This is what Tom said in his blog in reference to Jamie.
"I also kind of like the strategizing that comes of knowing that the game could actually go as it did and that the chef of a poorer dish that never gets served might be spared elimination. It raises the stakes for everyone, and I’m all for a challenge that asks the absolute best of the chefs."
He contadicts himself here. If the challenge asks for the absolute best of the chefs and a poor dish isn't served, that only means a better chef is eliminated. Don't get Tom's logic there.
If strategy is more important that the food then this competition is more like Survivor and not Top Chef and it loses some of it's credibility.