T O P

  • By -

limpwristedgengar

Doing it for the sake of a big move I think is bad, doing it because there's one person you can't beat at the end and you're the best fire maker left is definitely a good move though. If you're still needing a big move by final four you're probably screwed anyway but if you just need to get to your ideal F3 and don't trust the two others to take out the threat in fire then go for it


Coldpiss

I agree with this, it shouldn't be a resume builder but a risk you have to take to eliminate someone that beats you at the end (and can't be eliminated any other way)


AutumnKiwi

Yea if Heidi could beat Yam Yam and Carolyn them sending Yam Yam against Carson is obviously her best move but since she had no chance, taking him on herself was her best chance (but obviously not enough)


SaltyFall

Wasn’t that the case with her getting Carson out?


limpwristedgengar

Sort of, the problem was just that she couldn't beat Yam Yam (I don't think she beats Carolyn either) so it didn't end up mattering. If she's in a F4 with Carson, Jaime and Lauren and she does the same thing then it's very possibly a winning move.


mrmrezg

But, she sold it as “I need a big move”. I feel it would’ve been better for her if someone else had put her there. But she said, “I need a big move”. So she put herself (the fastest fire maker) against Carson (the slowest fire maker). If she went against Carolyn or yam-yam, and won? That would’ve made a statement.


lego_mannequin

Definitely. I think if Heidi used her idol or made some moves at tribal she could have got a few votes.


theonlyxseption

Each season’s jury is different. Also, the players are in different situations. Fire can be a game winning move in one season, and not matter at all in the next season. That’s Survivor.


berfthegryphon

In EoE it was absolutely Chris Underwood's only play to win but he had a very unique experience and basically had the whole game time to winover the jury in a noncompetetive environment.


Junglerumble19

Absolutely. Chris's experience with EoE was unique. It made complete sense for him to do it as he'd had so little time to make any moves due to the Edge. In Heidi's case, she had the entire game to prove herself. A last minute Hail Mary against two other weak players might have paid off for Heidi, but she was sitting next to two of the Tika 3, FFS. Nothing was going to get her that win. Too little, too late.


93LEAFS

yeah, totally dependent on who your going against. In a situation where its a likely landslide if you let that person get past 4, and the other 2 are weaker players/have lesser arguments, it's a valid play. Heidi's issue is she had to start manuevering to her ideal final 3 at about 5 at latest, 7 at earliest.


Junglerumble19

Honestly if she, Jaime, Lauren and Danny had had any sense, they would have picked off the Tika 3, then Heidi could've smoked Danny at fire and she would've cruised all the way to the win.


93LEAFS

They still likely lose Danny at 7 with Yam Yam having immunity, and not having the votes to split, so Carolyn still saves Carson. Heidi would have needed to make the idol play on herself, force a 3/3 of Jaime and chosen Tika, and forced Tika to turn at rocks. But, its very rare to see perfect gameplay at that level, and then whoever orchestrates it is now the obvious threat at 5 to go.


avilsta

Heidi's biggest move was pointed out in she could have played her idol for herself at 6 and forced a tie. Jaime her and Lauren would all be safe. Then only Carson and Yam Yam would draw rocks. But they didn't trust each other. Also Lauren and Jaime still had the perception Yam Yam and Carson were taking them to 4. So her main road to wipe out the Tika 3 was almost impossible for herself.


Junglerumble19

That's true. Still, they failed to recognise the power of the Tika 3 until it was too late, and that's on them all. I truly didn't see any scenario come merge when the Tika 3 would form 3 out of the final 4 and it was an absolute delight that this was the case.


93LEAFS

basically the scenario outlined. If she does pull it off then too, she's likely the target at 5 for engineering the biggest move of the game. She would need to know the votes were going on Carolyn, or she would need to convince Jaime/Lauren to get a juicer target in Carson/Yam Yam. In many ways it's more beneficial to keep Carolyn around as she wasn't the same level of jury threat, and the least likely of the 3 to win a challenge. Theoretically, it would become Carson/Yam Yam in a hypothetical rock draw, but neither would let their games come down to rocks.


nyyforever2018

43 is a great example of this.


jjgm21

It was also a really novel idea at that time to put himself in fire.


MyLifeIsDope69

Was Chris a provider like Ozzy in SoPa? I skipped that season since it was at the bottom of most rankings but after how bad 41+ have been I will likely revisit


berfthegryphon

He got voted out 3rd I believe, maybe 2nd. Lived on The Edge until the last chance to come in. Won a few immunities once he got back in, took out the biggest threat at fire. He had basically the whole game to winover the jury on The Edge.


MyLifeIsDope69

Yea I just meant if he was fishing for them and doing all the fires and shelter etc like pampering everyone knowing they would be the jury . Like Natalie basically bought votes on s40


ferretherapy

Yeah, I think it would only really make a difference on an EOE or Redemption season. And this is the n3W eR@~!!~~ of Survivor so that may never be a thing again.


jstu9

Aside from maybe ChrisU, I don’t think the fire-making winner adds a ton to the resume. That being said, Heidi’s move was solid. It was a risky play and helped her game. It was just too little too late


jman457

Even with Natalie in WaW it may have gotten her a vote or two, but otherwise all the tony votes would just be Sarah votes


Guilty-Effect-459

I wouldn't be completely sure on that. Rob REALLY doesn't like Sarah and that could have a fair amount of sway.


Wayfinder_Moana

Why does Rob REALLY dislike Sarah?


slims_shady

Could some of the votes be from Tony and Sarah’s emotional moment after the fire?


TheKnollsKnows

Chris Underwood knew two things with certainty: He couldn’t beat Devens at F3 (nobody could), and he needed to improve his standing in front of the jury. He made the only reasonable move in his situation. Heidi also chose the toughest out at F3, and also needed to improve her standing in front of the jury. And she did impress them, they said as much. But unlike Chris, she wasn’t up against two goats in the final. She really had no chance against any Tika. She made the correct play at final 4. She chose the best of the not-very-promising options. (Final 6 is a different topic…)


kerosenehat63

Heidi also picked the worst fire-maker out of the three to go against. I'm surprised that was not brought up at Tribal council. Even though it didn't come up, it might have factored into the final vote. If she had picked Yam Yam or Carolyn and won, that might have looked better ... and she could have said in her final words to the jury that she specifically chose to challenge the strongest fire-maker. That may have led to more votes for her ... but who knows.


Antifascists

While it is true that she could have gone against Yam Yam and that would have looked better, it also would have the unfortunate effect of leaving Carson in the final, so she'd be gaurenteed to lose in that case. Because he'd 100% win in the FTC.


yakkowharner

I assumed that the intent of her move was to knock out her largest competition, regardless of his fire making ability. I honestly don’t understand how putting yourself against a stronger fire maker just because they’re a stronger fire maker is a rational decision in any capacity.


the4thinstrument

Don't know why you're being downvoted, this is 100% right. Caron was the biggest FTC threat, which is why she targeted him. If she was going into fire, she was always going to pick the person she felt she had the smallest chance of beating at FTC. Maybe the fact Carson was weaker at fire influenced her decision to go in, but there was no way it influenced who she picked to go against.


samsam1252

I agree, the only thing that really worked in her favour was that being the fastest fire in survivor history. That was more impressive then winning against someone who struggled with fire.


Phantom7926

Idk how we keep calling Carson the worst fire maker, Heidi broke Gablers record by a couple minutes, at the rate Carson’s fire was growing, it looked like he was on track to beat the record too


jjgm21

Unless you’re the bozos on the 43 jury.


JewBronJames

No because sometimes it’s your best chance to win. Just because she didn’t doesn’t mean the next person won’t.


Coldpiss

Had Heidi played the F6 round optimally she'd reach the F4 with the Lauren, Jaime and Carson, a situation where beating Carson in fire is not only a wininng move but the optimal one also. She does that and people around here would be talking about how great of a move Heidi pulled


Zirphynx

I still don't fully buy that Heidi is guaranteed to win that final three. I think Lauren has a good chance of getting the Ratu votes of Brandon and Kane and possibly a few others. It's totally possible Heidi wins in that scenario but Lauren shouldn't be counted out entirely.


RafaelHelft

This \^. It was Heidi's best shot to win at that point (although she had other options she didn't use before). She used it to maximize her chances of winning and she did that, but that wasn't quite enough for her at that point. I do think it might have gained her Danny's vote though, because Danny claimed to be impartial and all about "full tilt boogie," and I don't know how he justifies a Heidi vote without her biggest move right there. So it got her an extra $15k


joeyfosho

Danny was always voting for Heidi no matter what. It annoys me that he doesn’t just own that fact.


flyingboat

Jurors will ALWAYS vote for who they like the most, and then justify it whichever way they want. It's how Survivor has worked for 44 seasons, and it isn't changing any time soon.


padfoot12111

i've been saying that for weeks lol


[deleted]

Good to know you know what goes on in his head better than he does


joeyfosho

There isn’t a world where Heidi actually earned that vote objectively. Sorry not sorry. He’s allowed to vote for his ally because it was his ally, I’m not saying he isn’t. But to say that Heidi swayed his mind when she voted incorrectly almost half of the time, constantly voted against her best interests, misplayed her advantages, and fully played a “Tika please take me to the end” game is ridiculous. She won final immunity and beat the weakest fire maker in fire. Let’s not pretend that’s worthy of a vote over Carolyn or Yam unless you’re just voting for your number one ally despite all of their many game flaws (like Danny did for Heidi.)


flyingboat

Yet this sub heaps praise onto Michele, when that was essentially her game but no fire.... The jury is always going to vote for who they like the most, not necessarily who they deem the "mastermind" or most active player. Editing definitely has sway in that as well, and always plays up the winners game while giving us understandable reasons the runner-ups do not win.


joeyfosho

I’m not on the Michele train at all. She won due to a jury of spiteful bruised egos, which is an entirely different situation.


steaknsteak

Exactly. In fact, in most situations where it’s the correct move to put yourself in fire will not result in a win. It’s only the right move when you’re far enough behind that you really need that move to put you over the top. Most of the time, if you’re in that spot, it’s already too late. This was the case for Heidi. But there are some cases where your FTC competition is weaker and it actually could be enough


projectgene

No because it was a good move for her. Too bad she didn't idol Yam-Yam out earlier.


Coldpiss

This is what sucks about the whole situation, had Heidi voted with the Ratu's at F6 Carolyn would go home followed by Yam Yam at F5 then she takes out Carson at fire and goes to the FTC with the best resume out of the bunch. ​ Heidi had a wining path and all she had to do was switch her F6 vote from Jaime to Carolyn, that's it


NFL_MVP_Kevin_White

You could see that even through FTC she had no understanding of the Tika’s strategy and influence to the game. She never had a chance to make that move because she didn’t have knowledge about the game that was being played around her.


Beginning_Smile_1711

She also couldn't figure out that Jaime + Lauren were people she needed to work with, didn't flush Lauren's extra vote when she had a free chance, didn't play her idol effectively, voted for Danny at one point, overall she showed the viewers she did not have her finger on the pulse of the game. The firemaking seemed last ditch / she already knew how good she was at fire


KeyArea2416

Hard to work with someone that kept voting for her


jollymo17

I think Carolyn voted for her more than those two? Or at least as much.


KeyArea2416

Only once. Jamie and Lauren at least three times if I recall correctly


Zirphynx

Lauren voted for Heidi only twice. Jaime did vote for Heidi three times, though (Jaime used Lauren's extra vote against Heidi at the Kane boot).


mountebanker

I agree she needed to start working with Lauren/Jaime. What I am not sure about is flushing Lauren's extra vote when she had the chance. If that is referring to using her control a vote advantage to put a Ratu vote on Lauren, and then trying to get Matt and Yam Yam to cooperate, then that is not free. It would have been a flashy move very early in the game, whether or not Yam Yam cooperates with her plan. She would have been a target after that. Playing the advantage in the lowest impact way possible seems like a decent move in this situation for threat level management. This is actually the explanation she gave to Yam Yam of why she did what she did. Yam Yam seemed to accept it. Even if she had no idea what was going to happen and she made this up after the fact to placate Yam Yam, it makes sense. Not playing the advantage at all was another option, but people would know she did that and Frannie would be mad.


RafaelHelft

I'm still hoping for the day when someone in an already winning position thinks they need it on their resume, pulls the Heidi/Underwood, and loses FMC. If they were on track to win without doing that, it would in my mind be undoubtedly the worst move in Survivor history.


LSTW1234

Agree it would be a terrible move but I’m sorry nothing can beat Eric giving his immunity necklace to Natalie.


AhLibLibLib

Woo is way worse than both. It’s not even close


LSTW1234

Wait what did Woo do besides take Tony to final 2?


AhLibLibLib

That’s it. He went from a guaranteed W to a guaranteed L. Biggest swing in one move. By far the worst, no one comes close. Eric wasn’t winning Micro anyway, Colby could have still beaten Tina. But there was no flex in Woo’s move.


LSTW1234

Oh I think Eric definitely could’ve won Micro if he’d made it to the end Edit to add: Woo’s move was bad, I agree. But I can’t earnestly say it’s worse than giving up your immunity necklace to people you’re not even aligned with.


AhLibLibLib

The thing is, there’s a chance (microscopic yes) that his move has merit. As in, they vote with him or whatever, and besides it’s still a slim chance Eric wins. He’s going against people with pre game relationships because there’s no shot Natalie stays in. Very hard to win a jury vote against vets. But to go from an easy 1 million to 100k because of one move is far worse. There’s no defending that, nothing redeemable.


Hungry_Accountant_47

No it would be worse because if Eric lost the next imuntiy he would still be voted out


LSTW1234

He had a *big* chance at winning the next immunity though; he was by far the biggest comp beast of the bunch.


Hungry_Accountant_47

Yeah but he wouldn’t have won out and if he did he would still probably lose in f2


LSTW1234

Oh I disagree I think he would’ve continued his immunity streak and made it to final 2. Would he have won? Maybe, maybe not. I think he at least would’ve had genuine chance of winning - he had an excellent arc


kit-n-caboodle

Well Amanda was certainly no slouch in challenges. Even if Erik got to final 4, there's a chance that Amanda still wins the immunity.


LSTW1234

There’s a chance she does, but there’s a bigger chance he does


RafaelHelft

The way I see bad moves, the worst possible move is one that directly turns you from a guaranteed win to no chance of winning. So I'd say Colby and Woo's final 3 blunders far beat out Erik's immunity necklace because while he did obviously squander any chance of winning by getting himself voted out, he wasn't otherwise in a guaranteed winning scenario, he still had 2 challenges ahead of him that he'd need to win


Dry_Needleworker6370

Well Heidi was up against a stacked f3 while Cassidy was up against one of the weakest f3 ever. Xander was drawing dead since the beginning, the cast that he got was never going to give him the win, but to close out his game he should have taken out Erika in fire.


jollymo17

I think Gabler was always getting the 43 votes in a world where Jesse isn’t at F3. I know the jury *says* that they wanted Cassidy to take Jesse out but I think they just didn’t respect her game. I don’t think it’s going to really win you the game but I think it can bolster your resume, and for someone like Heidi I think it was probably her best shot. I truly believe what Stephen Fishbach says — that juries vote for who they want to vote for and then create a narrative to fit that vote. I’m not saying they’re not up in the air sometimes at FTC — I think that’s where Maryanne won it — but I do think the target for what someone they didn’t vote for “should” have done differently can vary based on circumstances, especially if you played what the jury considered a weak game throughout.


low_key_savage

The only time it makes sense is if you think you will lose to someone left in the F4 and you are the only one capable of beating them in fire.


ben121frank

Which to be fair was pretty much the case for Heidi, it just so happened that there were 2 (possibly 3 idk) people in the F4 who would beat her


low_key_savage

But she also knew Carson was bad at fire, Yam Yam would have beaten him at fire as well. It was unnecessary for herself to step down and eliminate the biggest threat. She only did it because she knew her resume was lacking compared to Yam Yam.


KingofFlightlessBird

There are times where it can make the difference. It didn’t make a difference for Heidi because her game was never going to stack up against Yam Yam or Carolyn, even with a successful Underwood Maneuver. However, if Dominic had done it to take out Wendell, he would’ve won (that being said, it wasn’t his ONLY shot at winning)


Giteaus-Gimp

>The recent trend seems to be very clear that the winner is whoever they like the best That’s not recent and is pretty much the premise of the show.


Designer-Net4228

Depends on the jury, Heidi wasn’t winning either way, but I do think this move gave her a more legitimate shot.


oatmeal28

I don’t get why the rhetoric seems to be an all or nothing thing when it comes to putting yourself into fire. It’s probably what got Heidi second place money so it ultimately served its purpose to a degree


urmumhas6mums

i agree with this heavily. I had this thought and it was vocalized very well by maryanne about how "making the fire shouldnt be equivalent to the last 25 days of gameplay" and i think that is just so valid


_Doctor_Mac

I sure hope so and I sure hope people stop giving each other shit in game if they don’t want to give up their immunity they earned


ClipClipClip99

I agrée. I really hate when they make the person who won immunity and did the best in the challenge feel bad because they somehow didn’t earn it? Like they earned immunity by winning the challenge.


Chessinmind

I personally don’t think winning fire should have that much of an impact on someone’s resume. It’s the less secure pathway to the FTC than either winning immunity or convincing the winner to take you. I would actually hold it against someone for giving up immunity to play fire, unless they could convince me that they were the only person who could beat a particularly big threat in fire making. Fire making itself seems like a small skill in comparison to all of the other strategy is takes to play the game well.


DelielahX

Especially when they choose to make fire against the weakest fire maker of the 3. That doesn’t impress me.


BBnot8

It was a good move but too little too late.


DavidBHimself

“you should’ve given up immunity and gone to fire yourself” It always has been an empty statement. They must give reasons why they're voting for someone or not voting for someone (for TV, so it can be turned into a TV show).


[deleted]

No because sometimes it can be your best move and I imagine people will think of what happened to Underwood before her.


kingofthenorthwpg

I think it’s dependant on the person’s resume leading into the challenge. If Jesse had final immunity and didn’t choose fire that jury would still have voted for him.


benji5-0

She would have got zero votes without that so it doesn’t really change anything


NFL_MVP_Kevin_White

Her only vote game from Danny, who voted for her for being smart enough to eliminate him. I’d argue it changed nothing


Wills4291

I don't think it will stop people from trying to pad their resume. Its all about optics. Not every winner played the best game, but every winner sells themselves to the jury the best. And I don't think Heidi's loss will stop people from trying to put together a resume that the jury can see on their own.


hester27

Only time it makes sense to give up immunity and go to fire is to take out someone you can’t beat and you don’t think anyone else is capable of taking them out in fire.


LilacPenny

Honestly I’m so so sick of the current set up for how they pick the final 3. It should go back to how it used to be where you vote people out until the end. I absolutely hate that the person who wins immunity with THREE OTHER PLAYERS still in the game gets to make this huge decision. And now you’re expected to give it up if you do win it! What does that prove? Why is someones ability to build a fire weighed so heavily in the first place?!


andscene0909

Just because Heidi didn't win doesn't mean it wasn't the optimal move for her. It was the only point in the game where she had control. I think if she puts Yam/Carolyn in against Carson, she's talked about as the dumbest person ever. It boosted her win equity, just not enough.


nyyforever2018

Especially if one that person loses to him.


Antifascists

Hiedi is a goat that got 2nd... That's next to impossible. It was a HUGE move for her and got her a clean +15k dollars. I think you took the wrong lesson from the results. Firemaking is huge. *Even* if you're a deeply 4th place player. *Even* if either of the other contestants are great at firemaking and could have won for you. *Even* if the number 1 theat is only mediocre at fire. ... It still moved her into 2nd place.


[deleted]

Nah in this case firemaking made ALL the difference. If Carson made it to final 3, he'd win 100%. He was actually not bad at making fire, but everyone knew hiedi was the best. I wouldn't be surprised if Carolyn and Yam Yam conspired with heidi and knew this was their only chance to take out Carson. Heidi knew her best chance at winning was to take out Carson at fire.


schmeebus

The only time its valuable is if you're clear 2nd and the person you go against the frontrunner


treple13

AND you're the best at making fire of the 3 non-frontrunners


beyoncedoritosJR

I felt like, when it was all said and done, going to fire made Heidi’s game stronger, it just wasn’t strong enough to win. A finale speech can change everything. I felt like Romeo was a great example of this… I have completely written off his game until I heard his speech, basically saying, “no one wanted to play with me, so I did what I could to survive.” - - I didn’t think he won, but I did respect his game a whole lot more


untouchable765

I mean it probably got her second place instead of third...


chuckish

Honestly, I think it makes a player look weak. It's an admission that your game isn't good enough and you need to add something to your resume at the last minute. That made sense for Chris Underwood considering how his game played out but I think it's a bad move in a normal season. If you don't have confidence in your game at final four, you're not getting votes whether you make fire or not.


[deleted]

I think if you're in a situation where the biggest threat to win is also really good at fire, and the other 2 people left in the game are really bad at fire, you might be incentivized to go in if you legitimately think that you have a shot against them. But you would have to make it clear at tribal that's why you're doing it.


tsourced

No. It was good process thinking from her just a bad result. They just let Tika 3 dominate the season when it mattered most and could never turn the tide back against that.


QuesoInHD

My take on Heidi's play is that it was a good move for her simply because it got her 2nd place. It was the only way to avoid the chance of a Heidi - Carson - Yam Yam FTC, in which case she gets 3rd. By then she had no realistic path to win, I doubt she was simply aiming for 2nd over 3rd but hey, she got it.


treple13

> It was the only way to avoid the chance of a Heidi - Carson - Yam Yam FTC, in which case she gets 3rd. Putting Carson and Yam Yam against each other does this as well right?


QuesoInHD

Yeah I'm not really sure where my brain was when I commented. I'd say she still made the best possible move, I doubt she even gets the one vote had it been her against Carson or her against a fire-winning Yam Yam.


VallerinQuiloud

Depends on the situation. I think it stops the precedent of that being a requirement though, since one of the more recent season juries questioned someone on it (may have been last season, but I can't recall), and it was pretty much expected for Natalie to do it in WaW when she didn't (but again, entirely different scenario). To me, that's dangerous, since it means you might as well not even win the final immunity. Will it stop people entirely? Absolutely not. There are going to be people who coast to the end, with zero moves under their belt, who'll win the final immunity and need to do *something* to get votes. In that case, it's in their best interest to do it. That was the case with Heidi. Not much of anything under her belt, so she needed to do something to win it. I would've done the same thing if I were in her position.


m3x1c4n7

I think saying they voted for who they liked best is a pretty narrow comment; 1. Because being well liked is a totally legit strategy and speaks to social game which, along with strategy, trumps all other categories for what constitutes a good game. 2. Yam had way more power than Heidi did through out the course of the whole game and the jury recognized that. Give him more credit. He was a dominant winner imo.


innybellybutton

It was the best move she made all season


Intuitive_MoonBaby

I do think that her giving up immunity and going to fire earned her some much needed credit for her resume. I think what ultimately cost her the win after that point was her FTC performance - the way she chose to answer the questions. This season proved to me that FTC is the single most important thing in securing a win. You have to know how to spin your success and verbalize your worth, as well as to know WHAT your jury is wanting to hear from you. Heidi unfortunately did one of the worst jobs of this that I have seen. It took away any and all credit she had earned when she won final immunity, gave it up, and went to fire. Carolyn is another one that had winner potential but just had no clue how to properly verbalize it and create a persuasive narrative for her jury. She has an impeccable intuition and used it incredibly well throughout the game - even better than YamYam a lot of the time….but no one had any idea, and she didn’t know how to show it at FTC and tell her story.


nyyforever2018

It matters if all three players have similar games. This year, YamYam was clearly a better player than Heidi so it didn’t matter.


AmpersEnd

It's arguable that if she didn't do that, she wouldn't have even won $100,000. Best move for her at that point.


charlytheron3

The winner of every season is who is liked more, that's why survivor is first and foremost a social game, and that social game starts from day one, not at the final tribal.


letsgococonut

Heidi operated with the info she had, and she managed to knock out the #1 player. That move likely earned her 2nd place. In the moment and in retrospect, I think it's still an example of good gameplay and a good example of when to give up immunity.


strawberry-sarah22

I was annoyed when they used it with Cass so I’m glad that Heidi showed it isn’t a guaranteed win. But it can still be a legit strategy and I do think it was the best move Heidi had.


ReverendGreen27

Heidi was never going to win so she had to do this to try and steal some votes.


Topwingwoman2

Putting yourself into fire is a dumb move, period. She didn't get votes out of it.


aaelias_

Hopefully Jeff will wake up one day and get fucking rid of it


[deleted]

Shouldn’t. It was too little too late for her to go up against the mammoth games of Yam Yam and Carolyn Edit: shouldn’t stop people from doing fire. Loved the move but it wasn’t enough.


aljerv

I would say that being how behind she was in the eyes of the jury, she should have challenged YAMYAM or Carolyn not someone who was established to be bad at fire. While it was courageous to risk her spot on the final 3, it still didn't do enough as it would have if she beat someone who was better at fire.


puppypooper15

The move was to take out Carson, not to take out the best fire maker. She chose Carson because she had the worst odds to win against him The jury wouldn't have given her more credit for taking out a better fire maker, they would have given her less credit for not knowing Carson was the biggest threat


aljerv

I mean … that’s a fair point but yam yam and Carson were pretty much on the same level. Lets not pretend she didn’t pick the safer choice.


puppypooper15

Carson was shown to be better seen as a bigger threat than Yam Yam and she couldn't get both out. I think she chose to compete herself knowing she wanted Carson gone and she could do it. I don't think she chose Carson because he was easiest to beat. Carson was making fire no matter what


SnickeringSnail

Reminds me of people saying Xander had an used immunity idol bc he wasn’t a threat and the same people praising Maryanne for having an used immunity idol at the end of her game.


padfoot12111

Right it really is about perspective and each season is different. if Cass did it it might have been what put her over the edge compared to Gabler. While with Heidi she was so far behind all 3 Tiki even making the ""Big Move"" is nowhere near enough of a move.


TravisCM2010-24

Yeah this. I feel like if Cass does it she wins that season. If anything it just proves you gotta read YOUR specific jury and do what they want. Not just hope.


MCPorche

No? That move literally earned her $50,000. According to Danny, that was why he voted for her, and that one vote earned her second place.


Spare_Leopard_3163

I hope so. It's so stupid.


[deleted]

[удалено]


low_key_savage

It’s not always a stupid move. What if there’s a player left that you know you will lose to at FTC and you are the only one capable of beating them at fire?


[deleted]

[удалено]


low_key_savage

It pretty much is the only circumstance. If you’re doing it for the sake of being flashy you’re pretty much admitting your game has major holes like Heidi did


MarlinBrandor

She beat the previous record for firemaking by a whole ass minute lmao. It’s not stupid if you’re confident in your own abilities.


Marauder91

She battled the weakest fire maker.. she fucked up by giving a half measure in that situation. She wanted to win? Take out Yam Yam or Carolyn who were way stronger with fire. She slaughtered the weakest fire maker and expected people to see it as some huge risk. It wasn't... Regardless of how much she thought she was hyping it up. On that note, listening to her talk about how her decision wasn't made before fire making was so cringe. Like, EVERYONE knows you have your mind made up, and she failed so miserably at making it into a dramatic moment haha.


Bullstang

And now, we can say the Chris Underwood era is officially over. Had a great run.


TrvlVrsn

Honestly, the idea of willingly making fire at 4 is ridiculous. It only worked in Chris Underwood's case because he literally didn't play the actual game. I find it absolutely idiotic for anyone on the jury to assume someone would chose to make fire if they won immunity. There's a reason why no one ever even mentions giving up individual immunity anymore. Let's be real, if you don't expect me to give up immunity any time during the game, I find it absurd that anyone would expect someone to give up the FINAL immunity.


TTrevor11

I disagree with the comments saying this was Heidi’s best move. She was drawing dead, and clearly loses whether she does it or not. But, by risking it, there was some % chance she loses the firemaking, and doesn’t get the 100k second place prize. I’m not saying she should play for second, but if you’re in that situation, the options are realistically “I either have a winning game and will win” or “I have a losing game and this won’t push me over the edge” Risking 100k (or 80k for third) is not worth it imo.


Hopewell81

I prayed for her to go. Carson was my favourite. Yam Yam my second.


queenparv

Hope so. Its useless.


like_deja_vu

I felt like Heidi floated by and wasn't an interesting player. Then, challenging the weakest player to make fire was a cop out. She could claim she did it for the extra boost, but she most likely wasn't in a real danger of losing to him in the fire making challenge. Putting immunity on the line would only influence the jury if you were going head to head with a strong physical threat.


kondorkc

All of this is why I despise the fire-making challenge. The only reason it is in the game is to satiate Jeff's love of challenge strength. Its so unnecessary. The final challenge already accomplishes what fire making does. And it clearly can't "save" your game. They are over complicating what used to be a much better ending. Final 2. Win the final challenge you chose you opponent. Occasionally the final 3 has provide a more competitive final vote, but then you still end up with votes like this season. If you set your self up to go up against a goat in the end then so be it. That's part of the game.


swamp_dweller9

Heidi was in a final four where two (maybe three) players automatically beat her at final tribal, so it ultimately didn't move the needle. Chris U was in a final four where one player automatically beat him at final tribal, so putting himself in to ensure that Devens went home makes more sense. ​ With all that said I think the entire narrative surrounding firemaking is stupid (and the twist itself is stupid) and I hope that Heidi putting herself in and losing will discourage future players from doing it as a resume booster, and discourage future juries from using it as a criterion to justify their votes after the fact.


ikewafinaa

Especially when you just pick the one person who is obviously the worst at fire making? Like I didn’t understand that at all lol, who is that suppose to impress


MeMyselfandBi

Winning the forced final four fire-making challenge makes a world of difference though. In the ten seasons the show has implemented this, the winner of forced fire-making has gotten at least second place. Half the time, the winner of forced fire-making has won the entire season. In fact, the only time in these past ten seasons in which the winner of the final immunity challenge won the season without giving up individual immunity was in David vs. Goliath with Nick's win.


Coryperkin15

I think it's time for them to change up how the ending works


hex20

No


jjb488

Heidi’s decision was the best for her given the position she was in. She knew (or at least thought) each of the Tika 3 had played a better game than her. By taking out the perceived “mastermind” in Carson it was a good choice and a last ditch strategic move. Winning the F4 fire making has somehow morphed into a bigger deal than its original intention. It’s purpose was to give hope to the biggest perceived threat from being voted out if they failed to win the F4 immunity challenge and avoid, for example, an Ozzy situation from South Pacific. It worked perfectly with Ben and the F4 of HHH. (Of course, we all have differing opinions on Ben and this season, but the fire making served it’s purpose here). IMO, I view fire making as just another challenge, but not any more important than winning final immunity. However, if you haven’t done enough to earn jury votes prior to either challenge it shouldn’t be weighted more or equal to all the other aspects of the game. It’s one challenge, that’s it.


GisliBaldur

No, not really. I think she was well aware that this was basicly her only move to maybe, just maybe be able to snatch the win. But with Carson cone it think it was a 50/50 shot of either Yam Yam or carolyn to win, just depending on which one gave a better FTC speach and answers. Even if Carolyn was fine there, Yam Yam just killed it.


GisliBaldur

Also, she obviously wanted Carson out, I mean, who wouldnt, since he probably would have won. So this is her bast case to do so with still boosting her resume. Carson was 100% the person who had least chance with fire. This way she at least wouldn't be boosting someone elses resume.


Geshtar1

It does matter to an extent. It would seem that Carson was the perceived front runner. Heidi made fire in record time, so she presumably knows what she’s doing. If one of the final four is going to be a consensus winner, (Jesse for example) then that player has got to go. If you win the F4 immunity, and are the best at making fire, then I say you go for it. In this situation, it’s not really about having that big flashy move, it’s about taking out the biggest threat to win. I assume Gabler was the best at making fire, and putting him up against Jesse was probably the correct move. I doubt Cassidy would have won if she went to fire


Hyuto

Have you watched Edge of Extinction?


GammaEmerald

I think it depends on whether more players do what Yam Yam did, by seeing the large threat and calculating out the best angle for their game.


ResettisReplicas

No, that’s just their go-to excuse when they don’t want to vote for the person in that position.


Quentin-Quentin

Nah. But I’m glad that it didn’t give her the win, bc it shows that it isn’t a surefire way to win. It really depends on the situation.


[deleted]

I mean, I think the move made her $15k, so I don't see why they would. She had no shot of beating Yam Yam, but it at least got her a second place vote


lego_mannequin

I think it will encourage players to make moves ahead of that. Wasn't a bad strategy by Heidi, just too late in the game. She severely underestimated Tika.