Dan's gameplay: love it or hate it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gratefulgirl

Also, I think there is a difference between favorite player and best player.
I think that if he wins this season, it will be hard to argue that he's not the best player.
"Favorite" player is much more personal choice and specific to the individual making the choice.

I definitely think that he's taken it to a new level this season. I think that there are infinite ways to manipulate people, and levels of sophistication of manipulation - and I thoroughly enjoy watching him make moves that have never been made before. I enjoy watching him prepare for different possibilities and cover all of his bases - on one hand it looks like "over-playing" - but really, it's the smartest thing to do to win.

As much as it makes me uncomfortable on a personal level, I love watching him discover what makes people tick, where people are vulnerable, where they are weak in their make-up and exploiting those weaknesses with a finesse that is so smooth, people don't realize that it's happening. That's the mist. The reason that the mist works is that it's tailor-made for whoever he's talking to at the time. Even when he's pissing people off, they aren't that pissed off. To be able to do this, he has to get to know people - and he spends a lot of time listening and not that much talking. He doesn't give his opinions about a lot. He remains neutral, and then distracts people when they notice his neutrality. He asks a ton of questions, partly because he has a curious nature, but mostly to figure out how to manipulate each individual the best.

The other gift that Dan has is that even when he's lying, he's tapping into the part of him that believes it's the truth. I think he absolutely means a lot of what he says...it's just not the whole truth or the majority of the truth. That's why people fall for it, because there is a level of genuineness that can't be faked. He just moves into the small part of himself that believes what he's saying.

His precision and combination of using these various interpersonal and manipulation skills is what makes him the "best" player.
I'm not sure that he's my favorite either. I would have to check all my values before I could answer that.

---

When you have unequal "playing field" then I suppose he would look like the player you just described. Maybe BB should even the playing field and see what sort of "level of genuineness" Dan really poses...? Obviously I am speaking of a all-star BB show.... WITH players that lie and manipulate. Of course that BB season would include Dr. Will. NOT Boogie, Janelle or Britney.

Boogie likes to think he's equal to Dr. Will... but he doesn't come close... and Janelle, while I like her as a player... she is NOT good in the sneaky, back-stabbing... manipulating sort of player and Britney... I'm not sure what her game is... as she hasn't proven herself in either season.

I understand BB choses all sorts of players... physical, strategic, brains and duds aka floaters... but IF we want to pat a player on the back for being the BEST player.. then I want a season of the exact sort of player and then watch it play out.....

Good point, second time around, Dr. Will was playing against All Stars, so how well his game worked was even more impressive. Dan was mostly playing against newbies.

And while Dan's get to the F2 game was incredibly well done (in terms of success, not discussing moral issues here!), the other half of the game, avoiding having everyone furious at you once you get to F2 was, obviously, not good. I'm not sure he had many choices, and at least he got 50K, but he managed to make the evictees for the most part feel humiliated on a personal level as well as outplayed---that's much harder to forgive for most. You can blindside people without humiliating them, even lie to them without humiliating them, and give them the flattering old 'you were the biggest threat left" line. Dan left them feeling as though they had had their vulnerabilities explosed somehow. Maybe he couldn't have done it any other way....but it's no way to get the F2 votes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PWS

Good point, second time around, Dr. Will was playing against All Stars, so how well his game worked was even more impressive. Dan was mostly playing against newbies.

---

On the flip side of that though in All Stars everyone had played before so it becomes more of an even playing field. Everyone knows each others games and they are all big targets. This year the coaches were at a disadvantage because people had seen them play before whereas the newbies were unknowns. IMO not sure which would be harder.

I do know that I prefer to have all new players or a straight up All Stars.

if we didn't have all new players there wouldnt be an allstars

i complain every season about them rehashing the same players, but realize that for the most part the newbie group they picked this season sucked

if it werent for Dan Brit etc.. season would have sucked

seriously though, next season they need to take a break and get all fresh blood in there, give those folks a shot that really been trying to get on for years and whatnot

stop wasting contestant slots on typecasted people ... put some motivated real players on there and you can still *steer* the show from the DR if you find the folks boring

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dogslife

On the flip side of that though in All Stars everyone had played before so it becomes more of an even playing field. Everyone knows each others games and they are all big targets. This year the coaches were at a disadvantage because people had seen them play before whereas the newbies were unknowns. IMO not sure which would be harder.

I do know that I prefer to have all new players or a straight up All Stars.

---

I agree on both parts!

It should be all or nothing. All all-stars or non at all.

I admire Dan even more now that the dust has settled. Dan orchestrated Ian's win and Ian's strategy as displayed on The Talk would not have worked if it had not been for Dan. Dan had a lot of 'blood' on his hands and he played a game that brought a newbie to a win. He was never going for #1. The many comps that he threw was very obvious! And he is not going to ruin Ian's win, by detailing his game plays that helped Ian to #1.
He knew full well that his game play would not win the jury votes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Matchmaker

I admire Dan even more now that the dust has settled. Dan orchestrated Ian's win and Ian's strategy as displayed on The Talk would not have worked if it had not been for Dan. Dan had a lot of 'blood' on his hands and he played a game that brought a newbie to a win. He was never going for #1. The many comps that he threw was very obvious! And he is not going to ruin Ian's win, by detailing his game plays that helped Ian to #1.
He knew full well that his game play would not win the jury votes.

---

I completely disagree with that... NO WAY did Dan join this season to take second place. IF he could have won it... he would have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I'm here

I completely disagree with that... NO WAY did Dan join this season to take second place. IF he could have won it... he would have.

---

LOL absolutely! he didn't play as hard as he did, and as dirty as he did, to place 2nd. Plus if he knew the way he played would be really disliked - he would have changed his gameplay

Coaches know a thing about that ;)

I agree to disagree, Dan was to smart to lose all the jury votes. If he could pull off all he did he could have won the jury over. The tax implications alone make the $50,000 a good paycheck for 3 months.