But I’m so confused, so a girl played like a 10x better game than the winner, but did not put herself in the fire making challenge, so she lost?
This is why they should just go back to the original format and vote off the fourth place person.
Because that’s so dumb I’m sorry. I could give 0 shits if you can make fire lol.
Comments
That's not why she lost. She -was- asked a question regarding not doing the fire making challenge. But more so, she lost because the jury felt like she was not as authentic in her responses and didn't meet their personal checklists of what they were looking to see from each of them. She won x3 immunities, was part of a solid alliance, but was not able to really pinpoint any singular move she drived herself and the one she cited, the jurors were like, no, we did that. And the guy who won, Gabler, was able to really sell and deliver a solid closing argument on why he deserved to win. He was able to explain how he had agency in the game and was able to answer the jurors questions in a way they found sastifactory. And they were laughing and eating up everything he was saying. And he forged really strong social connections that weren't overly highlighted on the show itself but he formed intimate bonds with most of the players.
But the fire making challenge is stupid af and should be retired. The original way was much better.
Okay, thank you so much! That does make more sense and yes I agree completely! If you can’t win the challenge, or your social game is not strong enough to carry you to the finale, then you don’t deserve to make it. bluebarracuda
But the fire making challenge is stupid af and should be retired. The original way was much better.