I have a question to the survivor lobby, and I want people to discuss their opinions on this.
Let say you were Never Nominated in the entire Big Brother game, and you still manage to lose in the final 2, is it justified?
I remember a game I was never nominated, but I still manage to lose against cjn104.
Just a few minutes ago, Evolpz was never nominated, but I still managed to beat him in the jury 6-1
I know this probably happened to many others.
If you are not a fan of Big Brother, just survivor, what about never once receiving a vote against you entire game?
If you achieve the feat, but still lose in f2, is it justified?
deletedover 7 years
I think despite someone being unnominated, the argument is always the same: is it better to be in less danger throughout the game or to be in more danger but get out of it? I would probably lean towards voting the person in less danger most of the time, but I think all situations are different based on the context.
(p.s. if cjn was a big part of the reason why you were never nominated, that may be a factor in why you lost)
deletedover 7 years
Unexpected shoutout but thanks, glad everyone remembers the king
also i didnt lose because of "poor jury management" because i lost in blacklists anyways. there were like 2 jurors in the jury and jay voted against me cause i told him i controlled his noms when he was hoh which is completely true considering he put up the exact 2 people i told him to.
Yeah, I should have specified what I was saying better. My point wasn't that PoD is known purely for his physical, but rather that his physical game was recognised as a developed one. He is of course a great strategic and social player as well.
You never said that he was recognized for his social or strategic game though - you made it out that there was meta surrounding his physical game, and I'm telling you that there's a lot more to it than that. I would argue that, out of the three that we're discussing, he is least recognized for being a challenge threat.
I've already stated that I can only go on what I know and what I've seen in past games, and that's exactly what I'm doing here. I don't see how I am underrating him, given the fact that I have never witnessed anything impressive from him in the past. Perhaps he has improved, which I've already stated is a possibility in my previous comment, but I'll stick with what I've seen in the past until we end up in another game together. Maybe he'll surprise me.
When have I said PoD isn't good socially and strategically? He's great. I simply said he's good in challenges and so happens to be known as a good challenge player. He also is very solid strategically and socially. It's more than possible to be recognised as a good challenge player and have fully developed social and strategic elements to their game, which is also the case for all of the people you've listed in your first paragraph.
Also, all of those people you've mentioned are great in challenges as well. But you're underrating evolpz in challenges, he's a faster typer than most of the lobby. His physical side is developed and unfairly underrated.
You're more than entitled to your wrong opinion. If you're going to talk to me about people who are recognized as good physical players, then I expect to hear HighSpace, Voice, Jessys, Cody and so on. I'm being incredibly generous when I say that Evolpz is mediocre at best, but maybe he has improved since we last played a game together. I can only go on what I know and what I've seen in past games.
I will say though that Morgan is, without question, someone who is above average at challenges. His name just happened to be in what I originally quoted, and it wasn't even directed at him. You should give him more credit for his social and strategic game though because they are much more impressive than his physical game.
It's true, every player who's been around for a while has meta associated with them. A handful of people are recognised as good physical players, a stigma which has both advantages and disadvantaged associated with it. PoD and evolpz happen to be included in that category.
Well given that I was one of the jurors of that game I might as well give my input, for me it felt like both evolpz and you played a very similar game very focused on challanges, and that's all good, I never said that any of you played a bad game actually it was the opposite but at the end IMO it was a tie between the two of you, and in comes jury management, thing that with all honesty evolpz doesn't know how it works IMO. And I think the doc doesn't show that, I would recommend to review the f3 and the final tribal in that case.
It doesn't mean nothing, but I also don't think there's any objective and quantifiable criteria that makes you deserving of a win at the end.
Jury votes are completely situational and if you lose, maybe instead of blaming the jury for being a bad jury you should evaluate why the jury voted the way they did and try not to have that happen again to you the next time.
I think in my game last night, it wasn't as amazing a feat as it is usually because my challenge choices weren't the best (my fault). However, a lot of final jury votes have to do with how you manage the jury, not just your gameplay. Last night, you had the better jury management imo as well as strong gameplay so you deserved the win due to a better complete game.
I just reread the doc of the game in question and the game itself, and you and evolpz won 95% of hoh's and pov's. In the few times where one of you two could have been nominated by a different hoh, the other one won PoV. I see you also made F2, were you F2?
Also never being nominated is an easy feat when there's meta about you being a challenge player, which both you and evolpz have. A lot of people actively avoid frontdooring known challenge players for fear they might win the PoV, which you two did a lot according to Luca's doc.
Not being nominated at all is an astonishing feat, but it's not worth a lot when there are only two or three occasions where you could have been. It's much, much more impressive to not be nominated in a game when there are more than two players actually competitive in challenges and when you don't win every available comp.
Simply put, the fact that evolpz wasn't nommed in that game just proves that he was amazing physically, which I personally wouldn't give two sh*ts about when jurying.
I wouldn't be surprised if you were never nominated and lost in a game where everyone can see who you are, but if you are never nominated and you lose in an anonymous game, it would probably be a travesty.
