- Sat Apr 16, 2022 2:38:10 am
#74722
G'day Bret, Shirin and Wendell,
Congratulations on making it to the final 3! You've done what 37 others couldn't and for that, you should be proud. I've enjoyed getting to know you guys, and although frustrating at times, you've all had your moments.
I'll go through what I'm gonna do here, I'm just gonna say a paragraph or so about my impressions of the games each of you played. I do not expect you to respond to these, just merely let you see my impressions so that might guide your answer here, and perhaps in other threads. And then I'll ask a question, which you can answer in as much or as little detail as you like.
Bret
First of all, Bret. This may seem harsh, but from my point of view, your style of play always seemed a bit..cowardly? You'd always be 'on board' to make a move, but then when push comes to shove, you wouldn't enact it and then when people came back to you after the vote saying why did this fall through, you always had some obviously transparent bullshit that just severely damaged your reputation within the game. I'll give you a couple of examples. Firstly, ALL the way back on og zakros, when Michaela got voted out. Now I KNEW that you wanted me out that vote but not because 'yOu FeLt At ThE bOtToM' and attempted, very much transparently so, to claim 'the girls made you feel you were at the bottom', the girls alluding to Michaela and Rachel. But I knew the real reason was because you saw me and Jess running table, you wanted us to shut up shop, you wanted to take power and so you got bigmoveitis. I get it. BUT, you never took ownership. Because you were playing scared, and you didn't get the read on me that, I would've been so much more forgiving if you had just explained the situation properly. But because you didn't, that stuck with me the whole game, and it's the reason why, I'm sure you were aware, or maybe not given your omission of the topic from your speech, your name was up for grabs at the merge vote, if it wasn't for some strong gameplay on some of the Rhodes players end. I'll point to another part of the game. The final 9 vote. You came and told me that Wendell and Jacob were gunning for me at 8. Great, you're actively revealing information. And what's more, it was a lie, and a pretty good lie because it was believable to me, based on their position and my position in the game. So that was good gameplay on your part. What followed, not so much. If you revealed that information, why would you not have the intention to go after Wendell, it doesn't make sense to me. And if you say 'you wanted to turn us against each other', that actually lacks awareness of threat levels within the game, since they WOULD have come for me, and I would've come for them, probably at that same vote, because I knew that I wasn't well-positioned at that moment and I needed to reposition. So you voted out Rachel, and then came to me with the excuse of 'b-b-b-but Rachel told me she'd go after you if I helped her by voting Wendell'. Again, clearly and transparently bullshit, and again, not owning your moves. Which has left a lot of the jury with a bitter taste in its mouth. To me, it seems you've followed Wendell throughout the mid to late game. Note the final 6 vote. In order to have the best chance of winning a final 3, by the time of the f7, you needed myself, Erika, Wendell and Lindsey out. But, at the final 6, you voted out Jacob?? Who was arguably the most beneficial player to your game at that point, considering he could beat myself and Wendell in challenges. So my question to you is, please help to clarify to me and the jury, why you feel like lies helped you in the game and why you feel they were necessary?
Shirin
Shirin we haven't actually managed to play together that much. Mostly because you weren't online that often, but given life circumstances I won't hold that against you. When we were talking, and I told you this, I did find you to be fairly likeable. I also think you had solid reads at times. Note the bold there because there were other times when you had poor reads. I'll highlight a good read you had, not going along with the Wendell plan at the final 8 because you called my bluff. That was a strong read, I feel, and you explained that well, to me. A poor read, however, I feel you made, was at the final 6 in going along with the plan to vote out Jacob. Your strongest chance at winning a final 3 by the final 7 was sitting next to Jacob and Bret. But, you decided to go with Wendell and Bret, with Wendell being a much larger figurehead than Jacob jury wise. So your decision there was baffling to the majority of the jury, particularly allowing the splitting of votes onto Bret, another player who needed to sit next you at the final 3. These aren't the only issues. Whilst you always came off as approachable and adaptable throughout the game, which I do think is a benefit to your game, a CRITICAL flaw in the eyes of the jury is that you were never proactive in these decisions. You were always the one being approached with moves but never actively brought up ideas, at least to my knowledge. That was a critical flaw to many people here, and I want to give you the opportunity to set the record straight on that point. Explain times in the game when you proactively and decisively brought up your own strategic ideas to set up a vote or a move that helped your game. If you have multiple, you can explain them all if you want.
Wendell
I knew you would make it here. Even during the 12 player Crete merge, I thought you were the player best positioned to make the end and win. And as time went on it just became more and more apparent how well-positioned you were and how active you were in making that happen. You were making deals to cover your ass left, right and centre. I am simply so impressed by your game and your ability to manage relationships. However, my vote is still up for grabs despite all these aspects. Others have made the comment that you've been arrogant, however I don't really see that from my perspective. I will say it can appear that your game appeared a little safe at points, and a little too pushy at points, regarding the final 10. However, I do think you made all the right strategic decisions for your game AND you owned them. The one slip-up I really do think you made strategically is at the final 7. I always look at the game as if everyone is playing optimally, right. Final 7, you vote out Lindsey. OPTIMAL scenario for Bret, Shirin and Jacob is for all 3 of them to go to 3. Bret also has the public idol, and so really, the decision to cut Lindsey at 7 almost bit you in the butt was it not for the poor reads of the people sitting beside you. So I will ask you this, how did you account for people playing optimally or non-optimally for themselves within the game? At any stage.
I know these questions are tough, and some of these reads are hard to hear, but KEEP FIGHTING!! Appreciate the three of you, looking forward to shooting the shit post season.
