| Started By | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 ArtieeLange |
|||
|
Posts: 100 (06/26/08 12:03 AM) |
doc wrote: As always you are half-right, half-stupid.
The ones that stand on a pole for 10 hours ARE amazing. They should be rewarded, with temp immunity and the winners camp.
The ones that dont are weak, and should be penalized by going to TC, and one of these weaklings get booted, and then the losers camp. |
||
|
doc |
|||
|
Posts: 136 (06/26/08 6:29 AM) |
Yet Paarvati did win a stamina contest, even though it took a deal to do it. And Ozzy was 1 of the first out because of his bum shoulder. So under your
system he'd become vulnerable and would have been gone, just like in the game. Someone like Ozzy needs to win every challenge. Under the current system,
it's dumb to get rid of Ozzy during the team phase, and if he was a better strategic player, a more complete player, he could have avoided the blindside
and maybe won the game. There is no reason Tom should have won. Since he did he must be a pretty good social player, unlike Ozzy or Terry.
|
||
|
ArtieeLange |
|||
|
Posts: 101 (06/26/08 7:42 AM) |
doc wrote: Under my system, if you lose you deserve to be vulnerable. However, those who lose are not "gone" simply because they lose, because if they lose
they are not threats.
doc wrote: You only think that because you know Ozzy is a threat. No one knew that until he started winning challenges. Dummy.
doc wrote: Under the current system, the team-phase is the only opportunity for losers to get rid of threats. Dummy.
|
||
|
m0t0 maj1 |
|||
|
Posts: 595 (06/26/08 9:31 AM) |
LOL No buyers still?
*yawns* |
||
|
doc |
|||
|
Posts: 138 (06/26/08 9:47 AM) |
Under my system, if you lose you deserve to be vulnerable. However, those who lose are not "gone" simply because they lose, because if they lose they are not threats. What? Are you serious? You Can't see how someone would a threat at a bunch of Challenges, but some random challenge they might not be? Noone will be in the top each time. Remmber the IC in China that Courtney won. I made a mistake, in that challenge I mentioned before, Ozzy would not have been in the losers group. The order they went down was Cirie/Erik, Alexis, Nat, James, then Ozzy. So Ozzy would just barely make the winners group, but look at who went out just before he did, James. I bet he becomes a target now, huh? doc wrote: So let's start ICs sooner., So the threats are made clear sooner. It's a little hazy when it still a team competition. It is the best chance, except they don't unless your leader has their brains rotted out by steroids. For the Millionth time, in the team game you keep strength, helps win challenges. Why is that so hard to understand? Every survivor ever to play the game gets that. Every fan over the age of 5 gets it. But the whole world and Survivor history is wrong, you're right. Just 1 example would be nice.doc wrote: |
||
|
ArtieeLange |
|||
|
Posts: 102 (06/26/08 5:09 PM) |
doc wrote: Which proves the fairness and variable results of my system. The more they get into the top half, the more immunity they have. The more they fall into the
bottom half, the less they are seen as a threat. The only thing that matters is every player will have much more control over their own fate then they do now,
and the reason for that is the team system, and the reason for that is to keep weaklings and losers around, so as not
to alienate the weakling loser viewers, and the result of that is it alienates everyone else, and the result of that
is 1 million less viewers per season.
doc wrote: How about 2 examples...from the most recent season...of the weakest, worst players ever. Read this entire thread again, dummy.
Last Edited By: ArtieeLange
06/26/08 5:12 PM.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
|
doc |
|||
|
Posts: 139 (06/26/08 5:47 PM) |
I was asking for examples of strong players who got early boots based on "We gotta get rid of him now while he's vulnerable." Which you claim
happens all the time, but has never happened. But thanks for avoiding that request yet again.
|
||
|
ArtieeLange |
|||
|
Posts: 103 (06/27/08 8:43 AM) |
doc wrote: Everyone was strong compared to Kathy and Chet...unless you think they were the strong ones |
||
|
Kitty Pryde1 |
|||
|
Posts: 4958 (06/27/08 8:56 AM) |
Right, so because Mary wasn't Kathy or Chet, she was a physical GODDESS, right? If I recall, they won the next team challenge which involved basketball, which Kathy and Chet were both capable of handling. And when Mikey got booted, if I recall correctly, Kathy and Chet had absolutely nothing to do with either of that episode's losses, given that they weren't even competing in the challenges. And Joel? Well, Joel was an asshole, and they booted him because of that, not his strength. Why don't you go back just two seasons and try to make your case, given that the final ten consisted of an athletic rock-climber, five strong, young guys, a relatively strong young girl, a strong older guy that everyone loved, a smart and strategic older guy, and Cassandra. Cassandra is the only one of the top ten in Fiji that could be considered "weak" and yet Fiji had some of the lowest ratings ever. Probably because people don't like seeing asshole Alpha males win everything like you do, dummy. |
||
|
doc |
|||
|
Posts: 144 (06/27/08 8:59 AM) |
Artie, reread my post, let it stew in your pea-sized brain. I don't know how clearer I can make it.
|
||
|
tubecam |
|||
|
Posts: 111 (06/27/08 9:28 AM) |
It doesn't matter what your post says, this is artie's ego thread. He will keep making senseless arguments with any posters to keep it alive.
|
||
|
doc |
|||
|
Posts: 145 (06/27/08 9:38 AM) |
I know, and I know it does no good. I can't stop, it's an obsession.
|
||
|
tubecam |
|||
|
Posts: 114 (06/27/08 9:43 AM) |
I know, i got in twice.
|
||
|
ArtieeLange |
|||
|
Posts: 104 (06/27/08 8:56 PM) |
Kitty Pryde1 wrote: The "Teams keep strong players around to win challenges!!1" theory? Owned.
Kitty Pryde1 wrote: Already went over this, your memory is as poor as your "logic".
Dreamz, Cassandra, Earl in the finale. Not one but three reasons for low ratings.
1) Everyone knew Earl would win (unanimous)
2) Players all belonged to similar demographic 3) Cassandra = weak, Dreamz = stupid, both = undeserving. Which brings us to the deserving Earl, which brings us to 1) |
||
|
doc |
|||
|
Posts: 147 (06/27/08 9:59 PM) |
Mickey B's boot had nothing to do with "Let's get him out now, because it will be tougher after the merge. " It was because Joel has a tiny
brain, and Tracy convinced him that MB was taking over the tribe. Joel's boot was because it was after the switch and he landed on the wrong team
(Ozzy's)and Cirie was in danger and pointed everyone in Joel's direction. But notice what happens, they lose the next 3 challenges, always happens.
If you want to go back through history, Silas and Aaron wind up on the wrong tribe. China Dave was a nutcase and his tribe thought he might switch. Hunter
was the victim of a power struggle with Boston Rob. Burton wanting to throw the challenge got him booted. The Lopevi alphas was because Chris was trying to
save himself and convinced the Fat Five it was a good move (turned out it really wasn't). Kel was Jerri's victim, and an outsider. Think that's
it. But there's nothing like you claim that always happens. Reasons for boots, mostly self preservation or personal conflicts.
And you're full of shit on Fiji ratings. The final 3 wasn't set until about 45 minutes into the Finale, until Dreamz screws Yau Man, who should be a draw and who everyone thinks will win if he makes the F3 (so you can't saying going in we knew Earl was going to win). Finale ratings should be up at least at the start. But they're already down, the season is a disaster ratings down 3 mil, because of annoying alpha males like Dreamz and Rocky and boring alpha males like Earl and Edgardo. Even Yau Man couldn't save the season. |
||
|
cardswin5 |
|||
|
Posts: 585 (06/27/08 11:50 PM) Registered user |
You can't say something always happens on Survivor because every season has different people and different situations. In general, people keep the
strong ones on to win challenges until the individual portion where the strong ones get picked off so they won't win every immunity. It is boring
to see some "strong" asshole like Tom or Terry win every single god damn immunity and the so called "losers" are the smart ones for getting
the immunity threats out of the way when they get a chance.
Now why don't you just shut the hell up and go back to watching your fucking MTV? |
||
|
ArtieeLange |
|||
|
Posts: 105 (06/28/08 1:11 PM) |
doc wrote: Good point, since under the current system, the team-phase is the only opportunity for losers to get rid of threats = self-preservation. As a strategy it has gradually gained acceptance by the players until now its near-universal, resulting in weaker and weaker finals (and lower and lower ratings). By the time strength matters, post-merge, it has already been systematically weeded out. Hells Kitchen is just the opposite. Only the best are in the finals, because they are selected by a leader. This system works.
RW/RR is also the opposite. Only the best get through, because the players determine their own fate. This system works.
Survivor does neither, it instead relies on the mob opinon, invariably the mobbed up weaklings. This system no longer works. It fails. The game is broke. It
needs to be fixed.
|
||
|
SFC |
|||
|
Posts: 376 (06/28/08 1:39 PM) Registered user |
ArtieeLange wrote: Team Phase = Weeding out the weak players (JFP, Yau, Kathy, Chet, Tracy)
Finals =Average players (Parvati, Amanda, Natalie) I think you need to rename the thread "An idea to improve Survivor so that alpha males comprise the finals" Survivor isn't about the Challenges, it's a Social game more than anything. BTW can you prove that the ratings are low due to weaklings in the Finals? I always assumed the ratings kept decreasing becuase the contestants aren't interesting, and the fact it has been on for 16 seasons. |
||
|
doc |
|||
|
Posts: 150 (06/28/08 5:48 PM) |
ArtieeLange wrote:
|
||
|
oh ehm gee |
|||
|
Posts: 1135 (06/28/08 7:09 PM) |
ArtieeLange wrote: 1) Explain how Bonnie or Virginia are the best. Yes, the more competent finalist won, but that's like saying Fiji worked because Earl won over Dreamz/Cassandra. 2) The RW/RR challenges are A) almost always influenced by pre-game relationships and the "cut the fat" strategy which, if in a challenge where elimination battles are intra-team, rests a player's entire fate in the potential for them to run and lift heavy things and B) consist of endgames which reward having fewer players, downplaying the need for teams to win challenges. If you find no problem with this, then kindly cut the bullshit and3) Because of course, if you're strong enough, then you don't have to be a complete dick to people. Right. 
4) Regarding Fiji, your (1) was an editing decision (probably based on how shitty the characters were), (2) is just plain racist given how final episodes have had similar demographics both before and after (3 older white people in Borneo and Thailand, 3 younger white people in China). If you would like a F3 with differing demographics, then plan for more diversity in casts (which *gasp* yet again references the need for better casting) and (3) is odd, considering how people in the RW/RR challenges have *won* despite being both stupid and coattail riders. 5) Considering that only one person wins, self-preservation should be near-universal unless you're planning on pulling morality-tinged bullshit (which, granted, tends to occur). 6) At some point I'm gonna have to rank the RW/RR challenge whores. Do not be surprised when Katie and Coral land at or near numbers 1 and 2.
Last Edited By: oh ehm gee
06/28/08 7:16 PM.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
