Rumor I heard about when the teams merge
The ClubHouse: Archives: -- GENERAL ARCHIVES --:
November:
Rumor I heard about when the teams merge
Grooch | Wednesday, October 10, 2001 - 07:10 am   I heard that this year, instead of the usual teams merging after a certain point, the teams will be split into 3 camps new camps. Thus avoiding the usual old teams forming alliances and picking off the weaker team. Has anyone else heard this? |
Louloubell | Wednesday, October 10, 2001 - 07:13 am   I haven't heard that but it sounds like a good idea though! I hope it's true. |
Grooch | Wednesday, October 10, 2001 - 07:19 am   If it is true, I wonder how they will pick the new teams? Names out of a hat? 3 captains that take turns picking? (Like gym class, ugh!) Or will MB preselect the teams? I wonder that if this is true, if the teams are even aware of it at the beginning of the game? I like this possible new wrinkle in the game. |
Tksoard | Wednesday, October 10, 2001 - 07:39 am   Grooch, I heard that, too!! I think it will be great so we will never know what to expect. I heard it on, oh I can't remember, but I think it was MB on some new thingy. I'm just so excited about this year. GO SILAS!! GO TENN BOY!!  |
Amac | Wednesday, October 10, 2001 - 10:30 am   I heard this too. Dunno how it'll play out. Alliances are so much a part of Survivor it's hard to imagine the game played without them. Will have to watch and see. GO CLARENCE! GO MICH GUY! |
Grooch | Wednesday, October 10, 2001 - 10:51 am   Here's an article that tells (barely) some of the changes, but really tells you nothing at all. But its something to read. Link |
Car54 | Thursday, October 11, 2001 - 02:14 pm   There was a program on last night on E with a lot of interviews with S1 people, Mark Burnett,etc- very good... Anyway, Burnett intimated there that he was taking steps to break up alliances and block voting, so maybe it is true. |
Kep421 | Thursday, October 11, 2001 - 04:47 pm   How does this breakup into 3 camps work? I thought they merged two camps when enough people had been voted off to prevent the two camps from becoming to small. Also, merging turns the competition more individual based as opposed to team based. If they wait until half the people have been voted off, then break them into 3 camps, aren't they going to have even smaller camps? Won't that tend to make it a camp competition instead of individual competition? How and why is that better? (I'm not arguing, just trying to understand what the goals are) I always thought the competitions became more intense and interesting when they were fought on an individual level as opposed to teams. |
Grooch | Thursday, October 11, 2001 - 05:05 pm   I think it might prevent it because they don't know it is going to happen. When they first make their camps, they will start forming alliances immediately. Then after a certain point (maybe down to 9 players) MB then breaks up the camps and scrambles all the players. He knows who is in alliance against whom. He will make sure no alliances are in the same camp (except for the person he wants to win. ) These people will have to start their alliances all over again. That's my theory. |
Britchick | Thursday, October 11, 2001 - 05:58 pm   I've been thinking about this a lot and if, as Grooch suggests, they wait until it's down to 9 players then create 3 camps of 3 people, with alliances broken up or whatever, this is what would happen (presumably): *immunity would have to be given to the first 2 teams to complete a task (or whatever) so that only one team does not have immunity *unlucky immune-deficient team go to tribal council and vote off one of their own *first losing team is then down to only 2 players making it more likely they will lose the next immunity challenge and be down to a "team" of 1 in only 6 days (2 episodes) Isn't this a bit rubbish? Doesn't it mean that the team that lose the first immunity challenge are essentially going to be picked off one by one? Also, once it's down to 2 people in a team, how do they go about voting someone off if they lose the immunity challenge? It won't work. |
Deeya | Thursday, October 11, 2001 - 08:41 pm   There's one other thing to consider with the teams splitting into 3 groups... they have to do it when there are 9 people left in 2 groups.. which means more than likely each team will have 2 people from one tribe and the 3rd from the other tribe.. seems to me that being the 3rd makes it more likely you will be voted out... just my impression... |
Spunky | Friday, October 12, 2001 - 09:17 am   No, I don't like it. I much prefer them in one group and fight for themselves. When you split them in more groups there's more chance to form alliances that we can't detect as easily. |
Bracken | Friday, October 12, 2001 - 01:03 pm   This weeks issue of TV guide states: "Burnett says, the structure of the competition will remain essentially the same as last year, although there have been persistent--yet unconfirmed--rumors that those still in the game at midpoint will be slip into three new tribes instead of merging into one." I just went to the TV Guide website and it's pretty decent. It has polls and more information on the site than I have in my actual guide. www.tvguide.com if you are interested. Sorry, do not know how to provide a direct link. |
Deedee | Saturday, October 13, 2001 - 01:30 am   This is an idea that was suggested in a chatroom. Instead of the tribe transition being done at 10 or 9 people, it is done at 12 people. This is six days sooner than anyone expects and would be a total surprise! The players would then be given only a few minutes to divide up supplies and head to a new destination or wait for new team players. Also this would be logical from a production point of view, because while still strong the middle ratings have sagged compared the the first few episodes and the last few episodes. This early twist would also serve to boost the beginning of the "middle slump." Dividing into 3 groups at 12, would put 4 in each tribe. This theory, to me, makes a lot of sense. |
Awareinva | Saturday, October 13, 2001 - 08:40 am   I am wondering after just one episode if Boran is so inept that they lose every challenge premerger. Maybe they face going into the merge 8-2! After the first three days, I could almost believe that these yahoos lose everything! Then there would be no contest- Boran would just be picked off easily. In the last two the merge conveniently happened 5-5. Would it be as interesting to watch if they merged so unevenly? Maybe the three tribe thing was a way to even the playing field. I don't know how game show rules work. Maybe its something that has been in place all along as a possibility but never mentioned before. Like the # of votes in prior tribal councils when a tie occurs from S2. Wasn't needed in S1 so we didn't hear about it. |
Deedee | Friday, November 02, 2001 - 10:25 am   I think the three team split is the alliance breaker that we are going to see. My prediction is that just as they didn't choose who to team with at the beginning of the show, MB will also choose the new teams. |
Judy | Sunday, November 04, 2001 - 07:11 pm   Wasn't the origin on this idea of a three tribe split something that Jeff Varner said while visiting on BB2? I have tried searching the live feeds with no success-can anyone else find it? |
Blonde | Sunday, November 04, 2001 - 11:24 pm   I don't know how reliable this information is but I found it at www.futurizmo.com: Confirmed: Three Tribes At Merge Details about the interesting new "twist" added to the game. 10/07/2001 - As we earlier reported last August, the infamous "Three Tribes" rumor has finally been confirmed. An official CBS source has stated "Instead of the teams merging half-way through, this time around, word is they'll split into three (tribes), effectively putting an end to any alliances." Near mid-game, the nine remaining players from the Samburu and Boran tribes, will divide into three tribes, with three players each. The names of the three new tribes are not yet known. |
Blonde | Sunday, November 04, 2001 - 11:28 pm   Article from tvguide.com: Survivor: Africa I'd Never Do It to You 60 min. By Susan Hawk Let the mind games begin. Days 16, 17 and 18 should be unlike anything we've seen before on Survivor. The game needed a good twist and it looks like it has gotten one. The show was becoming just too predictable. In the first two editions, the players from the individual tribes still stuck together after the merger. Executive producer Mark Burnett couldn't let the stronger tribe just picked off the members of the weaker one again. The game had to be shaken up. Now we'll see just how strong alliances are. Can they hold together if their members are split apart? Normally, this is the time when you vote out someone who is physically threatening to you in individual challenges. But now that circumstances have changed, the weaker players will again be the targets. I still like the Boran folks. I hope they stick together. They've recovered from their boneheaded beginning when they stupidly poured out their water supply on the way to their campsite. Losing two of their players early was actually a blessing in disguise because it helped them to bond, while the Samburu group disintegrated into the Hatfields and the McCoys. This is the first time we've really seen a tribe divide itself so early in the game. And that's going to hurt the tribe's juvies down the road. They had better be careful and not imitate Lindsey, who pretends to be a badass. (She's not that tough.) If they do, they will likely find themselves in trouble with the other players. People just won't stand for that kind of posturing. |
Blonde | Sunday, November 04, 2001 - 11:31 pm   List of twist theories circulating around the net with analysis: Twist Page Link |
Apples | Thursday, November 08, 2001 - 04:01 pm   I remember seeing a commercial for Survivor saying that this one would be different than the other ones because instead of merging into two groups they will become three.  |
Kep421 | Thursday, November 08, 2001 - 04:33 pm   I hope you are soooooo right Apples!!!! By the way, Welcome to our boards.... |
|