|
I think the big surprize is that next TC is a tie and they do the purple rock thing and rob gets booted.
|
The big twist happens during the live portion, if I remember correctily.
|
Originally posted by das Monkey <b>El Scorcho</b>, is that you? (It's 1 in 5) das I had one stats screwup on the forum in the 4 years I've been here and you just won't let it go. :lol: |
Hmm!!!
I was reading on another forum the thoughts on the show, and some people think Amber threw the immunity challenge so as to let rob win immunity. Interesting tactic. As she could have given him the immunity, but who knows. |
I don't think Amber could've possibly beat Rob on the walking the rope portion--it requires a lot of arm strength she (and most females) lack.
What I couldn't understand was Rupert's play to make Tom switch sides but his vote falled in line with the "Robfather's" plan. Was Rupert playing (and lying to) Tom all along? |
Originally posted by dotheDVDeed Was Rupert playing (and lying to) Tom all along? I think so. I think they were all lying to Tom. |
the rope bridge was part of the reward challenge.
the puzzle was the immunity challenge. also, i agree. they were all lying to Tom, but Rob is going to get the brunt of the hostility. |
Originally posted by BadlyDrawnBoy Hmm!!! I was reading on another forum the thoughts on the show, and some people think Amber threw the immunity challenge so as to let rob win immunity. Interesting tactic. As she could have given him the immunity, but who knows. If Rob continues to win immunity, and I imagine he will - it is all over. Historically the challenges are about agility and strength - not brute power (Rupert), not brains (Amber), not drooling (Genna). They are all toast. |
Originally posted by Groucho Duhr. You're right. The fact that the person won the reward challenge increases their chances of making is to the final two so it is actually less than 1 in 5. |
Originally posted by Booth The fact that the person won the reward challenge increases their chances of making is to the final two ... |
Originally posted by Booth Actually, the 1 in 5 is based on an assumption that each of the remaining 5 has an equal chance of being the ultimate survivor which is not the case. The fact that the person won the reward challenge increases their chances of making is to the final two so it is actually less than 1 in 5. First and foremost, the reward challenge has nothing to do with whether the person moves forward in the game (that would be the immunity challenge)... |
Originally posted by John-In-VA Does anyone remember the spoilers from months ago about who would be voted out each week and who would be in the final two? I don't know if each week is holding up, but there is still a chance for the final two to be the final two in the spoiler list. Spoiler:
And analysis: Spoiler:
It should also be noted, that the "details" given in the list have been mostly wrong. For example, it implied that Rupert and Richard were on the same tribe at one point when they weren't, and it mentioned that Susan was voted off when she actually quit. But it was spot-on about Rob and Amber having a romantic alliance.[/spoiler] In the next post, I'll put up the entire list with all of the details, so anyone wishing to read the whole thing may. |
• El Scorcho • :p I had one stats screwup on the forum in the 4 years I've been here and you just won't let it go. :lol: das |
And here's the "spoiler" list with all of the details included, for those interested:
Spoiler:
|
Originally posted by WillieTheShakes Now, I'm no mathematicatactition, but aren't there a number of logical fallacies in this statement? First and foremost, the reward challenge has nothing to do with whether the person moves forward in the game (that would be the immunity challenge)... Historically, most survivors who win the car reward also make it to the final three and often the final two. So looking at past history, we can conclude that the winner of the car has a high probablity of making it to the final two but a low probablity of winning it all. That is why Jeff pointed this out-- there is a correlation between winning the car reward and losing the jury's vote. |
That sounds a lot closer to handicapping than it does to statistics...
|
Originally posted by TwineTime I'll say it again. Who cares how you or anyone else thinks the jury should react? What matters is - certain people, while playing a game like this for several weeks, are not going to have the same reaction you do while reclining on your sofa and watching them on television. Understanding human nature enough to realize that just like you and several others here react to the jury's perceived hypocrisy, they themselves are probably similiarly reacting to the players still in the game - is the kind of knowledge that people who lose jury votes could desperately use. |
Rob/Amber final two would be very boring, imo. Like you said, giving to one of them is like giving to both so the votes wouldn't really matter.
|
The "win the car, lose the money" condition probably also comes from the animosity factor when the votes are cast.
|
Caught a bit of Jeff Probst on The View, and he said that the big twist has something to do with Survivor the show, and not Rob and Amber. Here is my guess, which might be listed somewhere else in the thread, but I am too lazy to read it all:
Spoiler:
|
Originally posted by dotheDVDeed What I couldn't understand was Rupert's play to make Tom switch sides but his vote falled in line with the "Robfather's" plan. Was Rupert playing (and lying to) Tom all along? Rob wins immunity, takes Amber. Rob knows he can beat Jenna at immunity, so take her to the final three to be safe. Rupert has to go next (unless Rupert can win immunity because of a strength challenge). So anyway, they should know that a Rupert-Jenna-Tom final three was a lot more beneficial for them. It really could be almost anyone's game then. And a 3-2 vote could have made sure it would happen. But once they failed to get Tom "the swing vote" over... they had to be revise their strategy. Amber probably figured out that Tom should be the next one to go (look how well he did in the challenge) and as she said at council, she picked based on her gut feel... (and so not from just Rob telling her?). So Amber/Rob pick Tom to go which was a smart move. At this point, Rupert/Jenna could have picked Amber anyway. I am not convinced it would have been a bad move. 2 votes Amber 2 votes Tom 1 vote Jenna Hard to say which way it would have went. If there was any discussion, and then a rechoosing as they tend to do, it would not be hard to point out to Tom (and hope he understands it) that Rob/Amber just voted for him. He would then switch his vote to Amber. And Rob would be next unless he won all immunities (which he might). But that is water under the bridge. They did not think that out and just saw that they failed, so they fell back into the support Rob strategy and hope something else happens next time. If Jenna or Rupert win immunity, it could be a tie vote next time. If one does not, then it still may be a tie vote if they were smart, or one decides that the final three is worth it and goes along with Rob. Dumb move if they do... but I can see that happening. |
They had to get rid of Tom because he was the swing vote (dangerous position to be in if you ask me). If they had any brains they would of got rid of Amber.
|
Definition of "I am the swing vote" -
"I failed to form a strong alliance." |
Possible spoiler about the 'twist' from another board:
Spoiler:
|
Historically, most survivors who win the car reward also make it to the final three and often the final two. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:18 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.