EVERY SINGLE PERSON ON THIS TRIBE IS AN IDIOT: Cannot discuss tonight's Survivor in a non-spoilery way, so join me below the fold.
What made me happiest about tonight, even happier than the ouster of Coach, High Priest of Douchebaggery, was the re-emergence of Sandra as a strategist in the game. Yes, Ms. As Long As You're Not Voting For Me, I'm Cool With It does have a plan here, manipulating an oddly rudderless Russell rather easily.
But, still: Russell's plans of positioning the tribe to look the women are running the show so that he can gain the Heroes' confidence upon a merge is a pretty brilliant move I don't think we've seen before. The only parallel circumstance I can recall was the move in Survivor Outback when Colby's tribe knew who to target at the tied merge because someone leaked to Kimmi which member already had a vote cast against him, back when that silly tiebreaker ruled.
And, seriously, based on the preview for next week, J.T. might make this just brilliantly stupid. I can't wait.
I have never seen so many stupid decisions in all my life!
ReplyDeleteRussell voted for Courtney, so I don't know if the women's alliance is his strategy. God only knows why Danielle/Parv voted for Coach then? Anyway, loved the preview for next week.
ReplyDeleteThe loss of Rob M has exposed one problem with Masters Survivor: they're all at least advanced enough in strategery to remove brilliant, charismatic players early on.
I think Russell thought he needed to do that to keep the women in his tribe happy, believing that's where things were going. Regardless, he's *now* set up to do the "JT, save me!" strategy.
ReplyDeleteProbst:
ReplyDeleteWhen the Villains were strategizing about whom to sit out at the reward challenge, it was Coach that was taking the leadership role. Coach was asking silly questions like “Who is good at bowling?” What? Coach, this isn’t the PBA with oiled up lanes and a Black Diamond 16 lb ball. This is Survivor bowling. It’s 90 percent luck for crying out loud. When you have to sit someone out, the question should never be about the Reward Challenge, it should always be about the upcoming Immunity Challenge. You have to keep in mind that whoever sits out in the Reward challenge has to play in the Immunity Challenge.
Leadership. Forward thinking. Sorely missing.
I read someone (Fienberg?) guess that he put Courtney's name down (and he "signed" it) so he could tell Coach that he didn't vote for him during the end game.
ReplyDeleteSandra singlehandedly saved this season for me. I don't enjoy watching Russel. As long as I can hope that Sandra will continue to be in a position to play Russel, I can stick with it. I do love the format of the show but Probst's (and the rest of the show, except some of the players') sexism is becoming unbearable. No matter how much Probst wants Survivor to be about male strength, at it's core it is a psychological game. That's why I love that they showed us Sandra manipulating Russel. It was masterful.
ReplyDelete<span>
ReplyDelete<p><span></span>
</p><p>Last week, despite the mass proclamations of Hate, I thought Russell looked pretty darned smart for having spent two episodes engineering the ouster of (from his point of view) his most dangerous rival.
</p><p>This week, though, we're back to the guy who can manipulate, but is only playing to get to the end, not to actually win that Last Challenge. Coach was a guy Russell wanted to carry as far as possible, because a) if he went out before FTC, that's a vote for Russell, and b) everyone else seemed to dislike him enough that if he actually made it to FTC, that's a lot of votes for Not-Coach.
</p><p>As Probst said: Forward Thinking. Sorely missing.
</p></span>
Totally agree. Even at the challenges, Probst will call on men to speak for the tribe - even when, as in the case of the villains, there aren't very many men.
ReplyDeleteAlso? Most sexist moment of last week - Russell telling Rob that they should get rid of Sandra or Courtney IN FRONT of Sandra and Courtney. As if (1) in a group of 4 people, the 2 men automatically make the decisions and (2) women somehow have fewer votes? I don't know, but I weep for humanity.