Login
ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 14690
(01/25/12 09:12 AM)
Posts: 723
(01/25/12 10:27 AM)
Posts: 14692
(01/25/12 01:41 PM)
Posts: 1391
(01/25/12 01:44 PM)
Posts: 14693
(01/25/12 02:24 PM)
Posts: 1788
(01/25/12 03:03 PM)
RedCoffee wrote:We can rightfully criticize the endgame opponents she set herself up with, but it's hard to envision a way to the end that works better.
Posts: 1789
(01/25/12 03:05 PM)
Katy Carney wrote: The F2 did create a more favorable potential endgame for her, but that's true of Cirie as well.
Posts: 1392
(01/25/12 03:23 PM)
Posts: 1791
(01/25/12 03:27 PM)
RedCoffee wrote:Parvati buys too-sour lemons and makes too-sour lemonade. Russell buys too-sour lemons, tells the clerk all about how he is the master of lemonade making, and then proceeds to giggle as he pees in the lemonade right before he serves it. Too-sour lemonade isn't impressive but it's the best you can do with an inferior product. That's kind of how I see Parvati's strategic Micronesia game.
Posts: 531
(01/25/12 05:05 PM)
RedCoffee wrote: That's totally true. What I'm saying though is that Parvati knows how to play the hand she gets pretty well. Unfortunately, the social game she plays (and her reputation) will give her a pretty bad hand a lot of the time. She can be docked overall for this social game shortcoming. Setting that as a given, the way Parvati proceeds through this minefield demonstrates a strong strategic game that might not otherwise be noticed due to her poor endgame.Russell, on the other hand, has a bad social game that limits his endgame options (much like Parvati). The problem is that he makes it even WORSE by intentionally taking huge jury threats to the end instead of people he has some prayer of a chance against. Even with a stronger social game, Russell would still have lost Samoa/HvV because he took nearly unbeatable people to the end on purpose rather than people with more ambiguous/poor chances (Jaison, Shambo, Danielle). At the very least Parvati was able to take two other backstabbers with her to the final 3. She wasn't favored to win, but Amanda being Amanda and a bad jury speech by Cirie and the outcome could have still fallen in her favor. Parvati didn't intentionally take, say, Ozzy and James to the end.Parvati buys too-sour lemons and makes too-sour lemonade. Russell buys too-sour lemons, tells the clerk all about how he is the master of lemonade making, and then proceeds to giggle as he pees in the lemonade right before he serves it. Too-sour lemonade isn't impressive but it's the best you can do with an inferior product. That's kind of how I see Parvati's strategic Micronesia game.
Posts: 449
(01/25/12 05:15 PM)
Posts: 14695
(01/25/12 05:31 PM)
jonnyfairplay wrote:No, because it now gave Cirie a Kathy-like endgame where she had to win a challenge to make it to the finals and win, as opposed to the guaranteed one she previously had.
Unrelated: I don't really appreciate the Boston Rob ASS comparison from earlier, because I think Rob was a very easy and real 1 vote away from winning the whole time, and may have got it if the swap or FTC played out differently.
A lot of the other winners' capacity to get votes from themselves was largely conscious/self-created. Tom made people like him despite his constant lies by planning to and following through on complimenting people once a day, listening to people's personal stories and really getting to know about them, etc.Dan Gheesling of Big Brother fame did a lot of the same thing - complimenting people, learning factoids about players' outside lives and reciting them, staying controlled and never appearing to be angry, bitter, or taking anything personally.All of these people backstabbed the shit out of other people like Parvati and controlled their games for a lot of the time, but they intentionally did the things aforementioned that Parvati did not.
Posts: 1795
(01/25/12 06:03 PM)
Posts: 14697
(01/25/12 06:13 PM)
Posts: 16
(01/25/12 08:40 PM)
Katy Carney wrote:I have a different definition of a "social game" than the post-Natalie White era entails. I don't believe "social game" is reflected on how many people vote for you. That has to do with a variety of factors, the most prominent being "who hurt my feelings/reputation and whom can I retaliate against with this vote?". Social game is, to me, about people trusting you and placing a high value in their bond with you, protecting you even to their detriment. Parvati is, like Boston Rob, always the center of her alliances, and the most valuable ally of almost everyone in her group.
PARVATI surely can make strong alliance, and I'm applauding her for that but her social skill will revolve just around it, and that’s my concern. She has the ability but sometimes she’s so full of herself, remember HvsV when the tribe merged, and she felt people avoiding her, what did she do, she whined and alienated herself, when she can try to reach out to them. (Jeff calling her out is just funny)
Posts: 532
(01/27/12 04:21 AM)
jonnyfairplay wrote: After some research, I think I can answer my earlier question:Marcus-Charlie-Corinne:Randy - Corinne (because she's sexy)Bob - Corinne (because she treated him like a real person and didn't use him)Susie - Corinne (because she respects her game the most)Sugar - Corinne (they were actually really good friends before the merge and swapped stories about their moms having cancer)Ken - Charlie (he was really glad to have his first openly gay friend)Crystal - Marcus (because she loves massive people and they have a family connection)Matty - Marcus (because she never made fun of his gums and the others did)Corinne wins 4-2-1
Posts: 1837
(01/27/12 12:56 PM)
Posts: 651
(01/27/12 01:43 PM)
Posts: 506
(01/27/12 05:02 PM)
Posts: 1839
(01/27/12 05:35 PM)
cookie wrote:Ethan's stellar endgame? And did I miss something? I've always assumed Lex and Tom were taking the other to final two.
Share This Link