|
S7 Guest Column:
S7 Guest Column: "Who's With Who"
By
12/8/2003
A review of the strategies used at this stage of the game, in Survivor: Pearl Islands.
Another installment of "Survivor", and another installment of changing alliances.
This stage of the game is the hardest to predict just who ends up leaving due to the overwhelming number of mini-alliances, sub-alliances, and friendships that are formed and broken all in one day's worth of time.
Let's take a look back at "Survivor: The Amazon" for a second. More importantly lets look at Rob Cesternino, third-place finisher, in the Amazon.
Rob has changed the way this game is being played somewhat. Of course there has been contestants that have changed the game before him, like Richard Hatch and Rob Mariano, but Rob Cesternino made the game come down to paranoia.
Rob controlled the game by switching alliances at the drop of a hat. If he was not in a good position, he
would find a way to be in an even better position.
Before the Amazon, when it came down to the endgame, it was
usually controlled by a major alliance of people that were not about to change where they stood in the game.
In Palau Tiga, it came down to the Tagi four, Richard, Susan Hawk, Rudy Boesch, and Kelly Wiglesworth,
that had dominated the whole game and picked off everyone else.
Kelly might have tried to flip-flopped a couple of times, but everyone knew exactly who they were with and who they were against. In Australia, Tina Wesson, Colby Donaldson, and Keith Famie, pretty much controlled the outcome of the game.
They decided which pair of people to take with
them farther and then got rid of them when it was time. In Africa, the Boran boys, Lex Van Den Burghe, Ethan Zohn, and Big Tom Buchanon, did exactly the same thing.
There were times when an uprising might have happened, but leader Lex always found someone else to stick with them
and ride it out.
In the Marquesas, the underdog alliance of Sean
Rector, Vecepia Towery, Paschal English, Neleh Dennis, and Kathy O'Brien, banded together early and took out John Carroll's alliance and then proceeded to become the final five.
In Thailand, Brian Heidik led his Chuay Ghan tribe to victory and then won the game. Rob Cesternino, on the other hand, made "Survivor" a game of "backstab as many people as you can".
When the game got down to the merge, old alliances were being broken like nobody's business. It became extremely difficult to predict who left because castaways
continually changed their minds about their status in the game, thanks to Cesternino's influence.
This strategy has apparently been handed off to the Pearl Islands gang. Everyone has absolutely no problem whatsoever in betraying a friend and switching gears.
Jon Dalton has taken this strategy to the next level. He will gladly stab you in the back and befriend someone
else, and then proceed to stab that other person in the back.
What it comes down to is that Jon Dalton is playing a brilliant game. You may not like, but you have to respect him for the work he has put into it. Jon is doing whatever is within his grasp in order to get to the end.
Other contestants are playing extremely hard, yet Jon is
being creative and innovative about it. His big lie about his grandmother's death is a perfect example.
This now gives him leverage to use the line "I swear on my grandmother", anytime he needs to. Christa took the walk of shame this week, thanks to not being liked by many.
With the final five of Burton, Jon, Darrah, Lillian, and Sandra, I don't see a majority alliance or any real sub-alliances with any substance.
I just see five people willing to do whatever it takes to
get to the end. Who's looking good: Jon. He continues to place himself in the right situation.
Who's looking bad: Anybody else. It is totally up in the air trying to decide who goes next, but I'll take Burton seeing as how he is a tremendous challenge threat.
If I had to choose a winner right now, I would pick Jon Dalton. He consistently makes the right moves, and I have no reason to believe he won't continue that trend.
Note: The opinions and views expressed above, do not represent the views and opinions of Futurizmo Co. in any way.
|
|
