Post by eric on Aug 7, 2010 11:26:02 GMT -5
I would like to congratulate both of you for making the final 2. You two, along with Mike, were my three closest allies in the game, so once Stacey was gone, I knew no matter what happens that I would not be disappointed in a winner.
And since i had alliances with both of you (even though the one i thought was the weaker bond turned out to be the strongest), my vote is up for grabs.
Having said that I think reputation is coming in too much into this game at the end. General consensus (at least from my time in the house with all of you guys, and from conversations and evictions) is that Ryan has not played the strongest game. Many of you (and myself included) believed that Ryan would be the easiest beat in the final 2. But this is why perception and reputation are so important. What did (or didn't) Ryan do in this game that made him so beatable? He won important HOH's, (he probably wouldve been gone if he didnt win the final 4 (I would nominated Michael and Ryan), and survived the block (POST VETO, and nobody used a veto on him) a whopping 4 times (5 if u want to count the final round). Michael did survive it 3 times, but when Chad went home, the veto was used on him, and when Steven went home he used the veto on himself, thus never being in true danger of going home.
Applying this theory of perception: Jordan's gameplay is a good example of reputation. I remember saying in the jury lounge, how I thought Jordan and Jake were the most deserving to be at the end. I can logically sit here and give you reasons why Jake's game was great, and I'd be shocked if you both DIDNT put him towards the top of Jay's list for most deserving. Jordan on the other hand, benefited from this reputation card that I believe both Helps AND hurts you Ryan. Jordan won 2 of the first 4 challenges, in dominating fashion and then kinda flew under the radar. Nobody was targeting him, and he wasn't winning challenges (although always finishing close). It's not until after realizing that Jordan is going so under the radar, I pointed this out to both you (and Mike), did the target fly on his back. Me complaining to EVERYONE that he stole my money that put him back on peoples radars as well.
Ryan, you picked up on this, and during your HOH week you got rid of "Perceivably" the biggest threat to win the game at the time, and I don't think you got such credit for taking out such a threat.
So if it was you who started your reputation that you were easy to beat, Kudos- it got you this far and got Michael to vote out his strongest ally ,Mike (who gave me the impression that I was his strongest ally, I guess thats the advantage you have of hosting someone twice) . The only downside to your perception might be convincing some of the Jury otherwise, when it is so engraved in their skulls that you played a "weak" game
Question for Ryan:
1. How do you think this reputation began, and how much did u have a part in it?
On to Michaels game
Michael you had a strong game, and if this actually is your first then I am truly impressed. You turned a rocky start, where you were nominated a bunch of times , and couldnt win a challenge for your life, and were just throwing votes into an incredible finish. I believe you voted for everyone on the jury (some more than once). Michael, you truly played a fantastic game for your first time, and thinking about it, it was just as good as (if not better) than Jordan's (someone who had everyone, even myself, convinced he played one of the top two games in the house), and your cuthroatness at the end puts it up there with possibly even Jakes. And how many vetoes did u either win, or convince other people to use on you- Bravo.
But i believe there was one flaw in this game play that i think i suffered because of. You took Ryan to the end, voting out your strongest ally in the game for a strategic reason. I'm all for strategic decisions, but just the very round before you told me you were making an "emotional" decision and i suffered for it. Not only did you vote me out, but you told me I was safe, told me you voted Mike out, etc etc etc, only to make an emotional decision and keep Mike, the person who wouldve easily beat anyone in the final 2 in the game. That hurt a lot, especially since Ryan offered NOT to put me up, but I convinced him to do it, so i wouldnt have to vote you or Mike out. I guess being cutthroat comes easier to some than others.
So my question to you, is why do it? i told you I wouldve taken you to the final 2, which is true, you were the dominant challenge threat as you won more than Ryan and I combined, and you knew that you could beat both of us. So why patronize me, and tell me I am staying when I wasnt, and then to vote MIke out here because it was the "strategic" decision is just another slap in the face. To at the very least before you cast your vote, ask again if we have a final 2 alliance hurt a lot also. I think you and I worked very well together all game whether it was deciding how to use our money (you were the only person who I truly told how much i had), going over information before challenges, or plotting how we can get rid of the "big guns" (Jake, Jordan etc) from the house. We strategized about everything and to think how much we think alike, as we both believed Mike was our strongest ally, and that was probably the one thing we kept from eachother in the game, or at least I Kept from you (Although i figured ur pair eventually.) Were you just using me? (which would mean you wouldve had to have told Jordan how much I had) And ultimately playing me at the very end? So please explain it, how you considered our alliance in this game and what lead you to make the decision to vote me out of the game. (and before you get on saying it was Mikes emotional words, they were brilliantly ambiguously written that both you and I thought that he was talking about us).
Which leads me to my Main Questions for both of you.
Alliances: you both had plenty in this game
2. So i would like you to list them and rank them in order of A) Loyalty (Who you were most out to protect B) who you trusted the most C) who you wouldve taken to the final 2, assuming you could beat anybody and D) who you woudlve taken to the final 2 under game circumstances which is what we have.
and 3. since you both were nominated so early I want you to list what you think the boot order in this game WOULD HAVE BEEN if you were voted out early. I think this question will let me and the jury see, just how much about this game you understodd, and how important you were in getting rid of people on the jury. Feel free to write a line, a few words a paragraph, whichever.
Ryan I want you to start with the hypothetical situation of you leaving episode 5 (assuming you left instead of Travis,).
and MIchael please start with the hypothetical situation that you left in the fast forward round in episode 4 instead of steven.
good luck to both of u
And since i had alliances with both of you (even though the one i thought was the weaker bond turned out to be the strongest), my vote is up for grabs.
Having said that I think reputation is coming in too much into this game at the end. General consensus (at least from my time in the house with all of you guys, and from conversations and evictions) is that Ryan has not played the strongest game. Many of you (and myself included) believed that Ryan would be the easiest beat in the final 2. But this is why perception and reputation are so important. What did (or didn't) Ryan do in this game that made him so beatable? He won important HOH's, (he probably wouldve been gone if he didnt win the final 4 (I would nominated Michael and Ryan), and survived the block (POST VETO, and nobody used a veto on him) a whopping 4 times (5 if u want to count the final round). Michael did survive it 3 times, but when Chad went home, the veto was used on him, and when Steven went home he used the veto on himself, thus never being in true danger of going home.
Applying this theory of perception: Jordan's gameplay is a good example of reputation. I remember saying in the jury lounge, how I thought Jordan and Jake were the most deserving to be at the end. I can logically sit here and give you reasons why Jake's game was great, and I'd be shocked if you both DIDNT put him towards the top of Jay's list for most deserving. Jordan on the other hand, benefited from this reputation card that I believe both Helps AND hurts you Ryan. Jordan won 2 of the first 4 challenges, in dominating fashion and then kinda flew under the radar. Nobody was targeting him, and he wasn't winning challenges (although always finishing close). It's not until after realizing that Jordan is going so under the radar, I pointed this out to both you (and Mike), did the target fly on his back. Me complaining to EVERYONE that he stole my money that put him back on peoples radars as well.
Ryan, you picked up on this, and during your HOH week you got rid of "Perceivably" the biggest threat to win the game at the time, and I don't think you got such credit for taking out such a threat.
So if it was you who started your reputation that you were easy to beat, Kudos- it got you this far and got Michael to vote out his strongest ally ,Mike (who gave me the impression that I was his strongest ally, I guess thats the advantage you have of hosting someone twice) . The only downside to your perception might be convincing some of the Jury otherwise, when it is so engraved in their skulls that you played a "weak" game
Question for Ryan:
1. How do you think this reputation began, and how much did u have a part in it?
On to Michaels game
Michael you had a strong game, and if this actually is your first then I am truly impressed. You turned a rocky start, where you were nominated a bunch of times , and couldnt win a challenge for your life, and were just throwing votes into an incredible finish. I believe you voted for everyone on the jury (some more than once). Michael, you truly played a fantastic game for your first time, and thinking about it, it was just as good as (if not better) than Jordan's (someone who had everyone, even myself, convinced he played one of the top two games in the house), and your cuthroatness at the end puts it up there with possibly even Jakes. And how many vetoes did u either win, or convince other people to use on you- Bravo.
But i believe there was one flaw in this game play that i think i suffered because of. You took Ryan to the end, voting out your strongest ally in the game for a strategic reason. I'm all for strategic decisions, but just the very round before you told me you were making an "emotional" decision and i suffered for it. Not only did you vote me out, but you told me I was safe, told me you voted Mike out, etc etc etc, only to make an emotional decision and keep Mike, the person who wouldve easily beat anyone in the final 2 in the game. That hurt a lot, especially since Ryan offered NOT to put me up, but I convinced him to do it, so i wouldnt have to vote you or Mike out. I guess being cutthroat comes easier to some than others.
So my question to you, is why do it? i told you I wouldve taken you to the final 2, which is true, you were the dominant challenge threat as you won more than Ryan and I combined, and you knew that you could beat both of us. So why patronize me, and tell me I am staying when I wasnt, and then to vote MIke out here because it was the "strategic" decision is just another slap in the face. To at the very least before you cast your vote, ask again if we have a final 2 alliance hurt a lot also. I think you and I worked very well together all game whether it was deciding how to use our money (you were the only person who I truly told how much i had), going over information before challenges, or plotting how we can get rid of the "big guns" (Jake, Jordan etc) from the house. We strategized about everything and to think how much we think alike, as we both believed Mike was our strongest ally, and that was probably the one thing we kept from eachother in the game, or at least I Kept from you (Although i figured ur pair eventually.) Were you just using me? (which would mean you wouldve had to have told Jordan how much I had) And ultimately playing me at the very end? So please explain it, how you considered our alliance in this game and what lead you to make the decision to vote me out of the game. (and before you get on saying it was Mikes emotional words, they were brilliantly ambiguously written that both you and I thought that he was talking about us).
Which leads me to my Main Questions for both of you.
Alliances: you both had plenty in this game
2. So i would like you to list them and rank them in order of A) Loyalty (Who you were most out to protect B) who you trusted the most C) who you wouldve taken to the final 2, assuming you could beat anybody and D) who you woudlve taken to the final 2 under game circumstances which is what we have.
and 3. since you both were nominated so early I want you to list what you think the boot order in this game WOULD HAVE BEEN if you were voted out early. I think this question will let me and the jury see, just how much about this game you understodd, and how important you were in getting rid of people on the jury. Feel free to write a line, a few words a paragraph, whichever.
Ryan I want you to start with the hypothetical situation of you leaving episode 5 (assuming you left instead of Travis,).
and MIchael please start with the hypothetical situation that you left in the fast forward round in episode 4 instead of steven.
good luck to both of u
)