Purple Rock Survivor Podcast: Kaoh Rong Episode 13 “With Me or Not With Me”

Rather than spend an hour discussing an old guy’s prostate, we decided to find other things to talk about this week. Hope you don’t mind.

Purple Rock Survivor podcast: Kaoh Rong episode 13 “With Me or Not With Me”

Subscribe on iTunes
Subscribe on Stitcher
Subscribe on Google Play

In this episode, we discuss:

  • Did anything from this episode matter?
  • The poor design of the challenge.
  • Aubry’s perhaps too late realization that Cydney is a threat.
  • The Michele and Tai dalliance.
  • Who each of these people should be targeting at final four.
  • Predictions for the rest of the season, including whether or not it’s a final two.
  • The Under the Radar strategy and why it secretly sucks.
  • Reader questions!

Of course, we always welcome your comments. You can leave a comment here, tweet us (@purplerockpod, @purplerockjohn, @purplerockandy), or email us at purplerockpodcast on gmail. Thanks for listening and/or watching!

Note on our Explicit rating: This is not a particularly explicit podcast, but we do have some in our archives that qualify and we are sometimes more lax in our editing. So to comply with iTunes, we’ve erred on the side of caution and put in that rating. However, we will always warn listeners if a particular podcast is actually explicit before it begins.

82 thoughts on “Purple Rock Survivor Podcast: Kaoh Rong Episode 13 “With Me or Not With Me”

    1. I’m still going to say no. But only because the preview also mentions a twist, and that would fit with a preseason rumor I’d read.

      1. Well, I’ve read a preseason rumor too that if it’s real, it will happen at tribal council. But I just hope that will not be the twist.

          1. It’s something that’s gonna keep me from winning Champion’s League, isn’t it?

      2. Is the rumour that it is a final 3but Mark the chicken gets an automatic spot and the jury can choose him?

        I did not read this rumour and now I’m really curious.

  1. I have to imagine their “plan in place” for if there is a tie at final tribal is “Which contestant has fewer overall votes against them in the season” because I like to think they came up with that plan around the time of Australia and never altered it.

    1. In case your serious, they never needed a tiebreaker formula until Cook Islands. Which is after they got rid of overall votes as a tiebreaker elsewhere.

      1. Not serious at all, but that does shoot some holes in my rickety boat of a theory.

        1. Yes. They never needed a FTC tiebreaker until Cook Islands. Because ties between two people with odd number juries were impossible.

          1. (Spoiler alert, Barbara)

            Wow, I just looked it up. If Purple Kelly and NaOnka had been excluded from the Jury, Chase would have won, an even more nonsensical outcome.

          2. Just being cautious. I wouldn’t want to inadvertently ruin the experience of watching Nicaragua for you.

          3. That’s…. probably not something you need to be concerned about.

            The one and only thing that appeals to me about Nicaragua most likely doesn’t apply in your case.

          4. Ehn, equally nonsensical. Chase had a shockingly good FTC performance. If that wasn’t the first time he looked competent, he would’ve won.

          5. I’d say less nonsensical. I think part of the reason Chase looked so incompetent was the FTC loser edit

          6. No you don’t. I just ranked all the final 4s and it was tied for dead last. On a related note, Wikipedia actually references Purple Rock Podcast’s season rankings, and quotes their analysis in the Nicaragua article, which is awesome.

  2. I’m so glad you guys read my mind and asked the question about how foreknowledge of the 3 evacs affected viewing of this season! It’s the question I meant to ask in the liveblog comments but then forgot… 🙂

  3. Andy can’t say it for himself, so I’ll say it for him – for anyone reading this who’s convinced themselves Andy can’t understand or appreciate under the radar gameplay, go back and read the comments section on the AV Club’s review of the HvV finale, where it’s 90% people saying “what just happened,” and Andy writing multiple paragraphs about why it happened.

      1. Not that I would have been reading Survivor reviews, but I’m pretty sure that was during the period where I stopped reading after they published Chuck Klosterman’s inane review of Chinese Democracy. But I went back and read it after I watched HvV.

        1. Klosterman’s interview with Probst on Grantland (just before BvW, IIRC) was my gateway into Survivor superfandom.

          1. That was a good interview, other than Klosterman’s weird line of questioning about someone dying on the show.

        2. Aw, I love Chuck Klosterman. I’m not much of a music guy though, so I have no idea how good his opinions are on that.

        1. I was a senior in high school then. Most of my internet time was spent discussing Panic! at the Disco.

          1. I was a senior in college. Some of my internet time was also spent discussing Panic! at the Disco.

          2. I mean now I’m just an adult and seeing them (Him? It’s really just Brendon now) this summer for the… gosh, 10th time? I’ve lost track.

            But now I spend all my Internet time talking about television.

  4. Quick update from my non-Survivor fandom friend watching Survivor Samoa: At the merge TC, she says, “I like the potential of 2 idols being played at the same time”. She is so close, so close to seeing this happen.

  5. I think that making big moves and building a resume is certainly a factor in people’s jury votes, but I don’t know that it is necessarily the biggest one. Players like Sherri, Phillip, Woo, Jaclyn/Missy, and Tasha may have been more under the radar, but they were also just not as well liked as the people that won their seasons. Natalie T might be a good example of someone that wasn’t respected as a player, but I’ve certainly heard rumors that Ashley could have won the jury vote.

    Also, this episode inspired me to think of a question that I should have asked before. What does everyone here value more in a Survivor player: making the decisions or building stronger social bonds necessary to carry out those decisions? I’ve found that I see the Trish/Parvati/Dawn/Aubry aspect of keeping a strong alliance more impressive than the decision making aspect which is more represented in their partners Tony/Cirie/Cochran/Cydney (though I think they are all impressive players of course).

    1. I’d say it depends as all gameplay is situational. But I’m more interested in players that are more active and that can explain their actions.

  6. Thanks for the reply, guys. Your picks definitely match the way you each approach the show. May your tribes be strong and your splits lucky.

  7. To add to your point about the edits featuring, and Probst pushing, the more aggressive gameplay style, Ciera wanting people to play the game was more from her second appearance, whereas her first was playing somewhat under the radar for a while. However, she arguably did better in her first appearance. Although obviously circumstances play a huge role. This may be a pointless comment…

    1. “Although obviously circumstances play a huge role.”
      Why our nerd discussions really mean nothing.

  8. Besides a tie at FTC, I want to see an idol play that cancels all votes except for the vote of the idol holder. We have come close, but this would be really exciting.

    1. The problem with this is it’s hard to imagine a scenario where everyone wants to vote one person out, and they don’t do a split.

      1. Well, it almost happened with Wentworth and Russell Hantz. I could see newbies falling into this trap, especially if it is against a person who is least likely to have an idol.

  9. In terms of UTR gameplay, there’s times it works and there’s times it doesn’t.

    When it works is when you’re with a group of egotistical people who no one likes. All you have to do is make friends with the jury and make sure that the egotistical people think you’re beatable and will take you with them to the end. So think Amber, Natalie White, Sophie, Danni, I’ll even give Chris some credit for this. I think for all of them it wasn’t just luck they won but a solid strategical way to get to the end. That’s why I was a big fan of Sierra’s UTR game in World’s Apart, though that kind of got crushed by Mike constantly winning immunities which she couldn’t have planned for.

    Trying to play that game in a cast of people that are likable and respectable and mostly close with one another is basically suicide. Now Michele might get lucky and have things fall her way the same way Jenna Morasca did, but it’s through playing a style that was not suited to the season she was on, it’s from having a much higher than can be expected number of things break her way.

    1. I think another issue with UTR in the modern game is that juries are less likely to punish people for voting them out than they used to. The bar for becoming hated by the jury is higher than it used to be.

    2. As for WA Sierra, Shirin told us in our interview with her that the jury had no respect for Sierra and that she couldn’t win. Which is why she was happy she came to the jury earlier than players she Shirin didn’t want to spend time with.

      1. I have no doubt the jury didn’t respect Sierra, but without Mike, the players she’s up against are Mama C (pretty much the prototypical mother losing role), Rodney, Dan and Will. It would be close against Carolyn I think, but she could easily beat two of Dan, Will and Rodney.

        1. I like Sierra and wish she got more screen time, but I believe Shirin said that Sierra would not have been respected going up against Rodney. Her overall strategy made sense, but I don’t know how well she was reading things.

          1. I think Rodney would have beaten Sierra- he really did control the game, and had a certain kind of charisma- but I can’t imagine Dan or Will beating NOT DAN OR WILL, including in Sierra form.

          2. Which gets to my point about UTR: it boxes you into needing a precise configuration of finals partners while taking away your ability to create said configuration.

          3. Yes, but almost nobody realized he was controlling the game, and his certain kind of form of charisma was mostly overpowered by his douchiness and whining about doing dishes on his birthday.

    3. Quibble on Sophie, people didn’t super like Sophie either also she was UTR in edit but not completely in gameplay. The Jury knew she was in the top of that alliance but there was nothing to be done about that alliance once Cochran flipped and then she was much better and brighter than the rest of her alliance. To me Sophie is kind of the right example of play UTR until you need people to know you are in charge then be in charge and if you aren’t in charge make your move.

        1. I mean, in some ways don’t bother. I was going to say it’s not Gabon levels of terrible but Gabon is terrible in a fun way. SoPa is just a bunch of very unlikable people and an under edited winner and it’s full of god shit.

  10. I do have 1 quick comment: For as much as I love AO, the women aren’t nearly as flawless. Amber is definitely the Michele of her time during her first season but she doesn’t bring as much to her season besides being Jerri’s follower. Borneo, though, I can definitely see. Even Sonja, Ramona, and Stacey bring stuff to the table in their short stays.

  11. I saw an ad on Thursday boasting 3 tribal councils, so I think that is pretty much all the confirmation we need that it’s a final 2

  12. Did anyone else see the “Survivor Superlatives” feature they put on CBS All Access? I’m wondering if it could be a hint at the theme for season 34…….

Comments are closed.