2/22 Show Discussion One World **West Coast Spoilers**

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spockwhat

My guess is tribe switch-ups are the best way to break down those alliances. Take 2 or 3 of the 5 and throw them on the other tribe and vice-versa. As long as they do it early enough, it leaves the survivors scrambling.

---

Yeah, they haven't done any tribe switching in ages, I guess now is a good a time as any.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spockwhat

My guess is tribe switch-ups are the best way to break down those alliances. Take 2 or 3 of the 5 and throw them on the other tribe and vice-versa. As long as they do it early enough, it leaves the survivors scrambling.

---

I have a love/hate relationship with the switch-ups. Sometimes it seems terribly unfair to the players who have been successful in exercising some control early on. There was one season a while back where there were 2 or 3 switch-ups (can't remember which one)...I wanted to pull my hair out! It was as if they (TPTB) wanted to have a certain outcome, and they were going to keep fiddling with the cast until they got it. That was the only Survivor season I totally lost interest in and didn't watch to the end.

If this season is men against women then they can't call it that if they mix them up soon. They can't manipulate the order of the challenges because it might appear to favor certain contestants, so I would think switch-ups would need to be decided on ahead of time too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brooks

If this season is men against women then they can't call it that if they mix them up soon. They can't manipulate the order of the challenges because it might appear to favor certain contestants, so I would think switch-ups would need to be decided on ahead of time too.

---

If they shuffle the tribes early on, there's no way I'll buy that they did so to throw a monkey wrench into the alliances. I was convinced from the moment I heard it was boys against girls that an early mixing of tribes was inevitable.

The season isn't called men vs. women, remember, it's called "one world". So no bar to a mix. I just hope it is after that male immunity idol plot comes to fruition. Of course that means the women would have to win immunity one of these days....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PWS

Well, I like what might be happening on the men's team---I still don't know most people's names as I have captioning on that runs over the names they do show. But Colton I do know! :) I'd love to see the outsider guys wipe out the frat gang.

The women were truly pathetic tonight.... I'm wondering if one problem they had was not just the breast issue in general, but the lack of compressibility of silicon? They should have tried going around the back earlier, or maybe holding each other and each leaning back a little. And they should have started with someone relatively flat chested who could have made it to the end, making it more possible to spread out more. The guys started with their smaller people who had a better chance of getting by, and then they could space out more, making accidental touches more avoidable.
I wonder if they could all have stood bowlegged, each with a foot on the "outside" of the beam and had the moving person crawl through....

Someone really hates Christine.

---

"the lack of compressibility of silicon?"

Are you kidding me? Monica, who obviously has fake breasts, was the only girl to make it to the finish. Kat, who obviously does not have fake breasts, had the most opportunities to advance across the beam and also had the most failures. Plus, I don't think either girl had to maneuver around silicon mountains, to me it appears that Monica is the only one with fake breasts.

I am not so sure keeping Kat was a bad decision. Sabrina is the leader and she is looking ahead. She wants to keep their number strong. Voting Kat out would not mean they would gain Nina or any other, not at all. It gives those outside the alliance more power and the ability to swing their weakest member over to their side.

Now is not the time to change. Give it more time and see who emerges as a possible loyal member. I like Sabrina.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spockwhat

My guess is tribe switch-ups are the best way to break down those alliances. Take 2 or 3 of the 5 and throw them on the other tribe and vice-versa. As long as they do it early enough, it leaves the survivors scrambling.

---

I don't really care what they do, so long as they do something. The game has become too dependent on alliances to the point where they're not just alliances of two or three but of five or more. It makes the game, at least the early stages of it, far too predictable in terms of who's going to get voted out first, plus, as was shown this week, people are so frantic to get to the safety of a big alliance as soon as possible that they don't--or can't-- think far enough ahead. The big women's alliance isn't strong enough in terms of anything but numbers, and obviously some of the members are regretting their choices already. The game needs to be switched up so that it's possible for people to get out of unfortunate early alliances without destroying their game entirely.

I also agree that I know plenty of women who can work together. However, it seems that women who can work together aren't interested in being on reality tv (or the producers aren't interested in having them on tv).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tilden

I don't really care what they do, so long as they do something. The game has become too dependent on alliances to the point where they're not just alliances of two or three but of five or more. It makes the game, at least the early stages of it, far too predictable in terms of who's going to get voted out first, plus, as was shown this week, people are so frantic to get to the safety of a big alliance as soon as possible that they don't--or can't-- think far enough ahead. The big women's alliance isn't strong enough in terms of anything but numbers, and obviously some of the members are regretting their choices already. The game needs to be switched up so that it's possible for people to get out of unfortunate early alliances without destroying their game entirely.
....

---

But, didn't the two who knew it was wrong to keep Kat over Nina and went so far as to admit they'd have not entered into that alliance if given a second chance...didn't they have the opportunity BEFORE Tribal Council to form a new alliance? They could have, but they chose not to. That tells me all I need to know about the strength (or lack of) their convictions. They could have flipped the game right there and taken charge of their destiny - I think it's weak and silly of them to sit on their hands hoping the producers will fix it for them. Had they not admitted their true feelings and I'd never known, I could have respected them more. Now I see them as stuck in an alliance they rushed into, regretted it, voted against their desires, and did nothing to stop it. :down

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SugarMama

They could have, but they chose not to.

---

If they had jumped ship and gone with the three older women they would have automatically been at the bottom of the new alliance. Staying true to the old alliance means they have a chance to remain at the top. Particularly with Kat and Alicia being prime targets for eviction.

It was said that Nina already was lacking energy. If that was true then voting her off was not a bad decision. Now there are only two older women. If Chelsea and Kim align with Sabrina and join Monica and Christina that makes a pretty formidable 5 person alliance. And, since Monica has already stabbed Christina in the back the three younger women will have an advantage when it comes time to get rid of one the older women.

Kim and Chelsea have maintained their credibility with all the members of the women's tribe. I think they made the right move.