| Started By | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
panurge46 |
|||
|
No, you're saying she was amazing. I'm saying that she was pathetic in everything survivor related. Useless in challenges, horrible social game, very
weak in strategy, unable to provide for herself, bad jury speech, she'd be an early boot in most seasons. She was entertaining though.
|
|||
sddorme.idolnoise |
|||
panurge46 wrote:I loved Sandra, she was a great strategist, great friends, good w/ the jury, and she doesnt have to be great in challenges
Last Edited By: sddorme
11/05/09 9:56 PM.
Edited 1 times.
|
|||
val.kellyclarksonex... |
|||
|
top 10:
#1 Parvati <3 #2 Sandra #3 Todd #4 JT #5 Danni #6 Jenna #7 Hatch #8 Brian #9 Aras #10 Ethan |
|||
toomanynachos16 |
|||
|
Sdor-delete that comment...this is no place to discuss next season.
|
|||
ilovekelly752 |
|||
panurge46 wrote:There's no way she would've won if that were the case. |
|||
panurge46 |
|||
ilovekelly752 wrote: You mean, there's no way she would've won if there weren't any Outcasts that season. Let me amend that: Maybe she wins against Fairplay who was just as pathetic as her in challenges and in providing for the tribe, was only slightly less retarded about strategy than her but had an even worse social game. Sandra won simply because someone HAD to win!!! (A lot like the Rams playing the Lions last week-end) |
|||
ilovekelly752 |
|||
panurge46 wrote: So why didn't Darrah win? One of the so called horrible players took her out. |
|||
Oowatanite |
|||
ilovekelly752 wrote: Fixed. ywia |
|||
panurge46 |
|||
sddorme wrote: Your strategist decided that Trish was more dangerous than Fairplay. She also asked Fairplay and Shawn to plead for their lives just before merge, guaranteeing that the one staying would flip (One of the dumbest moves ever if you want my opinion) Then, she heard Jon and Burton say they wanted Rupert gone but didn't believe they had the balls to do it and voted Jon out of spite. She was a bitch to Lill and she wanted her gone even if Lill was the only sure win for Sandra. Sandra had 2 friends. That's it, that's all. She told the jury that Lill was the better player. P-A-T-H-E-T-I-C all-around as far as game player. Funny as hell as a contestant. Ilovekelly asked: You're joking right? In case you really don't know how that game worked, I'll tell you: 3 pathetic players ganged up on the slightly less pathetic of the bunch.
Last Edited By: panurge46
11/06/09 5:08 PM.
Edited 2 times.
|
|||
ilovekelly752 |
|||
panurge46 wrote: There's no way everyone that season was pathetic. Maybe a few of them were, but a lot of them were great, and Sandra beat them all. She got Trish out because she was planning to take out Rupert. You can't say it was a bad move to keep Jon, because she beat Jon. Then she turned Darrah and Tijuana against Jon, Lill, and Burton after Rupert was out, and she put herself from the position of power, to the minority, back to the position of power. She did the exact same thing again after Christa was out. Then she teamed up with Jon to get out Darrah, and planned to get out Lill. Then, when Lill won immunity, and she got her to vote out Jon. The reason she wasn't blindsided instead of Rupert and Christa was because she let them think she wasn't a threat, when she clearly was if she was able to get all of their side out. She knew exactly what she was doing the whole time. |
|||
panurge46 |
|||
ilovekelly752 wrote: Is there a quota on pathetic? You realize saying that is like saying "Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny cannot all be fake, one has to be real"!!! Anyway, yes they were all pathetic. I don't remember if it was T or Darrah but one of those two was going first if Nicole hadn't opened her big mouth. What I do remember is that Darrah was seen as the weakest in episode 3 and T's pep talk was useless. The only reason Darrah stayed was because Savage had enough of Lill. Lill was the 3rd person voted out which tells us how pathetic a player she was. Sandra would have been the first one voted out if Drake had lost that challenge. Fairplay was only playing for 2nd place until the Outcast twist gave him 2 great goats. His pathetic showing in Micronesia should convince you: Even if he hadn't quit, he would have been voted out immediately after one side gained control. Burton was an arrogant ass who got blindsided twice in a season. You think they weren't all pathetic? Open your eyes. Trish AND Fairplay wanted Rupert gone. Fairplay was the dangerous one. Vote him out and use Trish later on. But why even bother arguing with you when you make my point so nicely. You say Sandra had to get back on top after the Rupert boot then again after the Christa boot and once more to get Darrah out. Doesn't that roller-coaster ride tell you that she was very lousy at handling the game? She was a tool who didn't let them think she wasn't a threat; she simply wasn't. Then 2 weird things happened: Fairplay and Burton couldn't lie to Lill and Lill won final immunity. Saying Sandra knew what was going on the whole time is a fan talking. |
|||
Dr Will Hatch two point oh |
|||
|
Jon is weaker in challenges then Trish.
|
|||
Understandermant |
|||
|
1. Sandra.
18...everyone else. |
|||
ilovekelly752 |
|||
panurge46 wrote:If they were all that pathetic, there wouldn't have been seven blindsides in one season. Sandra played a big role in five of them. |
|||
BlakeB717 |
|||
|
1. Sandra
2. Jenna 3. Parvati 4. JT 5. Danni 6. Tom 7. Bob 8. Chris 9. Yul 10. Richard 11. Tina 12. Ethan 13. Amber 14. Aras 15. Vecepia 16. Todd 17. Brian 18. Earl |
|||
chapera rocks |
|||
|
Admittedly I haven't really read anything about Sandra in this thread, I've just seen her mentioned quite a bit this page. But I've always felt she
was strategically underrated. Even when I didn't really care for her that much. She seemed to be the only person in the final 7 or 8 besides Jon/Burton to
actually get the game. And they had major flaws themselves. She tried time after time to rally the women together, she flipped Tijuana (who fucked up by
trusting Fairplay even after overhearing what he was saying). Then she tried to talk some sense into D/L at final 6, didn't work. Finally it turned at
final 5. But she always was aware of what people were going to do, she was great at predicting; she knew she was in no danger at final 5 because she was aware
of how Jon was playing.
She did well. |
|||
Katy Carney |
|||
|
Sandra had no overall gameplan and the chief reason she survived a very unpredictable season was that she was a poor performer in challenges. At the same time,
her gameplay was very fluid post-Rupert boot, she was assertive with her decisions and she was good at reading people.
Just like any other winner, Sandra has pros and cons. Both are exaggerated. |
|||
TAR Addict |
|||
Dr Will Hatch two point oh wrote: omg Hatch is Claude?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! |
|||
panurge46 |
|||
chapera rocks wrote: Q.E.D. |
|||
OutwitOutplay |
|||
|
To be honest, lately I've really started to re-think what I think about both Sandra, as well as many of the other winners.
The bottom line with Survivor is that you simply need to OUTLAST every other player. You don't need to outwit everyone else (by controlling all the votes). You don't need to even outplay them (in challenges). All you need to do is be the last man or woman standing. And with that criteria it's hard not to see Sandra as a very strong player. Or Tina. Or others who seem to often be chosen as the bottom of the barrel winners. If no one votes for you, except when it matters, YOU WIN the game. Period. And Sandra, more than any other player, seems to have the qualities of always making the vote for someone else. It doesn't matter if she picked the player who goes. It doesn't matter if she had an immunity necklace around her neck. If, every single time there was a tribal council, she simply made sure the vote was for someone other than herself, then I think major kudos. All other strategies seem only semi-reliable. Winning all the challenges is never guaranteed. Trying to control all the votes frequently backfires. And making all sorts of alliances will get you booted if anyone gains wind of what you're doing. . . And, sure, players have all won with those strategies, but I'm staring to think that the strategy that would most often secure a victory would be a Sandra type strategy. Which, in my opinion, also includes people like Tina and Ethan. I just think maybe Sandra is better at that strategy simply 'cause she could talk herself out of anything. I dunno. I'm really starting to change my opinion of who the best players are. The best manipulators are the ones who can manipulate and never let you realize they're doing it. And don't have to flaunt to the cameras that they're doing it. I think that's a reality that has, for too long, been ignored by people who rate the winners. If you watch Survivor: Australia, for example, you can subtly see Tina manipulate everyone, but she'd never admit it to a camera. . . |
|||