Maddenation
Stupid vs. Going Far
After watching Survivor the other night, I called Dad with the claim that Jenna Lewis is the stupidest Survivor to ever get so far. You know what I mean: you put “stupidity” on the X-axis and “farness” on the Y, and you plot the 18 (or 16) Survivors and see how Jenna is way out there beyond everyone else. Why is she stupid? For voting out Rupert. But let’s hear what she has to say about it (from her little speech when she got voted off (surprise!)):
My biggest decision was voting Rupert off the other night. That was huge, because it really made me feel like I took this game, and I took control of my game. I love Rupert, and I’m sorry that I had to do it, but it really made me feel strong as a strategic Survivor. I’m really proud that I did that, because it gave me the option to go to the Immunity Challenge today and have just as much chance of winning Immunity and going to the Final Two as those other two people.
OK, Jenna, let’s see how your options play out in a decision matrix:
Granted, we cannot know how a tie in voting would have been resolved, but we’ll play with the numbers anyway. Had Jenna voted for Boston Rob (therefore tying Boston Rob and Rupert at 2 votes each) and the tie-breaker were a repeat of Survivor 4 Marquesas, with the three non-immune players (not just the two players tied with votes) reaching in a bag to pull out a stone, and the purple-stone person going home, then, yes, Jenna had a 1 in 3 chance of going home fourth. But that’s not the only way they’ve broken ties on Survivor in the past, and I hope they wouldn’t pull that crap again. Let’s see how the’ve handled ties in the past.
The first tie was between Richard Hatch and Sue on Survivor 1, but since Kelly switched her vote and voted Sue out, there was no external tie-breaker. The next tie was between Mitchell and Keith in Survivor 2 Australia. Nobody switched their vote, so they used previous votes. Since Mitchell had one vote to Keith’s none, he was voted out. Later, on the same show, when the tribes had merged at 5-5 (because Mike fell into the fire), the Ogakor tribe found out from Kimmi who on the Kucha tribe had votes against him and went after Jeff. So when Jeff and Colby tied with 5 votes each, it was Jeff who lost out.
In Survivor 3 Africa, the Samburu tribe had a 4-4 tie (split between the young and the old) in their first tribal council. Because neither Carl nor Lindsey had any previous votes, their tie was decided by a quiz and Carl (one of the old folks) lost out. Then, before the merge, the tribes were switched up and Lindsey again tied, this time with Big Tom. Lindsey had those four votes from her first tribal council, so she lost based on that.
In Survivor 4 Marquesas, we got the purple-rock tie-breaker. I suppose the idea was to force people to think seriously about switching their vote. I hated the idea because it meant Paschal got “voted” out without ever receiving a vote against him. I don’t think there’s been a tie since that point, which may also have been Mark Burnett’s intention: force people to fear the chaos of ties so they won’t want to knowingly vote into one. Then again, they seem to like surprises, so I would expect them to have some other method of tie-breaking the next time one comes up (just like they keep bucking expectations about merges).
OK, so maybe Jenna votes for Boston Rob and then gets put out of the game by choosing a purple rock. IF that were the tie-breaker, she’s got a 1 in 3 chance of going out #4, but ONLY if she doesn’t change her vote. In Marquesas, the people knew how the tie would be broken and were given the chance to change their votes. Maybe that wouldn’t happen here, but why not? In every tie-breaker yet, there’s been a chance to change votes. And even if she stuck with her vote (for integrity’s sake or something) Rupert and Boston Rob also have a 1 in 3 chance of leaving. If it’s Rupert, then it’s the same result as if she voted for Rupert, and she has to win immunity to get to the final 2. If it’s Boston Rob, then it’s way better for Jenna because she’s got at least a 2 in 3 chance of making the final 2, and probably a 100% chance, because Amber would probably rather be up against Jenna than against Rupert, whom everybody likes.
My point is, she had nothing at all to lose by sticking by Rupert and the agreement they had, except if she thought she had no chance in the final two against Rupert and wanted to get rid of him. But nothing would force her into the final two with Rupert except Rupert winning immunity and taking her, which would mean at least second place, which is better than third. Right? Say the final three is Jenna, Rupert, and Amber. If Jenna wins, she can take Amber. If Amber wins, she’d probably take Jenna. If Rupert wins, he takes Jenna and she still has a small shot. The only difference here is she cannot get to the final two with Boston Rob (which, the finale showed, would not have given her the win anyway, no matter how much Jenna’s foggy brain might have thought so).
I can’t tell if I’ve covered all my bases, but it’s absolutely clear to me that the stupidest thing she could have done was to vote for Rupert when she did.
The only explanation for her comment that it “made [her] feel strong as a strategic Survivor” and all that is that she had never made a decision for herself on either of the shows she was on. The other excuse I may be able to make for her is lack of nutrition and rest really clouded her brain. By the way, I just noticed that the poll on the Survivor website shows that only ten percent of people think Jenna made a good decision. I can’t believe it’s even that high.
Patrick • Observations • 05/11/04 • 7 comments
Comments
Dad • 05/12/04 • 12:32 AM:I also fault Rupert for not pointing out the options clearly to Jenna. He seemed to only make the case that she should honor the pact they made, and she was easily talked out of that by Rob, who said, “If you’re willing to let your fate be decided by a colored rock, then don’t vote Rupert off.” Also, Rupert could have mentioned that there was no guarantee that the rock drawing would even be the tie-breaker.
Looking at it probalistically, I think it can be stated that she would have been more likely to win if she had voted for Rob. First, let’s ignore skill at winning immunity (which is too kind to Jenna, who I believe had a negligible chance of beating Rob and Amber), and consider the final vote like a coin flip. If she votes for Rupert, she has a 1/3 chance of making it to the final 2 (because Rob and Amber take each other), and a 1/2 chance of winning the million. That’s a 1/6 chance overall. If she votes for Rob, she’s got a 1/3 chance of going home fourth (assuming they use the stupid rock tie-breaker). This means she’s got a 2/3 chance of being in the final 3, 1/3 with Rob, 1/3 with Rupert. If it’s Rob, she again has a 1/3 chance of making the final 2 and 1/2 of winning. This is only 1/18 chance of winning. But if it’s Rupert, she makes the final 2 for sure. Rupert brings her because of their pact, Amber brings her because she loses to Rupert. So 1/3 times 1/2 gives her a 1/6 chance for this outcome. Overall, adding the two outcomes, she has a 1/6 + 1/18 chance of winning if she votes for Rob first. This is a slim margin, but statistically, it’s the better option. Also, considering that voting for Rupert virtually dooms her to 3rd because her chance of winning immunity is closer to zero than 1/3, Rupert is a much better choice.
Finally, on the tired and hungry excuse, I don’t buy it. They had all day to consider it, and many days before that to consider alternative outcomes. This analysis isn’t that hard is it?
Patrick • 05/12/04 • 8:52 AM:Rupert has never been a brilliant strategist (nor has he bragged about his savvy). Sure, he should have figured it out and explained it to Jenna, but he may have been blissfully ignorant of the need to do so. For a guy like Rupert, it’s enough that he gave his word (like to Rudy, even when his tribe voted Rudy off, he would not write Rudy’s name down), so he (naively) thought that would be enough for Jenna: you gave your word. You remember a few episodes back when Jenna was being ornery with the food and stuff, and Rupert said (in private) that he was lamenting his alliance with Jenna? But he didn’t turn on her even then.
I do think it’s important, even in Survivor, to live by your word, and it can be successful if you’re lucky. But that’s not my point here. My point is that it made far more strategic sense for Jenna to stick with her alliance and vote for Boston Rob.
Dad, I like where you’re going with the statistical analysis, but even more, we should understand that she had no chance of winning (according to the jury, and assuming Rupert would have won 7-0). Of course, she couldn’t have known this, but still, let’s play with it. Then it becomes abundantly obvious that by voting for Rob, she either has a 1/3 chance of going home fourth or a 2/3 chance of getting second (again, assuming they’d reuse the stupid rock tie-breaker). There is no third place for her in this scenario. By voting for Rupert, she has a 3/3 chance of getting at least third, still no chance of winning, and, realistically, no chance at all of getting second, since there’s no way she can beat Rob and Amber at any immunity challenge yet invented by the Survivor crew.
And may I reiterate my best point: they have always let people change their votes after the initial tie. They really seem to want to cause that turmoil and test alliances and integrities. She would, in all probability, know if they were going to do the rock thing and get a chance to bail.
Dad • 05/12/04 • 9:41 AM:The problem with my analysis is I focused on the big win, but didn’t factor in that 2nd is better than 3rd is better than 4th. Also, as you point out, the real probabilities are not simple random chance (except in the case of the rock). Bottom line, Jenna made a monumental mistake. Maybe we should call it that, a big mistake, rather than a consequence of her “stupidity.” Remember the “clouded mind” theory?
Patrick • 05/12/04 • 10:06 AM:I think it’s only a “mistake” if you don’t gloat over it, calling it your most brilliant strategic move. Once you do that, it’s 100% stupidity.
In fairness to Jenna, this may have been her thought: She didn’t want to go up against Rupert in the final two, because he was so much more likeable than she. She wanted to go with Boston Rob because she figured people were mad enough at him to vote against him in favor of whoever was with him (which kind of did happen, but, according to Shii Ann, would not have happened quite enough if Jenna were in the final two). So Jenna thought that she could control her own destiny by just winning the immunity challenge. She didn’t want to rely on others to win (or at least to get to the final two); she wanted to rely on herself. That’s fine, but maybe a bit delusional.
I will say, though, that I was sure glad to hear Jenna congratulate Rob and Amber at the final tribal council. Alicia, Lex, and Big Tom were total whiney crybabies (though I want to like these two guys, man, they gotta grow up, especially Lex, who stabbed his friends in the back and then cried when it happened to him and called it “different” than what he had done). She did have a good perspective about not winning.
You know what? I’m surprised Rob and Amber didn’t try to fake a huge blowout fight somewhere along the line to make the others think they had split and would be voting against each other. That would have been a good move. (Unnecessary, in the end, but good.)
David • 05/17/04 • 1:31 PM:YIKES!! Wouldn’t you rather be sleeping than thinking about all this and writing all this? Or doing something? I mean, Survivor is cool and all, but this has gone too far - in my simple opinion, of course.
Patrick • 05/17/04 • 1:51 PM:David, we know you don’t like mayonnaise. Lay off.
David • 05/17/04 • 3:28 PM:I did forget to mention that I do like the idea of plotting a graph. Good work. Just today I was grading graphs of Voltage vs. Current - with the slope equal to Resistance (just think of the Queensryche song). My question is then is this - what does the slope of your curve equal?
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
Please capitalize your name properly and use the same information each time you comment. We will not send you spam, and your email address will not be posted.