I really wanted Jeff to say "sorry, but when I 'smuff' your torches, you don't get to be on the jury. Yve and Jill will be brought back in to take your place, because they didn't quit."

But it really did live up to the billing of "most surprising Tribal Council ever." Loved it.


And having watched that first episode again, I'd still put my money on Jud.


ETA: In her interview at Reality News Online, Purplekelly indicates it will be a final three, not a final two. ("Congratulations to everybody who was in Survivor: Nicaragua and to the final three.") And NaOnka's interview is worth reading.

I either wished a) NaOnka chose to stay on the show, and everyone voted her out, or b) that they allowed everyone still left in the game to vote for one of the three people on the jury to come back into the game.

Either way, NaOnka is a horrible person. The end.

Well, I think his point was that it wasn't fair to the remaining players to break the precedent mid-game because they could have relied on the precedent in their jury strategy (if they have one).

He also indicated that the rules may be changed before the next season. I can see the reasoning that if the rules are going to be changed, it has to be before the game starts.

As for a smaller jury, if it's a final three (as Purplekelly indicated) and the quitters aren't on the jury, that would be a jury of just 7. I can see not wanting that.

I finally watched this yesterday. (If it wasn't before) This is officially the most terrible season of Survivor ever, and I think CBS would have done themselves a favor to just choose not to air it and take the loss. Now, don't get me wrong, this is a trainwreck I can't not watch, but still...WTF?

One last thing: Nay totally, utterly, fully and completely looses at life, forever and ever, amen.

I finally watched it in full yesterday too. I disagree though.. I think things like this make it more interesting. They are a pathetic cast, yes, but it sure cast a whole different spell over the alliances, etc. to have these two quit.

I agree about NaOnka though... what a loser.

Anybody watch this week's episode yet? I gotta admit, I was surprised...

This was probably the first episode where I was truly "thrown off" and guessing until the votes were read.

I missed everything before Chase, Holly and Jane went on the reward. I will watch that tonight.

I was truly confused up until I saw who voted for whom. Even then, I didn't see the logic. So you thought you were voting with the majority? Big deal. It's not like they're going to decide "look - they're on our side now, let's not vote them off".

PS...if Dan makes it to the finals because nobody thinks he'd win, I think they're wrong...I think this jury is likely to go with whoever pissed off the least amount of people, rather than who played the best social/strategic game. Dan hasn't really pissed anyone off.... If Dan wins, I'm so done with Survivor... (until I get sucked into next season)

I'll admit it -- I thought it was the most likely outcome, despite Chase's stoopidity in not taking Sash on the reward after he promised. It was clear to me that Benry was going out when he uttered his "Chase has been my boy since Day 1" line right after Chase said he'd never trusted Benry. That's why Chase and Sash wanted Benty out first -- they didn't trust him.

As for Sash feeling like he's King of the World again after winning immunity, I think he'd probably better think again.

And I wish that when Jane talked about not being as strong as the younger guys and Jud/Fabio was asked to react, he had said "Are you kidding me? Did you see Jane in the immunity challenge a few days ago? Did you see Jane when she had already won immunity and kept going just to show how strong she is?" Missed opportunity, that.

What I thought was interesting was the looks on the the non-quitter juror's faces as the votes were read. They did seem to have a "what are you people thinking?" quality. Anyone who takes Jane or Holly to the end is nuts.

So what does anyone thinks Propst meant by "the losers will be executed?"

Apparently hell hath no fury like a Jane scorned, eh?

How does the hidden immunity idol come into play if there was a tie? I have many "rules" questions after this episode in an effort to understand why they didn't fight the "big three" at all.

If they had forced a tie between Jane and Holly and re-voted to get the same tie, then would they bring in the purple rock? Who would have to pick a rock? Would Jud, Chase and Sash all be exempt since they had immunity? Then Jane and Holly would be exempt too because that has been the rule in the past (the people involved in the tie are not supposed to pick a rock). That means Dan would be eliminated, which wouldn't really help Jud or Jane in the long run, except that Jane could still win some immunities and end up in the final three. I initially thought they were stupid to not force a tie situation, but after I went through this scenario, I realized what would happen if they did. Jud and Dan extended their chances by NOT forcing a tie and by letting Jane leave. That is assuming that the people who played HII would be exempt from picking a rock.

If, realizing that the purple rock scenario wouldn't really work in this situation, they went to a fire building tie breaker instead though, Jane would have won for sure.

Interesting episode. I hope Jeff addresses the possible tie scenarios in his blog this week to verify that I'm thinking this through properly.

I agree - the building a fire challenge is always the most interesting (and most fair).

I say, even if the outcome of voting for Holly wasn't a good one for Jane, Fabio and Dan, they should have done it.

However... my honest opinion is that both Fabio and Dan wanted to "show their allegiance" to the other 3. Let's face it - everyone knew that if they took Jane to the final 3, she'd win. They wanted to get her out eventually. I think both Fabio and Dan thought, "If I vote with them, they'll keep me around a little longer."

However, if I were one of them, I would have voted for either Sash or Chase, knowing that they would have used the HII. Jane, being on the jury, would never think that I voted against her, and I would tell Chase and Sash back at camp that I voted for one of them.. just because. I'd say I knew Jane was going home, so I just wrote down whoever's name. You know the alliance of 3 already has a strategy as to who they're going to vote out, so what would I have to lose by saying that to them? And I could possibly solidify Jane's jury vote if I made it that far.

I was surprised at how honest Chase was, however, he still couldn't just man up and say, "Yes, that's what is happening," without turning to Sash and Holly and saying, "Right?" ... both when they were talking to Jane at camp, and while answering Jeff's questions at tribal council. The only chance that 1 of the 3 of them have to win is if Fabio and Dan are voted out.

All I know is.. they better hope Fabio doesn't any more immunity challenges...

That may have been part of it, but I think the real thing is that Fabio wanted Jane gone. If you remember, Fabio was the one who suggested to Chase that Jane should go. Sash, Chase and Holly seemed to be assuming that Dan would be the one to go. Chase said that to Fabio, but Fabio was the one who said "No, it should be Jane" and then the alliance of three decided this was the best time to get Jane out since it had to happen sooner or later.

I had to rewind a few times to catch it, but when Jane puts the fire out and it goes to slo-mo before the commercial, you can see a smile starting on Fabio's face.

Fabio knows his only chance is to win immunity, because Sash, Chase and Holly will stick together. They said so last night. (I just do not understand these people who feel the need to lay it all out at TC.) But he also knows that if he does win immunity and make to it the Final 3, he doesn't want to be there with Jane. She is seen as a bigger Final 3 threat than Holly. So, it's in his best interest to get Jane out, especially if it can be done in a way that assures that she'll never vote for Sash, Chase or Holly. Having her go out before the Final 4 does just that. If he makes it to the Final 3, he has her vote and he might pick up the votes of some others.

There's simply no way that Fabio could come out on top based on strategy, going against the alliance of Chase, Sash and Holly. So the task for him is to (1) win immunity and (2) try and make sure jurors have a reason to vote for him over the other 2 in the Final 3.

I said out the outset I didn't think he was as dumb as he was coming across.

This season is killing me.

Why in the world did Chase, Holly and Sash volunteer their strategy the way they did? At this point, Holly is the only one of the three who seems to have their strategic wits about them, and that's not saying a whole lot.

I'm really pulling for Fabio at this point. I've been silently cheering him on for most of the season, but the exchange between him and his mom clenched it for me. Go, dude! Bring home the million bucks!!!

Now, about Jeff's blog. I usually really enjoy it. I look forward to reading it every week. I was a bit disappointed in this week's, though. I'm wondering if he's through wasting mental energy blogging about this season's idiots.

Because Chase, who plays emotionally (like we were reminded in the "Previously on Survivior" intro this week) can't keep his mouth shut, and he forced Sash and Holly to chime in or sit there and look dumb.

BTW, spoiler-free speculation is that CBS basically telegraphed who is in the Final 3 in the commercial promo this week. I won't say more here, but check it out if you want to.

I haven't seen a commercial promo other than the "Next time... on Survivor" plug at the end of the last episode. I did notice in that, though, that there's a scene of only four survivors carrying their torches. I don't know whether it's accurate to assume the fifth person has been voted out, since s/he could've just been the last person in the line (and simply left out of the shot).

Is there another promo out there? (I looked briefly, but didn't do any in depth hunting.)