chapera rocks wrote:Because it made 0 sense for Natalie to take out Parvati over Amanda when she was close to Parv, and Amanda had a ton of friends on the jury.
Except when Cirie gave Natalie the chance to take out Parvati (~final 6), she said no. What was to stop Natalie from going to Parvati/Amanda and telling them that Cirie turned on them, just so that she's out of the line of fire?
So because she asked much earlier in the game, Natalie would not have been willing to vote out Parv at the final four to save herself? Come on. I know the fans got edits making the majority of them look like idiots, but people should at least be able to say Natalie knew what she was doing strategically.
Your point is that Cirie was blindly loyal to Parvati/Amanda, and I'm refuting that point by saying (with Natalie confirmation) that Cirie was willing to take them out, but didn't have the support. So if Cirie was going to stick with the faves at final 4, it wasn't because she was blindly loyal, it would be because she thought it was better for her strategically. Not saying I agree with it, but who knows what she would have done out there anyway.I never said that she was blindly loyal. I'm saying she knew what she was getting into with no desire to change anything about it. Much like Denise in China who everyone at Sucks seems to hate, yet Cirie is worshipped.
I understand them taking out Natalie because she was the biggest jury threat of the final four. She would have won against anyone, but I don't understand why Cirie would be ok with having a 33% chance at the finals when she could make it a 100% by forcing the tie.
if parvati knew it was a f2, she would definitely rally amanda and natalie to vote cirie out, and let amanda take the fall.Why? Cirie and Parvati played similar games while Natalie would have murdered her in a jury vote. No questions asked. Cirie probably would have killed her, as well, but Parvati at least had the same enemies as Cirie.














