Did he? I must have missed it. Can you find that tweet?
Hmm. That makes sense. I must’ve missed the part where they discussed who could beat Ozzie in the final IC.
Over at TWoP someone posted this tweet from Mikaela right after the reunion show.
That has piqued my curiousity.
Look, if you are going to cast Jesus loving freaks who think getting an erection is a sin, just have an all male season. WTF, why should a person be targeted for wearing revealing clothing on a tropical beach? If you think there is a market for a christian version of the show, then just do it and get this fucking show off of prime time.
Have they ever officially said what happens if there’s a tie in the final vote? Could we someday be watching the Final Three scrambling to make a fire on a stage in New York?
I’ve always assumed that a 4-4-1 vote would lead to the “1” voting immediately to break the tie (I assume they read the votes immediately to confirm they have a winner). 3-3-3, I can’t imagine it being anything BUT the fire challenge, right?
I could be wrong, but I thought the interesting thing about the resolution of tied votes is that Probst & Co. have never explicitly acknowledged exactly how they would be handled, until it actually happens. They’ve done the rock thing in the past, and they’ve done the fire challenge as well (and didn’t the fire challenge originate because the rock-choosing caused such an uproar?), and Probst plays along to goad the players when the dreaded rock comes up in conversation (as it did this season), but for some reason I’m thinking they might have some completely different tie-breaking scenario in mind for the next time it’s necessary. I wonder how (or if) it’s codified in whatever rules are shown to the contestants beforehand.
A brief history of Survivor (non final tribal council) tie-breaks:
- Seasons 1-3, tie-breaks after re-votes were handled by “previous votes against”–ties in “previous votes against” were resolved by trivia contest.
- In season 4 and after (with one exception, discussed in point #3), it goes to rocks–the people who received votes and the person with the immunity necklace do not have to draw rocks. Notably, Probst and production made two errors in the final four tie in season 4 when all players drew rocks–the dreaded “purple rock of death”.
- In season 5 and after, in final 4 ties (or final 2 premerge, as in Palau), it goes to a fire making challenge between the two tied players.
For final tribal council tie-breaks, the language on page 8 here (Link to rules included in Survivor contract) suggests that producers have yet to explicitly state to players what the tie-break is.
I remember there was one season where someone at tribal said something like “It’s gonna end up as a tie and those two will make fire” and Probst responded with “You don’t know what the tiebreaker is. You’re just assuming it’ll be fire.” I think the tie was avoided so they never discovered what the tiebreaker actually was.
Sophie grew really unlikeable as the last few episodes went on - ordering Albert around in challenges, having a meltdown, hearing she acted like a spoiled brat around camp, etc. Still liked her more than Albert or especially Coach. Ozzy, too, was insufferable. I had no idea it was such a foregone conclusion he would win the 100K. He’s so grating.
Brandon on the other hand grew more likeable as we learned how crazy his family really is. As obnoxious as he was, I still preferred his presence over many of the other nutjobs the show adds each season (aka Phillip)
Finally Probst’s question to Christine in the recap was borderline racist. Considering they must plan beforehand what questions to ask that was really inexcusable.
Really boring season, in all. They need two tribe shakeups to make it interesting.
Thanks for the rundown, ekweizn - I’d nearly forgotten about the “previous votes against” process; I wonder if it might be interesting to go back to that; might add some more maneuvering to avoid votes at any point in the game. I think today’s contestants are savvy enough to realize it’s game-play from Day One. Without going through the linked document, your summary seems to be what I was thinking - the producers do not explicitly state the tie-break rules.
Yep, this is what I was remembering as well. I’m thinking even if they (the producers) do have a set process for tie-breaks in mind, they don’t reveal exactly what it is until it has to be put to use. That way Probst can use the uncertainty of the players to incite further debate at Tribal Council.
While it might have come off that way, I really doubt that’s what they were thinking. It was more bragging about Survivor: “A mortician from Texas and a teacher from New York, who never would’ve met before, are now best friends because of our show.” If I remember correctly, the question was “Would you two have ever met?” not “Would you two be friends?” which makes Christine answer kind of dumb.
Have we ever learned what would happen in an tie vote situation for the winner?
i just want to put in another vote for pitying Brandon. just the thought of how his father jumped right in and tried to take control of the situation at the island. it’s one thing to have a crazy uncle, but his father appeared to be of the same stripe. that and having the rest of the family ignoring him. it explains a lot.
(Sorry for the late response, just got around to watching the finale last night.)
Wow. I expected Coach to take it in a cake-walk. Sophie and Albert were equally deserving of the win – that is to say, not at all. The two had exactly the same strategy: do whatever Coach says. Coach was the one who carried them for the entire season. This also means, of course, that Coach was the one who had to make and break promises while Sophie hid behind him so as not to make enemies. Obviously it worked for her, but it’s so damn unsatisfying to watch.
And it just blows me away how petty the jury members can be about “stabbing people in the back” and “breaking your word” and people lacking “honor and integrity” and so forth. That’s how you play the game! It’s Outplay, Outwit, Outlast. Nothing in there about Out-honor or Out-pray or Out-keep-your-word. The Outwit part is all about being duplicitous, no different than bluffing in poker. Yet these people hold these ridiculous personal grudges over getting beaten at a game. Hell, Jim was still pissed a Cochrane, what, seven months later? Cochran had it right with his voting comments: Coach played the best game. But everyone else was just too butthurt to give him credit.
Other observations:
Brandon is still a dolt, but his family sounds like a bunch of assholes. I do feel sorry for the kid. (Provided he doesn’t beat his wife anymore. Otherwise he can go to hell.)
They really need to do more tribe shuffles. I enjoyed this season because of the personalities, but the votes were boring and predicatable. They tried to edit some drama into the Tribal Councils, but there was just none to be had.
I was again left wishing that the reunion had been longer. Every player should get a chance to talk.
Screw Russell.
I wish somebody had called Whitney out for her adultery on live TV. That would have been a riot.
[QUOTE=Wheez]
And it just blows me away how petty the jury members can be about “stabbing people in the back” and “breaking your word” and people lacking “honor and integrity” and so forth. That’s how you play the game! It’s Outplay, Outwit, Outlast. Nothing in there about Out-honor or Out-pray or Out-keep-your-word.
[/QUOTE]
You are underestimating the social component of the game. That is the same mistake Uncle Russ made. Objectively, he played an outstanding game if the goal was to get to the final 3. But it isn’t. The goal is to get to the final 3 and then to get jury members to vote for you to win a million bucks.
Russ pissed off, or hurt, too many people to ever be a serious contender for the cash. And that is ultimately why he made it to the final 3. Had he been likeable, they’d have voted him off, because he’d have had the lethal combination of great performance and likeability. No one wants to bring THAT person to the finale. (That’s why Dawn was voted off.) No, when you’re standing before the jury, you want the grade A asshole next to you.
IMO, the person who’s played the “cleanest” all-around game is Tom the NYPD Fireman during his first stint on the show. He provided for his tribe. He was good at challenges. He was a great motivator and leader, without being threatening. He was fair, but not a pushover. He voted off people without making it personal. And he was likeable. Giving him the million bucks was a cakewalk.
That problem is, now, it seems like everyone takes every single vote against them personally. None of the former Savaii had any right to be bitter against the Upolu final three. Both sides intended to vote the other one off completely, and they lost.
How could we know that? All we see is what the editors want us to see. There is plenty that goes on off-camera that could influence the game, including the post-tribal discussions among the voted off members. Ozzie, in particular, had a reason to be ticked off at Coach because Coach promised “as a Christian man” that he’d take Ozzie to the final 3. Imagine how Ozzie could influence the others when he relayed that bit of gossip to them.