From: Grlygrl201@aol.com
Date: Sat Aug 26 2000 - 06:10:48 PDT
In a message dated 8/25/00 11:41:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
adam@KnowNow.com writes:
<< Reflecting back on it, I think it was an awful strategy, because he
depended significantly on people not kicking him out for arrogance, and
I don't think that was a given, especially the weeks he really got on
peoples' nerves. Winning the fire challenge when there were only seven
people left might have stopped a coup that week, so I think he relied a
little too much on luck, too. A much better strategy was to stay under
the radar but stay loyal to the alliance, like Rudy did. After the
first few weeks, as he learned to play the game, Rudy was never in
danger of getting the boot until the Final Three.
>>
Agreed. What strategy? It was an odds game all along. Rich gives himself
much too much credit.
If the final vote had been between Kelly and Rudy, rather than Kelly and
Rich, Rudy would have gotten better than 4 out of 7. I doubt anyone would
have attributed Rudy's winning to strategy, least of all Rudy. Rich may have
aligned himself early on with Rudy as someone he thought was least likely to
get voted off, but if it hadn't been Rudy he'd have aligned himself with
someone he felt would make it to the end.
The feeling I walked away with was this: no one had problems with a guy
being ruthless, but it seemed at least a few people couldn't handle Kelly's
duplicity. I think everyone was blind to Rich's disdain of others in general
and read it instead as cool logic. Kelly cared - others bought into it, then
couldn't deal with her turning on them.
My take,
GG
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Aug 26 2000 - 06:15:13 PDT