim interview with Rob. Id skip it.
Kind of reinforced how dominant Tony’s game was.
He’s telling people the plan minutes before the lockdown and somehow just getting away with it.
Tony also had Jeremy eating out of the palm of his hand, apparently

I also think Sarah has Kim snowed to this day.
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
05-24-2020 , 05:38 PM
I'm rewatching HvV. My biggest takeaway so far is "Thank god Rupert never won so I didn't have to watch his dumb ass on WaW".
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
05-25-2020 , 02:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by King~of~Diamonds
I just saw a tweet that said Michele is/was on a Friday night poker game on pokergo.
Just watched it here. It was a lot of fun. Tyson was playing as well as Michael Cera and Bruce Buffer (UFC Announcer).
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
05-28-2020 , 07:36 AM
I just finished rewatching season 1.

Biggest takeaways:

1) Jeff is way more present in the show - for example, one of the reward challenges is you get to go have dinner with him.

2) On the flip side, he doesn't narrate the challenges

3) The challenges are much less impressive - the first challenge in survivor history is basically "run through some water and along the sand and light torches along the way"

4) That said, the final 3 challenge was just "who can stand with their hand on the idol the longest". Surprised it only lasted 4 hrs.

5) Tribal council is usually about 2 minutes long and involves 2-3 questions.

6) They call the immunity necklace "the talisman"

7) They call the merge "the merger"

8) The impression that Hatch was the only one who thought of an alliance is overblown; multiple players mention it and say they don't want to do it or they think

9) This season would never fly in the "woke" era. Hatch is referred to (admittedly in a non insulting way) by almost every name for gay people that wouldn't be considered acceptable today.

10) Kelly is probably underrated as a Woo level maker of FTC mistakes - taking Hatch over Rudy at F3

8) Sue Hawk's FTC speech is just amazing.
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
05-28-2020 , 10:36 AM
re: 10 - I thought it was established that Rudy would have won vs either of them.
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
05-28-2020 , 11:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bazooka87
re: 10 - I thought it was established that Rudy would have won vs either of them.
Probably true, but not neccesarily. I think Hatch tries harder in the F3 challenge if he knows a Rudy win sinks him, but I could be wrong.
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
05-28-2020 , 03:03 PM
I'd highly recommend that anyone listen to Adam Klein's RHAP interview. The guy is smart, but it seems he has a tendency to overthink things and just galaxy brain it.

The most interesting things were: He had a secret alliance with Michele and told her twice she was about to be blindsided - at the Natalie and Wendell votes. This explains why he told her about the Fleur De Lis like minutes after she had voted for him.

The fleur de lis was on the buffs, he thought he might have to race for the idol because someone might have the clue.

I know I've said I don't like Rob here but my opinion of him went up. Rob and Adam were very close from the start, and part of their spats at tribal was an act. Specifically at the tribal where Rob instructs people to empty their bags, he had pre-warned Adam about it. So Adam was really playing up his disapproval.

Rob also played a game of "who has the stick" in order to get people's tells.

Adam's pitch to Rob for why he should be ok with Parvati going went as follows: The other tribe has voted out Amber, so they clearly are anti-Rob. Heading into a swap Rob's best chance of survival is to look like he's at the bottom, as if they think he's in control they'll boot him immediately. If Parvati goes and Rob is blindsided then it's more likely they scoop him up. Adam recognised that Rob could use this ammunition against him, but warned Rob that he would not be able to use this to get Adam eliminated this round. Adam told him that the new-schoolers were intent on making one of the trio go.

Rob does look terrible on the swap tribe though, Adam said he thought he had Ben but there was just no chance of that being a reality because Ben felt intimidated by Rob. Adam recognised that Rob going was bad for his short-term game and wanted to flip the script on Sarah using Sophie-Rob but Rob never gave him the opportunity because he implemented the buddy system. Adam didn't want to rat on Ben to Rob directly because he felt like Rob would just use the ammunition against Adam again.

He felt generally the players played extremely scared of the cops and that the endgame was frustrating to watch.

Said the edge was cliquey and that Rob/Amber played the best edge game on a social level as they were in the "in" group but also had positive relationships with the castaways who had been ostracized. Those were Wendell, himself and Yul.
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
05-28-2020 , 06:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by master3004
Probably true, but not neccesarily. I think Hatch tries harder in the F3 challenge if he knows a Rudy win sinks him, but I could be wrong.
From memory Hatch said he didn't want to beat Rudy as he would have taken Kelly and lost Rudy's vote at final tribal
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
05-29-2020 , 12:38 AM
rudy would have definitely won 100%
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
05-29-2020 , 02:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bazooka87
From memory Hatch said he didn't want to beat Rudy as he would have taken Kelly and lost Rudy's vote at final tribal
This has never made sense to me.

So Rich and Kelly both know Rudy beats them in a F2. Therefore, one of them must win. To Richard, that means he has to at least try until Rudy drops and then give it up to Kelly OR he has to beat Rudy if Kelly drops and vote him out, possibly sacrificing his vote.

If he is so sure that Rudy wins a F2, the voting out Rudy and possibly losing his vote is a better outcome than Rudy winning F3 in any and all situations.

Therefore either Hatch is lying or Rudy was less of a 100% lock than he pretends.
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
05-29-2020 , 08:49 AM
I watched the Survivor Sequester Mini game yesterday

Would recommend it as was a lot of fun.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcGXTwUP35k

I think the way the final four works is super interesting where the 4th place finisher drags out 3rd place with them.

I wonder if actual Survivor could incorporate something like that in the final 5. Anything to avoid the final four fire making challenge
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
05-30-2020 , 04:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punker
5) Tribal council is usually about 2 minutes long and involves 2-3 questions.

6) They call the immunity necklace "the talisman"

8) The impression that Hatch was the only one who thought of an alliance is overblown; multiple players mention it and say they don't want to do it or they think
5) Yea just watched S5-6 and lol'ed at this. Also the post-immunity "strategy" was about 60 seconds.

6) Haha, had no memory of that.

8) The other players mention it after it's already clear they're being picked off or before? Regardless, they still didn't want to do it as you say. Also looks like your typing got cut off here...
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
05-30-2020 , 04:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by master3004
This has never made sense to me.

So Rich and Kelly both know Rudy beats them in a F2. Therefore, one of them must win. To Richard, that means he has to at least try until Rudy drops and then give it up to Kelly OR he has to beat Rudy if Kelly drops and vote him out, possibly sacrificing his vote.

If he is so sure that Rudy wins a F2, the voting out Rudy and possibly losing his vote is a better outcome than Rudy winning F3 in any and all situations.

Therefore either Hatch is lying or Rudy was less of a 100% lock than he pretends.
It could be that he doesn't want to "betray" Rudy to that extent just as a human being, and/or he thinks that move would make his jury perception overall too negative to win other votes.
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
05-31-2020 , 09:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by master3004
This has never made sense to me.

So Rich and Kelly both know Rudy beats them in a F2. Therefore, one of them must win. To Richard, that means he has to at least try until Rudy drops and then give it up to Kelly OR he has to beat Rudy if Kelly drops and vote him out, possibly sacrificing his vote.

If he is so sure that Rudy wins a F2, the voting out Rudy and possibly losing his vote is a better outcome than Rudy winning F3 in any and all situations.

Therefore either Hatch is lying or Rudy was less of a 100% lock than he pretends.
He felt his only winning scenario was against Kelly, but only if he wasn't the one to vote out Rudy. Therefore, Kelly had to win the F3 challenge. Hatch winning the F3 challenge just means he gets to pick who he loses to.
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
06-02-2020 , 09:37 AM
Season 2 rewatch

This is another season I watched live at the time. A few takeaways:

1) The editing here is a massive leap forward towards how survivor looks now; Jeff incorporates more of his catch phrases.

2) Tribal council is quite expanded from season 1 and Jeff seems much more polished in his question asking.

3) This season was much more focused on the survival aspect; these tribes ran out of food, their camp was washed out, they were literally starving at one point.

4) Maybe this is blasphemous, but I don't see why Amber ever got invited back based off this performance; she wasn't a very interesting character, wasn't good at challenges, didn't give particularly memorable confessionals, and didn't make any particular moves. She just hung around until near the end and was never someone that seemed like a threat to win.

5) Jerri I had this memory of being a super villain; on rewatch, I didn't really see it. She's a bit harsh with people, but she's not lying or backstabbing anyone. The whole Sarah Lacina speech from S40 was way more applicable to her; she just made it clear she was there to win and wasn't making apologies for it.

6) Also in "mis-remembered" things, I had this impression of Colby as some super challenge beast because of his physical dominance. He won a bunch of challenges, but there were mitigating factors; first, he was the only one eating because he was winning all the reward challenges and it became a bit of a self fulfilling cycle given how badly the tribe was doing foodwise. Further to that, he was competing in challenges against an old guy, three women who were all likely sub-100lbs, and one actual other physical threat.

7) I'm actually a bit surprised Tina beat him.

8) The one thing about editing that seems odd is they actualy downplay the alliance. At the end, it's clear (both Tina and Colby say it) that they brought Keith along as far as they could as a goat, and it checks out based on their obvious disdain for him (one of the FTC questions is "who on this jury are you happy isn't going to win or doesn't deserve it" and they both say Keith. That he's a goat they're carrying along is never mentioned before that.

9) I'm really surprised it took so long for Skupin to come back. He was a really dominant personality on the season before his accident.

10) lol at the family visit being done by some version of ICQ chat.
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
06-02-2020 , 10:18 AM
That was the first season I watched "live" as well (been a while but presumably it took ages to get to Australian shores, even though it was the Australian season).

Of people coming back I'm still confused that the public voted for Kimmi in Second Chances, and that she was even nominated for it. I just assumed Amber got into All-Stars because Elisabeth declined
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
06-02-2020 , 09:39 PM
Regarding Skupin- popular theory is that he was cast for All Stars, but he blabbed about it before they filmed, so CBS cut him so as to set an example.

Are any of the recent RHAP deep dives particularly good? Gonna listen to Sophie’s (and obv Tony if/when he does one), but wondering if there are any gems from Rob’s interviews with Kim/Meesh/Ethan.
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
06-03-2020 , 08:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketInfinities
Regarding Skupin- popular theory is that he was cast for All Stars, but he blabbed about it before they filmed, so CBS cut him so as to set an example.

Are any of the recent RHAP deep dives particularly good? Gonna listen to Sophie’s (and obv Tony if/when he does one), but wondering if there are any gems from Rob’s interviews with Kim/Meesh/Ethan.
Adam's is the best, because he's funny and it actually reveals a lotta context behind his decisions and also some just weird stuff like why did Adam tell Michele about the "Fleur De Lis" literally minutes after she just voted for him.


The Meesh one is fine, mostly what it solidified for me is that Ben is an absolute moron and Jeremy and Nick got playyyyeddd bad by the cops.

I found Ethan's hard to listen to because I felt bad for him, I think he feels more disdain for Adam than anyone else because he saved Adam at the first vote.
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
06-04-2020 , 02:14 PM
I like the talk about prop collecting at the start of Adam’s interview.
Id like to know the hierarchy of whose torches sell for how much money. I think an interview with a serious collector would make for a good podcast
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
06-04-2020 , 10:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by King~of~Diamonds
I like the talk about prop collecting at the start of Adam’s interview.
Id like to know the hierarchy of whose torches sell for how much money. I think an interview with a serious collector would make for a good podcast
These were allegedly the prices, taken from Survivor reddit.

Final Torch Standings On Ebay

1-Boston Rob-$15,223.90

2-Tony-$10,723.90

3-Parvati-$7,723.90

4-Sandra-$7,079.90

5-Adam-$6,223.90

6-Sarah-$5,723.90

7-Tyson-$4,423.90

8-Yul-$4,373.90

9-Ben-$4,223.90

10-Amber-$4,173.90

11-Kim-$4,173.90

12-Sophie-$4,173.90

13-Natalie-$3,773.90

14-Wendell-$3,732.89

15-Danni-$3,673.90

16-Jeremy-$3,673.90

17-Michele-$3,173.90

18-Nick-$2,873.90

19-Denise-$2,708.54

20-Ethan-$2,673.90



Surprised to see Ethan last and Jeremy so low, otherwise Tony being that far below Rob is a little bit surprising. That basically proves to me that Rob will always be the most famous survivor player, the top 4 make sense. Adam at 5 is a bit shocking, but I actually think he'll go down as one of the most memorable winners in the casuals minds.

Who do y'all think are most likely to return from this cast? I think Adam and Sophie because they both have the will and both will likely get an invite.
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
06-04-2020 , 10:57 PM
Natalie most likely returnee.

Adam most shocking torch price.
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote
06-05-2020 , 03:11 AM
Three torches going for $4173.90 is curious
Survivor: Winners At War Main Thread Quote

      
m