![]() ![]() |
|
Full Show Index Home Search RNO Article Archive Feedback E-mail Updates Advertise With Us Write For Us |
Survivor: Cook Islands – Why Nate Lostby David Bloomberg -- 11/30/2006
View Printable version of this article It would be easy to say that Nate lost because Jonathan flipped back to vote with those he had previously abandoned. And it would be true. But it wouldn’t really explain anything. We need to look deeper to find out why Nate lost. And how do we look deeper? I bet you know the answer, my dear readers. We peruse through What Cook Island Survivors Should Have Learned to see where Nate went wrong and how he might have been able to save himself. Nate seemed to do okay by the first rule, which tells players to scheme and plot. He was tight with Adam, and the two of them had an agreement to take Candice and Parvati to the final four. Along the way, he also made Brad believe he was part of the alliance, right up to the time when Brad was voted out. But Nate was not in on every decision, as evidenced by the fact that he voted against Jonathan in the second vote of the double Tribal Council, while everybody else in his alliance voted out Jenny. He told me in our interview that voting out Jenny was a mistake – and he was probably correct. But he apparently couldn’t convince his cohorts of this. Part of the problem, I believe, is that everybody on Nate’s alliance is so opposed to being told what to do. I have to wonder if this affected their ability to discuss voting even amongst themselves. As the first rule notes, “The second most important attribute [of an alliance] is that they will vote the same way as you will for somebody else to take the long hike.” The problem is that Nate’s alliance didn’t support him. They left him hanging. And no matter what he might have thought about how tight he was with Adam, that should have been a clue for him. Nate also told me that he didn’t trust Jonathan. However, it’s unclear if he actually did anything about this lack of trust. The key thing he should have done was to use his connection with Ozzy to attempt to make a back-up alliance. No matter how tight he was with his allies, he needed to have other plans, and he didn’t. He had the opportunity, but he just didn’t use it. The second rule tells players not to scheme and plot too much. He was fine here, since we just discussed how he didn’t scheme and plot enough. It also says not to backstab until you absolutely need to. Again, he was fine there. But a key to this rule is to keep your scheming secret. Here, Nate failed. Of course, Nate was not the only one – he just paid the ultimate Survivor price for it (so far – the others may be following shortly). Adam, Parvati, and Candice acted like they controlled the game. None of them hid their allegiance to each other. There was never a doubt in the Aitu alliance as to who stood where. That meant Nate was an obvious target. We’ve already partially addressed the third rule, which says to be flexible. When I was discussing the first rule, I mentioned that Nate needed to have a back-up plan, but didn’t. Well, what does the third rule say? “You can’t simply tie yourself to one alliance and hope that it survives.” Yet that’s exactly what Nate did. If he had made an alliance with Ozzy, rather than just chatting with him, Ozzy might have been willing and able to aim the votes in another direction. The fourth rule has certainly been ignored by at least two people this season, but they’re both still in the game (for now). It says not to let emotions control you, and it’s pretty obvious that Candice and Adam have blown this one. Indeed, we posted an entire article on this point. But we’ll talk about that more when Candice loses, in particular. However, Nate does bear some responsibility here as well. I think the main reason Nate didn’t really seek out a back-up alliance is the emotional attachment he had to his main alliance. Hearing him talk about Adam, it was more than just an alliance, as indicated when he said things to me like, “Adam’s my boy.” Nate didn’t want to backstab his friends, and as such he bears some responsibility for what happened to him. Nate did fine in terms of the fifth rule, though, which says to pretend to be nice. Indeed, I thought Ozzy might fight to keep him because they had a friendly bond. ‘Twas not to be, but nor was it a reason Nate was sent packing. 1 2 Next-->View Printable version of this article |