Survivor: China (Survivor #15) Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Mike Frezon]

It was a million bucks, actually! And it was during the All-Stars season.

I always figured...and I'm sure I'm being cynical...that the producers knew what they had with Rupert by way of popularity...and when they knew he didn't win All-Stars (which came on the heels of his loss in Pearl Islands) they came up with the scheme for the audience vote for most popular survivor.

And then, cynical guy that I am, I figured they did the same with James.

I'm sure it didn't really go down that way.

 

[MatthewLouwrens]

Here is what I would do if I was running Survivor. First, you would need to check for a tie before finishing filming. If you discover there is a 3:3:1 tie for first place, you go to the jury and tell them there is a tie, but don't tell them who the two tied parties are. You then get them to vote again on the basis that you eliminate third-place. Since you don't tell them who is eliminated, they have to vote three times again - "If Amanda is eliminated, I vote for Todd. If Courtney is eliminated, I vote for Todd. If Todd is eliminated, I vote for Amanda." The you discard the irrelevant votes, and you have your result. Could be complicated to present to the audience, but would certainly be best for getting a result uncontaminated by a jury that has watched the show before having the final tiebreak vote.

 

[Hanson]

To make it less confusing, I'd actually just eliminate the lowest vote getter and then have the jury revote. Then there would be no tie.

Whatever it is, I'm sure the producers have a tie breaker in place or they would never have gone to the final 3 format.

Personally, I dislike a final three -- I think they may have done that to make it more likely that a stronger player makes it to the finals, but in reality, it just makes it just as likely that the stronger players are voted off earlier and a useless player makes it to the finals.

 

[Mark Kalzer]

The way I would run things for a tie, and perhaps it was done this way, is that after the jury votes, ask each of the final three to approach the voting booth, and cast a vote for either of the two other finalists as a tie breaker, and stick it in an envelope. This envelope would only be opened in the event of a 3-3-1 tie, and it is made clear that each of the final three does this so no clues are dropped as to what the final vote is.

This works with a jury of 7, but in a jury of 9 as in Cook Islands there remains the possibility of 3-3-3. Not sure what you do then...