Temporary alliances can certainly be useful in this show, but a "final 3" pact can easily be destroyed the minute the alliance is in the bottom of the pack and it's every team for itself. If people understand and are ok with this, and the alliance is created primarily to help each other rather than gang up on another team, then I'm ok with it as a strategy.
Wasn't it last season where someone wanted another team to do their dirty work for them and U-turn a team they hated. When that didn't happen, they were irate about it, which was stupid because as we have seen on this season, you can make enemies when you U-turn someone and they take it personally.
I just don't understand Dave's logic. He's really upset at being U-turned and won't accept Brendon's explanation that it wasn't personal, but then he turns around and U-turns Leo and Jamal (even though he didn't have to, he could have chosen the Globetrotters) and then hopes they will have no hard feelings.
I think Dave likes it when people make him feel admired and important, so he's soaking up this Accidental Alliance and all the adoration from the girls (real) and the Afghanimals (half real/likely half gameplay). When things go his way, he's having fun. When there's adversity, he's belligerent and extremely sensitive. Dave and Connor need to shake these things off, and just race already.
"I suck at life" ~Dan
I think Dave and Connor were more angered that they did not use the UTurn on the Cowboys versus using it on them. The Cowboys were the best choice because they are so good at pretty much everything and I think it would value all to get them out. I think the Uturn is ridiculous because it is basically the same penalty as a non elimination and to me coming in last and being saved should carry a much larger penalty than being good or close to another team and being basically screwed.
No one is ganging up on Rachel and Brendon-what they have done is make a conscious choice not to associate with two people who are irritating to them. Two people who decided they weren't going to help anyone, Rachel CHOSE to stand on those steps and make a pouty, sour face, blatantly ignore Connor and Dave rather than respectfully state "we aren't going to help anymore, game on" She chose not to smile. That was the turning point in how they are perceived by other teams (along with intentionally turning over Dave and Connors chariots. Yes, they can do that, I get it. But, it's not something Dave and Connor would do. So, it surprised them) Everyone is ganging up on Dave, but no one seems to be terribly bothered by Rachel's long history of behaving consistently badly. In fact, she said she was embarrassed by her previous behavior and vowed to change. She didn't do so well standing on those steps, nor did Brendon by mock praying in the church and giggling like a two year old. Dave and the other teams make a few remarks out of frustration and it's perceived as a personal attack on Rachel. So, they made fun of her laugh. So, Dave yelled "I hate the Brachels" while running down a hill. Does he actually hate them? No. It's called the heat of the moment and if Rachel and Brendon can be given passes for their choice not to help , for their abrasive style then what's the problem with the other teams choosing to return the `favor?' If three teams decide they like each other and want to assist one another, what's the problem? it's not like any of them are going to keep doing it when it comes to the final push. And since Brendon and Rachel made the conscious choice not to be part of any of it, there's nothing to complain about (even though Brandon did say "karma was going to get" one of the teams because they were ignoring him and Rachel.)
No one hates anyone, talk about one word being taken out of context and blown out of proportion. Frankly, if I was in the race and I had a crap day because another contestant didn't have the good manners to respectfully refuse to help, it would make me feel good that other teams were giving me moral support. Some of these posts are really harsh regarding Dave, and I get people don't have to like teams, but I guess it's a bit shocking to read that the race is fixed in Dave's favor, that Dave is a hypocrite that Dave is "St.Dave" (I still don't know what is meant by that insult- other than to mock him and mock those who like him). The reaction to his few moments of human behavior seems so out of proportion to what he's `done' to deserve such harsh judgment. Yeah, complain about him, but again, I have a hard time reconciling the strength of the remarks against him with what he's `done'.
Who cares if teams help each other-where is it written in the rules this can't be done? It's a strategy, just like choosing to go it alone. Both have benefits and both have drawbacks. There is no right or wrong way. The styles clash and sometimes, as a result so do the contestants-particularly when it comes to personality types. Rachel is abrasive and so is Brendon-that naturally clashes with Dave and Connor. By saying Rachel and Brandon are abrasive does that mean I'm dissing them? No. It's just a small part of who they are. But given the choice, I would rather hang out with Dave, Connor, Jahmal, Leo, The girls and maybe the cowboys. Why? Because I'd rather be surrounded by people who are having a good time and aren't hyper competitive. I might die tomorrow and if I'm in the middle of this fabulous race around the world, blessed enough to see all these amazing places, I want to be surrounded by folks who , while competitive, are also generally speaking, viewing the race as a chance to bond. Coming in first is nice, so is a million dollars(gosh knows that would help my family) but for me it's the excitement of the journey and not getting so caught up I decide winning at all costs is the most important thing. And if I have moments recorded on videotape in which I express exasperation or yell " Oh my gosh, I hate so and so" I would hope people wouldn't take those five minutes and decide that's who I am or I'm a hypocrite because those moments here and there don't mesh with the rest of my behavior? In the end, this is just a inconsequential game having no long term lasting effects on anyone, much less the world. It's pretty meaningless. The prize has nothing to do with saving someone's life (unless the million dollars actually is going to that, but in this race it isn't) , making the world a better place or changing history for the better. So really, does it matter how someone wins? It's a crazy competition, not a battle to save the planet. JMO.
Last edited by redsox girl; 04-30-2014 at 05:28 PM.
I agree, its a race and we all have our opinions, which is fine. I think if we don't all agree that's okay as well. If I don't care for Dave and Connor, that's okay also. It wasn't one thing BTW, I posted that three weeks ago Dave was brusk and seemed somewhat rude to me. I have not forgotten Rachel's behaviour, but if she has changed after seeing her behaviour, there is room for Dave to improve imhoIt's a crazy competition, not a battle to save the planet. JMO.
If I was running this race, it would be to win a million dollars !!
The average dog is a nicer person than the average person
Well not everyone found Branchel irritating....check the interview by the Globetrotters. And I'm sorry, but, since when has it been a crime to be super competitive? and why does that make you a bad person? I would prefer to have my teams be both enjoying the race and super competitive, but if push came to shove, I'd rather watch a super competitive team than one like the singers who seem to need assistance at every turn. (And for the record, there have been moments when Brachel have taken time out during the race to enjoy the scenery and the experience.) And why is OK for Dave and Connor to U-turn someone as a game move but not Branchel?
Clearly everyone has their favourites and I doubt anyone will change anyone else's opinion. I like to remember, that editing can make everything appear different from reality. Good can come across as looking bad and bad can come across as looking good...these people are the mercy of editors. One funny face made during one moment can be inserted somewhere where it didn't occur and result in a totally different interpretation than what it meant originally...it is just easier to judge those we dislike more harshly than someone we may like....and why I find it mindboggling that I am actually defending Branchel!
You could be the juiciest, most ripe peach, but there is still going to be someone who doesn't like peaches.