Why Russell is a better player than Natalie. MATH ITT in Survivor Sucks Forum

0 Points

Why Russell is a better player than Natalie. MATH ITT

Started By	Comment
zergrush		#21	[-]
Posts: 28 (12/22/09 08:09 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Go ads naked Remove this ad micronesia wrote: Dont worry, zergrush. Some people here are simply overwhelmed by posts that are longer than one line ("Yo, xxx sucks balls, right"). Their brains cant take it. Your last paragraphs sucks tho, if you really think Russ has a 95% chance to win any season... I got lazy, but I said his chances were 76%. It's probably like 15% or something though. Passive play invites too many random factors, someone like Russell would be able to take the reigns and win through adversity. Players like Natalie need everything to go right in order to win. The stars aligned and she won this season, big deal. To the 7 > 2 morans, want to play poker with me sometime?
micronesia		#22	[-]
Posts: 472 (12/22/09 08:19 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Nat wasnt a "player" to begin with. She hardly played at all, she was her kind self and got lucky, no way she could`ve talked her way out of anything if she had to (which would be ACTUAL good "social gameplay"). When Russ told her she might go home, she almost cried, cause she would`ve had no clue what to do if Russ hadnt already decided to take her. Nat wasnt dumb, but she wasnt good either. Totally average. Better than many retards casting graces us with, but worse than a lot of actual players.
micronesia		#23	[-]
Posts: 473 (12/22/09 08:20 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Oh, and lol@"morans". 2p2?
zergrush		#24	[-]
Posts: 30 (12/22/09 08:23 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	I think morans is pretty widespread, but yeh. The jury can diawf.
BortBort	Dylan approves of you using his name in vain...	#25	[-]
Posts: 1802 (12/22/09 08:28 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts
SuperJude		#26	[-]
Posts: 16097 (12/22/09 08:29 AM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	-SJ™
micronesia		#27	[-]
Posts: 475 (12/22/09 08:31 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	zergrush wrote: I think morans is pretty widespread, but yeh. The jury can diawf. MATH ITT almost gave it away already, but combined with morans I was pretty sure, lol...
A Dying Clown		#28	[-]
Posts: 11694 (12/22/09 08:32 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Russell, on the other hand, has a 95% chance to win any season Russell has a 100% chance to lose any game that involves interacting with people instead of talking to a camera.
SuperJude		#29	[-]
Posts: 16099 (12/22/09 08:33 AM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	micronesia wrote: zergrush wrote: I think morans is pretty widespread, but yeh. The jury can diawf. MATH ITT almost gave it away already, but combined with morans I was pretty sure, lol... Yep this is why I love foreigners, they make the internet fun! -SJ™
myopics		#30	[-]
Posts: 893 (12/22/09 08:33 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Go ads naked Remove this ad zergrush wrote: Here's the deal. A lot of people are running around talking about how Natalie played better because she "didn't have to" dirty her hands to get to the final 3. The problem with that argument is that Russell would have won without Natalie, and Natalie would not have won without Russell. Incorrect. You're right that Natalie got up to first place because of Russell. Know what else is right though? Russell got up to 2nd because of Natalie. You can't just remove Natalie and bump everyone's placings up. Oops, Russell is in 1st now! zergrush wrote: Natalie was a number, the same as Mick and Jaison. It just so happened that the three of them were either the least aware of Russell's tactics or the most willing to ride his coattails. You can replace Natalie with anyone on Foa Foa post-merge and nothing changes, but if you replace Russell Foa Foa would have been Pagong'd. What does it matter, you say? Natalie won right? Well, she was the winner this season, but saying, in any way, that her game was superior to Russell's is absurd. Let's try to quantify their games in the only way that makes sense: predicting their average placings throughout multiple seasons. Incorrect. You love science don't you? With so many variables all affecting the game, and the variables all affecting one another too, you can't just change one (removing Natalie) thing and say nothing else has changed. Without Nat, who knows? Maybe all the votes against Russell go to Mick and he wins. Maybe the member of the FF4 that replaced Nat beat Brett at the IC and he was voted out at F6, then the other 3 FF target Russell and Shambo, voting them out before FTC. zergrush wrote: Paragraphs 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7: blah blah blah, stats that lack any connection to actual mathematics but make up for it by proving Russell wins. Incorrect. On any of those seasons, Natalie might have played a completely different game. Her Samoa strategy was to read Russell and figure out she could ride his coattail to the end, then beat him at FTC. If reading people and manoeuvring herself into the most desirable position is Natalie's strategy, then it is likely that she doesn't use the riding coattails strategy had she been on other seasons with other people. Therefore, I conclude that your assessment is entirely incorrect.
micronesia		#31	[-]
Posts: 476 (12/22/09 08:37 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	SuperJude wrote: micronesia wrote: zergrush wrote: I think morans is pretty widespread, but yeh. The jury can diawf. MATH ITT almost gave it away already, but combined with morans I was pretty sure, lol... Yep this is why I love foreigners, they make the internet fun! -SJ™ I`m stoned, does it sound particularly funny? No way you actually know what we were talking about, right?
Greenkiwi		#32	[-]
Posts: 23 (12/22/09 08:38 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Russell could not have won with out Natalie, just as Natalie could not have won without Russell. The reason Natalie deserves it more is because she played both an EXCELLENT social game, and a pretty good strategic game. Russell on the other hand played a very good strategic game but his social game was horrible. Basically, I compare Russell to be the exact opposite of Poopert. Also, Natalie played Russell. She stroked his ego the whole way to the bank. She knew he was cocky as all hell and just continued to stroke that fact so he'd become so overconfident that he wouldn't try at FTC. It's so secret that CBS tried to shove Russell down our throats. Everyone said all Natalie did was fly under the radar and make 1 move with Erik. No, Natalie flew under RUSSELL's radar. She was talking and making friends with Galu even in the early parts of the game. She said in pre-show interviews that her strategy was to be perceived as useless and weak and get carried to the end by someone who thinks they could beat her. She obviously managed to pull off her strategy very well. Is it a good strategy? Meh, it's above average. What it a good strategy for Natalie to use? Yes, and therein lies the difference, Natalie made the best moves that Natalie could have possibly made, where as Russell just pulled a Rob M. Russell = Rob M. Natalie = Tina Last Edited By: Greenkiwi 12/22/09 08:41 AM. Edited 1 times.
micronesia		#33	[-]
Posts: 478 (12/22/09 08:41 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	GTFO, Nat didnt play nothing, or we would have proof by now. She was behaving like she would in real life, kind and personable. You could say she was raised in a way that gave her a good chance to make it far, I`ll agree with that.
sammyhain2364		#34	[-]
Posts: 2655 (12/22/09 08:44 AM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	micronesia wrote: When Russ told her she might go home, she almost cried, and when Jeff read the 5th and deciding vote for Natalie; Russell DID cry
Greenkiwi		#35	[-]
Posts: 24 (12/22/09 08:46 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	micronesia wrote: GTFO, Nat didnt play nothing, or we would have proof by now. She was behaving like she would in real life, kind and personable. You could say she was raised in a way that gave her a good chance to make it far, I`ll agree with that. Watch her pre-season interviews. The strategy she says there is the strategy she uses. Obviously she came in with a strategy that was at least somewhat though out. More than they can say for 95% of this cast. She isn't the most strategic thinker, but she knew what to do to win. Isn't that what Survivor's all about? Figuring our how to win and executing the plan.
micronesia		#36	[-]
Posts: 480 (12/22/09 08:47 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	sammyhain2364 wrote: micronesia wrote: When Russ told her she might go home, she almost cried, and when Jeff read the 5th and deciding vote for Natalie; Russell DID cry ...yes, and?
Greenkiwi		#37	[-]
Posts: 25 (12/22/09 08:48 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	micronesia wrote: sammyhain2364 wrote: micronesia wrote: When Russ told her she might go home, she almost cried, and when Jeff read the 5th and deciding vote for Natalie; Russell DID cry ...yes, and? They're saying Russell is a bigger baby than Natalie.
micronesia		#38	[-]
Posts: 481 (12/22/09 08:52 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Greenkiwi wrote: micronesia wrote: GTFO, Nat didnt play nothing, or we would have proof by now. She was behaving like she would in real life, kind and personable. You could say she was raised in a way that gave her a good chance to make it far, I`ll agree with that. Watch her pre-season interviews. The strategy she says there is the strategy she uses. Obviously she came in with a strategy that was at least somewhat though out. More than they can say for 95% of this cast. She isn't the most strategic thinker, but she knew what to do to win. Isn't that what Survivor's all about? Figuring our how to win and executing the plan. If you call behaving like she always does, "strategy", you`re right. I already said she wasnt dumb, she won, I`m not pissed about it, it was ok. But she didnt "figure anything out", she had 1 gear and got lucky it worked out. She didnt do anything wrong and didnt fuck anything up, which makes her already better than 50% of any Survivor cast.
micronesia		#39	[-]
Posts: 482 (12/22/09 08:56 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Greenkiwi wrote: micronesia wrote: sammyhain2364 wrote: micronesia wrote: When Russ told her she might go home, she almost cried, and when Jeff read the 5th and deciding vote for Natalie; Russell DID cry ...yes, and? They're saying Russell is a bigger baby than Natalie. I`m not talking about baby-crying. When Russ cried, there was nothing that he`ve been done, votes were cast, game over. Nat on the other had would`ve had at least a day to figure something out, but she would`ve been unable to, cause she had almost no game. Hence my crying-reference. Seeing Nat trying to actually scramble to change votes would`ve been funny tho. The other survivors would`ve chuckled inside as well I think.
zergrush		#40	[-]
Posts: 31 (12/22/09 09:02 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Go ads naked Remove this ad Greenkiwi wrote: Russell could not have won with out Natalie, just as Natalie could not have won without Russell. Stop saying that. Replace Natalie with any loyal goat and he still gets there and wins barring the worst jury in Survivor history. Replace Russell with another Jaison or Erik or the other Russell or Betsy or whoever the fuck you want, Natalie wouldn't have won. It's like Peyton Manning and some random Offensive Lineman. There are plenty of linemen, and you can replace them without a dramatic effect on the team's ability to win. You can't replace Peyton Manning with a random QB and expect to get the same results. The real tragedy is that this rewarded her for being useless so we'll get more useless people next time hoping for the perfect storm of a bitter jury, an offensive QB, a tribe bent on self-destruction and luck. "She knew what to do to win," no, when has that strategy ever worked? Amber? GTFO. She knew what to do to get 2nd/3rd place. She luckboxed her way to the million.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

Why Russell is a better player than Natalie. MATH ITT