Board Thread:Virtual Tribal Council/@comment-27638357-20160519221405/@comment-27638357-20160522175739

Tozza6 wrote: Zypker124 wrote:

Tozza6 wrote:

Zypker124 wrote: First of all, you cannot say that the jury reasoning behind their vote was wrong, because clearly she was likeable enough to receive the damn jury votes! How can you say she has a poor social game when she managed to get the votes from these people? Secondly, just because she didn't get Nick's vote, doesn't mean she played poorly. That was only one vote, and Nick had already informed us that he liked Aubry the most of any girls during his boot episode so it made sense. For your first statement, I'll just refer to the tweet again that points out the circular reasoning: https://twitter.com/domhrv/status/733297779267776514. I think she must've played extremely poorly if she didn't even get Nick's vote. Nick and Michele were tight allies out there, and Nick didn't seem to be bitter about his elimination at all from the Ponderosa videos. I mean, they're dating now! It's like what would happen if Daniele didn't vote for Parvati in HvV, or if Stephen didn't vote for Jeremy in Cambodia, or if Malcolm didn't vote for Denise. Nick probably has no clue about Michele trashing Nick in her confessionals, and so if her "social game" is really that good, then there's no excuse that she can't get a vote from her closest ally. I know Nick ran a RHAP strategy blog, but let's be real. On the couch, we all want them to vote for the most strategic player. In the game, however, that's simply not true. Most people who claim that they're going to do that end up not following through. And I'd like to point out that Nick and Michele have been on the same tribes pre-swap, post-swap and merge, so if anyone really gets Michele, it's Nick! And Nick votes for Aubry! There's no way you can have a good social game and lose that vote. So by your logic, Aubry played EVEN MORE poorly than Michele because SHE didn't receive ample jury votes that she should have gotten. By using your own words, "I   know Cydney wanted to keep Michele at the F6, but Cydney seemed to have just as, if not a more, closer relationship with Aubry, as demonstrated when she puts her faith in Aubry to pull through and side with them at the vote. I hardly saw Cydney and Michele really talking anything in one-on-one conversations, or even directly to each other." So here you are saying Cydney was a lock for Aubry, but yet she still didn't vote for Aubry, meaning (by your logic) Aubry played poorly! Again, " I heard Michele didn't even TALK to Scot or Jason directly. That can't be considered a good social game." So Jason and Scot really should have voted Aubry, but didn't, meaning Aubry played EXTREMELY poorly to lose their votes. Same goes with Debbie. So since Aubry should have gotten four jury votes that she didn't end up getting, compared to Michele's one, Aubry is a god awful player.
 * To continue off my previous point, you look at who voted for Michele to win, and it's just unseeable, from my perspective. I know Cydney wanted to keep Michele at the F6, but Cydney seemed to have just as, if not a more, closer relationship with Aubry, as demonstrated when she puts her faith in Aubry to pull through and side with them at the vote. I hardly saw Cydney and Michele really talking anything in one-on-one conversations, or even directly to each other. After the whole campfire extinguishing and machete / ax hiding schenanigans, I heard Michele didn't even TALK to Scot or Jason directly. That can't be considered a good social game. Julia was allied with Michele, but the connection was established by Julia and Anna in the pilot when they formed the all-girls' alliance and less of Michele's actual work. Debbie was very closely aligned with Aubry, as we saw multiple times, trusting her with full confidence. Even if you want to say Aubry blindsided her, Michele also voted against Debbie, so if this "social game" is as good as they say her's is, Debbie should be equally as resentful to Michele. Heck, NICK DID NOT VOTE FOR MICHELE! Nick was aligned with Michele throughout the entire game (or so Nick thought), and is now dating Michele, and has been with her on every tribe, so Nick SHOULD be a lock for Michele, right? Nope! I really think it's a testament to Michele's poor gameplay.

Is that the conclusion you make? That's fair enough, I guess, but your statements that you mentioned led me to a different conclusion; if you're conceding here that Aubry played a better social game than Michele, then I'm led to believe that there was a case of BJS and that they were mad Aubry played any form of a tactical game. Generally, Aubry made the moves that were good for her game, and helped her position. It's hard for anyone to say that her tactical game was atrocious if she's improving her stance in her game. However, I believe that her having a present tactical game cost her the votes as the jury didn't want to admit to being outplayed by AUbry. That's my stance on how everything worked out.