Sugar's strategy

0 Kudo

Started By	Comment
A Dying Clown		#41	[-]
Posts: 7229 (12/15/08 6:31 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	I think most people would rather be rich than famous, so play to win (and if they do want to be famous would find a more relevant reality show).
Francois40		#42	[-]
Posts: 2685 (12/15/08 8:29 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Yeah it's possible she just went into it with a "Let's just make a good TV show" mindset. That wouldn't surprise me at all. Frankly I'm surprised more people don't do that. Actually, she makes no bones about the fact that her entire raison d'etre was to get more work from this "gig". She's been in SAG for a decade and done at least two movies recently. I'm afraid she may be the person for whom this franchise jumped the shark. Jonathan was a well-known actor, but at least he played the game with real strategy and tried to win. All she tried to do was get more offers.
Baulder		#43	[-]
Posts: 350 (12/15/08 8:34 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	She might have played with the mindset that she was going to get more "gigs" out of being on Survivor but she still managed to set herself up well for the endgame. The onions didn't like her but she had Kenny, Susie, and Crystal with her. I think she just made the conscious decision in the Crystal boot episoide that she wasn't playing to win. She could have gone to the end with any combination of the other three and had a shot at winning. The Onions might have hated Sugar but they hated all 3 of those others too.
losemygrip		#44	[-]
Posts: 142 (12/15/08 11:05 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	While I admired Sugar's game, she was NOT a strategist (at least as far as the actual game goes). She was all about tactics, but no strategy. The goal is to win. She never played to win, just to get into the final. A strategist would have started looking at the final six and deciding who were the best bets for the final 3, and then prepared an awesome jury argument. We know she didn't even think about that. On the other hand, as a strategist for furthering her career, she was both successful and unsuccessful. Successful in that she had the freedom to do crazy things that would get her lots of screen time; unsuccessful in that actually winning would have REALLY gotten her even more attention. But hardly anything happened in the game (after Ace's ouster) that Sugar didn't sanction or orchestrate. She was practically Brian.
Glebe220		#45	[-]
Posts: 2479 (12/15/08 11:07 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Going way back to page one Again, they [Ian and Sugar] didn't play like champions, they played like Survivor fans. But neither of them were fans going in. Do you mean they played as if they were doing the average fan's bidding? Because not trying to win isn't very fan-like. Obviously Sugar knew she couldn't win, even several episodes back. The problem is she never really tried. If you know you're screwed, fine your objectives can change. Sugar never seemed to have her eye on the prize. I also have no problem with someone selflessly advancing a friend even to the detriment of personal strategy. Colby voting out Keith, for example. Sugar taking the ally she wanted to win to the end would be another example, or even better if she had been able to take both Bob and Matty. But who she wanted to push forward any given day seemed to constantly change. For a while it was her long-time allies Crystal and Ken. Then Crystal was kinda mean one day, so Sugar decided she wanted to help Matty. Then on day 38 she felt bad for Bob so now it was time to help him instead. It frustrated me since I could empathize with the other players. How do you play with someone like that, who never attempted to win yet managed to find herself the king maker again and again, mostly not through her own doing? Maybe you could say it's their fault for not taking out the wildcard, but it doesn't make a season decided on a series of coin flips in Sugar's pea brain any less frustrating. She never played to win, just to get into the final. I wouldn't even give her this much credit. She probably had the immediate goal to make it through each TC, though we don't know since no one targeted her. But I'd say her goal at any given point wasn't to win, or to make it to the final, or even to make it far, but to vote out whoever displeased her at that time. Randy was nasty, let's humiliate him. Crystal was mean, let's turn on her and get her out. Each of those moves worked but the moves were never strung together into any overarching strategy. Her making it to the end was kind of a fluke more than anything she did. Last Edited By: Glebe220 12/15/08 11:11 PM. Edited 1 times.
menelaus		#46	[-]
Posts: 64 (12/15/08 11:08 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	She was like mega-retard Brian who INTENTIONALLY tried to lose to forward her career. Even that won't end well since I doubt that anyone would actually WANT to work with her (seriously, who would want to work with a whiney little brat that breaks into %@%+% every 5 minutes)
Baulder		#47	[-]
Posts: 352 (12/16/08 9:07 AM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	I think people are getting Sugar's acting confused with Sugar's gameplay. If you look at the progression of the game, she did what any good Survivor player would do (until of course the final 6 when she decide a "good" person should win). Early game - We know that she ahd a strong alliance with Ace and Jacquie. Although this early alliance was not enough to form a majority it was enough to shield her from at least a few votes (if they would have had to go to triabl council at all). After the switch she had the immunity idol and everybody knew it, but her name still did not come up for discussion. The vote was always deflected onto another: GC, Kelly, and Ace. She also should for the first time she was willing to betray others to get far in the game. If it had been any other season the Fang majority would have used Kelly and taken out Ace, Sugar, and Jacquie one, two, three. I think this is the best example of somehow Sugar's mindset was semi-infectious. People don't vote on the grounds of what was the best strategicly but who "deserved" to be there. Pose merge Sugar was never a target...ever. She also played a big role in deciding it what order to dice the onions. Sure she said and did some things that could cost her some jury votes, but I don't think anybody could have counted on the jury being so bitter. There was no respect or even thought about gameplay at the final vote. Then like I said in my last post at the final Six is when Sugar decide she was not playing to win. She had 2 great goats with her (Susie and Crystal) and then somebody equally disliked who was self destructing more and more everyday (Kenny), and bringing them to the end could ahve netted her a win. So bottom line Sugar did have a strategy but just like Colby decided that her winning wasn't the most important thing.
Ngiratkel		#48	[-]
Posts: 227 (12/16/08 9:16 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Well a lot of other Survivor losers had similar strategies but we don't call them "strategists". Like people going on the show for fame. Do we call them "strategists"? All of the castaways in the earliest seasons became famous, and for some that was their main goal along with winning. So that's the same kind of thing as Sugar. We don't call them "strategists" for accomplishing their personal goals
IluvGoddessCirie		#49	[-]
Posts: 377 (12/16/08 10:05 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Ngiratkel wrote: Well a lot of other Survivor losers had similar strategies but we don't call them "strategists". Like people going on the show for fame. Do we call them "strategists"? All of the castaways in the earliest seasons became famous, and for some that was their main goal along with winning. So that's the same kind of thing as Sugar. We don't call them "strategists" for accomplishing their personal goals But the difference between them and Sugar is that in most cases they weren't the ones calling the shots. Sugar controlled the entire end game, she decided who went, when they went and even how they went in most cases. She blindsided five or six people (Ace/Charlie/Randy/Crystal/Kenny/Matty), and always knew what was going on, and always had getting to the final three in mind. But she wasn't playing the game to win, she was playing to be the star of the show, to get more acting work and to pick a "good" winner. She played a truly bizarre game, and in some ways it was terrible and in others it was brilliant. So I think she was actually a strategist, but one whose goal wasn't to win the game. Does anyone think that Sugar's best bet wasn't actually to go to the F3 with Crystal and Suzie, but Kenny and Crystal? I think (maybe totally wrongly) that Marcus/Charlie/Matty/Bob would have voted for Sugar over Kenny or Crystal. I think Marcus and Charlie really hated Kenny.
7Sages		#50	[-]
Posts: 240 (12/16/08 10:24 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Well it's easy to find yourself in control when you've got the immunity idol and aren't playing the game to win. Goats like Dreamz and Katie have controlled their seasons, but it's because they were playing poor social and strategic games and that's why people left them alone and let them become powerful. That doesn't make you a great strategist
IluvGoddessCirie		#51	[-]
Posts: 378 (12/16/08 10:46 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	7Sages wrote: Well it's easy to find yourself in control when you've got the immunity idol and aren't playing the game to win. Goats like Dreamz and Katie have controlled their seasons, but it's because they were playing poor social and strategic games and that's why people left them alone and let them become powerful. That doesn't make you a great strategist Who is saying she's a "great" strategist? She wasn't playing to win, so by definition she wasn't a great strategist. But Sugar wasn't Katie/Dreamz. Firstly, Katie didn't control Palau. She was told what to do at every turn by Tom and Ian. She never made a move on her own, bar her decision to cause a tie at the Final 4. Where she could of made moves (F7, F6, F5) she didn't, and just stuck with whatever she was being told to do. That's almost the opposite of how Sugar played. Dreamz's game is much more similar to Sugar's in that he chose when to flip and to make huge moves on his own (at the F9, the F6 and F4 specifically.) But the thing that really divides Sugar from these two is that in both Katie and Dreamz's cases, there was someone dragging them to the end for their own advantage (Tom, Ian, Cassandra, Earl). Kenny was doing the same to Sugar but she blindsided and voted him out. She was the one running the show, certainly from the F6 onwards. Dreamz and especially Katie never ran a thing.
SPunKeeMonKee		#52	[-]
Posts: 11596 (12/16/08 10:53 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	I'm kind of worried about the fallout from Sugar's very blatant strategy to play for screen time and post-show fame rather than the million dollars. Hopefully we won't have any more imitators because that would completely ruin the show for me. I can get past mactors and recruits because they're still real people playing the game. It wasn't an experience or a competition for Sugar, this was just another acting gig. I suspected that was the case earlier in the season but I didn't think it would go this far.
7Sages		#53	[-]
Posts: 241 (12/16/08 10:53 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Katie was the swing vote at F6 and F5, and was in no danger at F4 or F3, making her the person most in control of the game strategically. Even if she was given advice, she in the end, was the one to make the choice whether to try forcing a tie at F6 or siding with Ian and Tom over the girls at F5. I didn't mean that Sugar and Katie were the same. Katie was trying to win, and Sugar had other goals. I was just pointing out that being the most in control doesn't make a person the best strategist like how some people think. Sugar is mostly like Lill who controlled most of the merge game but gave the win up to someone who she felt was deserving instead of other people who she'd have a better chance at winning against. However, she's still very different than Lill and 1 of a kind, because she's 1 of the few players whose main goal really wasn't to win
seltzer3		#54	[-]
Posts: 944 (12/16/08 11:32 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	You know what I realized? Sugar is the first person to have 0 votes casted against her and for her.
SenseiKreese		#55	[-]
Posts: 2834 (12/16/08 11:54 AM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Yeah but Sugar had the not so hidden immunity idol for most of the game too. That sort of puts an asterisk next to that statistic. Even if there was a reason to, people wouldn't have wanted to vote for her all game because it was risky.
mfrimley		#56	[-]
Posts: 965 (12/16/08 3:41 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	All I can say is thank God GC quit. If he hadn't, it looks like they would have tried to blindside Sugar. It would have been a completely different season.
cindidindi76		#57	[-]
Posts: 14089 (12/16/08 3:50 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	SPunKeeMonKee wrote: I'm kind of worried about the fallout from Sugar's very blatant strategy to play for screen time and post-show fame rather than the million dollars. Hopefully we won't have any more imitators because that would completely ruin the show for me. I can get past mactors and recruits because they're still real people playing the game. It wasn't an experience or a competition for Sugar, this was just another acting gig. I suspected that was the case earlier in the season but I didn't think it would go this far. I agree 100%. It boggles the mind that so many people on this board that absolutely HATE "mactors", are such crazed Sugar fans, when she was not only a "mactress", but used the WHOLE FREAKING SHOW as a giant audition. And all the love for her is really making me worried about future casting decisions.
unduli clone		#58	[-]
Posts: 3510 (12/16/08 3:59 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Sugar and Katie are essentially flip sides of the same coin. Katie played for 100K instead of the mil, while Sugar played for screen-time instead of the mil. They were both highly entertaining and brightened up their seasons, but I do fear a fallout from Sugar's antics.
IluvGoddessCirie		#59	[-]
Posts: 386 (12/16/08 4:21 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	7Sages wrote: Katie was the swing vote at F6 and F5, and was in no danger at F4 or F3, making her the person most in control of the game strategically. Even if she was given advice, she in the end, was the one to make the choice whether to try forcing a tie at F6 or siding with Ian and Tom over the girls at F5. I didn't mean that Sugar and Katie were the same. Katie was trying to win, and Sugar had other goals. I was just pointing out that being the most in control doesn't make a person the best strategist like how some people think. Sugar is mostly like Lill who controlled most of the merge game but gave the win up to someone who she felt was deserving instead of other people who she'd have a better chance at winning against. However, she's still very different than Lill and 1 of a kind, because she's 1 of the few players whose main goal really wasn't to win Katie didn't have a choice about what to do at the F6. She was completely outmanouvered by Tom and Ian, who already had Caryn's vote secured for Gregg. Then, minutes before tribal council they told her "vote with us or pick a rock". She never made ANY moves or dictated anyone's boots. I'm not saying Sugar played a great game (she didn't) but she wasn't riding coattails, she was the one running the show (certainly from the F6 onwards). I agree she's much more like Lill in the way she played.
Baulder		#60	[-]
Posts: 353 (12/16/08 5:06 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	SenseiKreese wrote: Yeah but Sugar had the not so hidden immunity idol for most of the game too. That sort of puts an asterisk next to that statistic. Even if there was a reason to, people wouldn't have wanted to vote for her all game because it was risky. Tell that to Ozzy, James, and all the others who have been blindsided for having an idol. I don't hear people putting an asterisk next to Yul had the idol the whole game but was still considered a great strategist. I can agree that Sugar played up for the cameras and in the end she decided that she wasn't playing to win. But she seperates herself from players like Katie and Lil because for most of the game she was playing to win and had a good shot at it. There is also a difference between "controlling the game" and being in the majority alliance like other goats (Katie, Dreamz, Becky, Kim J.). Sure the fact that she didn't have any votes cast against her can be discounted because everybody knew that she had the idol, but from what we saw she was never under discussion for being voted out. None of the majoirty alliances thought about taking her out to take out the idol, and most of them looked to her to decide what to do.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

Sugar's strategy

Quick Reply