Big Brother 17

[Calgary14]

Wow, that definitely didn't end the way I expected it to

[mile]

I wanted Vanessa to win going into this finale, but Steve winning was actually pretty satisfying - especially with how Vanessa voted bitterly. Liked how he came into his own socially and strategically compared to the beginning. He did a good job with his speech and how he answered the jury's questions.

Unfortunate that the final competition is essentially a coin flip. It was exciting to watch though, especially with how it was tied at the last question.

It's nice to see Steve and James walk away with some cash. Both are good guys.

The next time there is a socially awkward nerd in the game they have get them out early.

[Machiavelli]

Liz's answers were brutal. She couldn't come up with anything other than "I'm a twin; that made me a target."

She didn't have a chance either way, but I was a little disappointed how she whimpered out.

hate that final comp.

[Erick Estrada]

If you would have told me a month into the show that Steve was going to be the winner I would have laughed in your face. There were weeks you forgot he was in the show as he got no air time. He was essentially the guy at the back of the class that everyone forgot about for the first half of the show. As people started getting evicted he became more of a player but still he and Johnny Mac were kind of the outliers that were either pawns or used for their votes. IMO he's one of the worst players to win the game.

I actually think the Liz did pretty well overall as she was a central figure from week one involved in the major alliances. I don't think it could have been that easy during the twin twist when she would be out of the house for days missing out on talk and then coming back in trying to pretend she was involved in conversations or competitions that she was never part of. She actually performed well in competitions but not being the brightest bulb hurt her in the questioning as she just didn't have the rehearsed answers that you need to emphasize what you did and why you should win. That said I would have voted for Steve just because he did more on a strategic level.

As for Vanessa I didn't like how she played the game but she did play a great game albeit against one of the weaker groups of game players we have seen. IMO she made the critical mistake of underestimating the nerd. She had to know that Steve was too smart to ever consider bringing her with him to the final two and IMO she may have been better off trying to take Austin instead of Liz to the final three. Sucks to play such a good game and be the last person just miss the top 2 money.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

If you would have told me a month into the show that Steve was going to be the winner I would have laughed in your face. There were weeks you forgot he was in the show as he got no air time. He was essentially the guy at the back of the class that everyone forgot about for the first half of the show. As people started getting evicted he became more of a player but still he and Johnny Mac were kind of the outliers that were either pawns or used for their votes. IMO he's one of the worst players to win the game.

Totally, totally disagree. You could substitute Ian's name and it would sound the exact same.

The strategy was passive defensive, then when numbers dwindle you pounce. Derrick did little the first few weeks too

[rayne008]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

If you would have told me a month into the show that Steve was going to be the winner I would have laughed in your face. There were weeks you forgot he was in the show as he got no air time. He was essentially the guy at the back of the class that everyone forgot about for the first half of the show. As people started getting evicted he became more of a player but still he and Johnny Mac were kind of the outliers that were either pawns or used for their votes. IMO he's one of the worst players to win the game.

I actually think the Liz did pretty well overall as she was a central figure from week one involved in the major alliances. I don't think it could have been that easy during the twin twist when she would be out of the house for days missing out on talk and then coming back in trying to pretend she was involved in conversations or competitions that she was never part of. She actually performed well in competitions but not being the brightest bulb hurt her in the questioning as she just didn't have the rehearsed answers that you need to emphasize what you did and why you should win. That said I would have voted for Steve just because he did more on a strategic level.

As for Vanessa I didn't like how she played the game but she did play a great game albeit against one of the weaker groups of game players we have seen. IMO she made the critical mistake of underestimating the nerd. She had to know that Steve was too smart to ever consider bringing her with him to the final two and IMO she may have been better off trying to take Austin instead of Liz to the final three. Sucks to play such a good game and be the last person just miss the top 2 money.

I'm glad Jason called her out on playing a great game, but not owning a great game. The crying everyday made me hate her, but if she had acknowledged that was the plan, i may have more use for her.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Totally, totally disagree. You could substitute Ian's name and it would sound the exact same.

The strategy was passive defensive, then when numbers dwindle you pounce. Derrick did little the first few weeks too

Derrick was a mastermind and there's no comparison there at all. He never had to win a competition nor did he go on the block yet he ran the house as the puppet master. Ian was a member and player in a major alliance while the Scamper Squad was barely a real alliance. Like I said I would have voted for Steve over Liz but I wasn't overly impressed with his game as he was only there because he floated through the entire game and won some competitions when the numbers were reduced. If you are not going to win the game by being in the line of fire (Dick, Will, Rachel) you have to play a superb behind the scenes game (Dan, Derrick) to have your name mentioned in the same sentence as the best and IMO he didn't. The highest complement I can pay Steve is that he was opportunistic.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Derrick was a mastermind and there's no comparison there at all. He never had to win a competition nor did he go on the block yet he ran the house as the puppet master. Ian was a member and player in a major alliance while the Scamper Squad was barely a real alliance. Like I said I would have voted for Steve over Liz but I wasn't overly impressed with his game as he was only there because he floated through the entire game and won some competitions when the numbers were reduced. If you are not going to win the game by being in the line of fire (Dick, Will, Rachel) you have to play a superb behind the scenes game (Dan, Derrick) to have your name mentioned in the same sentence as the best and IMO he didn't. The highest complement I can pay Steve is that he was opportunistic.

He wasn't the best, but far from the worst

[Calgary14]

The fact that Vanessa voted for Liz and mentioned to the group that she's actually a successful poker player who has won $4.5M shows she might've been bitter when Steve evicted her. She must have known Steve wouldn't have taken her to the final two. He's a numbers guy, and she knew that, and he was way too smart to take her to final two. Evicting Vanessa helped Steve win votes because he was no longer seen as weak by the jury members (which he also knew).

Vanessa played an awesome game, and I like how Jason called her out for playing well but not owning it in the diary room.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

He wasn't the best, but far from the worst

He's amongst the worst IMO.

[Jiggy_12]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

He's amongst the worst IMO.

He was underwhelming at the start, looked lost half the time. But he nailed the end-game. Kicking out Vanessa who could talk her way out of anything and leaving himself up against Liz was a smart play, and then he absolutely destroyed Liz in the question round.

I'd give his overall game an 8/10 and there have been many, many more undeserving winners than Steve.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Jiggy_12

He was underwhelming at the start, looked lost half the time. But he nailed the end-game. Kicking out Vanessa who could talk her way out of anything and leaving himself up against Liz was a smart play, and then he absolutely destroyed Liz in the question round.

I'd give his overall game an 8/10 and there have been many, many more undeserving winners than Steve.

Evicting Vanessa was an extremely obvious move. I'm not going to give him a lot of credit for that. I didn't think his answers in the question round were overly convincing as he kept going on about the Scamper Squad which was the only alliance he was in and it was a very minor alliance. The fact that Liz bombed has more to do with him coming out of the questions as a winner. Can you list all these winners that were worse than Steve with explanations how they were worse. I know there's a few but I don't see how he's not in the bottom half.

[Barnes]

The only winners I would consider worse would be Jun, Maggie, and Adam.

Maybe Lisa, Jordan and Andy? The won because they were liked rather than good gameplayers.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Barnes

The only winners I would consider worse would be Jun, Maggie, and Adam.

Maybe Lisa, Jordan and Andy? The won because they were liked rather than good gameplayers.

Andy and Maggie were excellent winners. Probably just behind Dan, Dr. Will and Derrick in my opinion. Like Maggie, Andy wasn't the most likable or had the most releatable personality but their gameplay were easily the best in the season and both deserving winners.

Maggie created an almost cult like alliance. It was annoying and bizarre with the "Cappy" craziness but she very clearly the leader of the stronger alliance. Far far far less likable alliance, but far far far smarter alliance. She was pivotal in keeping it an "us vs them" season which made it great for the audience, and her.

Andy's gameplay was more subtle, like leaving items in every room so he could go and leave from any conversation to another. He could be with one group, say he needs to grab his cup of water, walk to the room with the other group and discuss strategy and no one was the wiser. He had everyone fooled into thinking he was on their side. Socially he has to be up there with the best social players of the game.

From when he won HoH he had everyone fooled:

Spoiler!

Undeserving winners (not necessary bad players) I believe include Dick, as if not for America's player and the skewed perception of him would have been voted out multiple times, Ian, as Dan was the obvious best player but having already won before hurt him, and Rachel, who got a favourable Pandora's box to save her.

Bad winners I would say were Jordan, who was carried and a "non-threat," Adam because that was just a bad season and Lisa (who was also undeserving).

Boogie and Drew are "meh." Can't really fault their gameplays but they didn't do anything special. That's the category I would put Steven with.

Hayden is the wildcard for me. Easiest victory. He rode to victory on a tight alliance that somehow was able to get to final 4 without being found out. No obstacles at all, but can't blame him for taking the easy route.

[activeStick]

Liz didn't even answer the questions asked of her. She basically said "stuff" but wasn't able to answer anything. Could have been the nerves or maybe she's really just not very bright.

[mile]

Best Winners:
Will, Dan, Derrick

Good Winners:
Hayden, Jun, Maggie

Decent Winners:
Andy, Boogie, Lisa, Drew, Steve, Ian

Worst Winners:
Adam, Jordan, Dick, Rachel

I would say Steve is a deserving winner, but still probably in the bottom half.

I don't remember anything Drew did in his season other than cutting his girlfriend, who I believe was the one running the game at the time - so it's hard to compare him to Steve.

Steve is very similar to Ian, but I would put Ian below him because when Steve cut Vanessa, he made the move Ian should have made by cutting Dan at final 3 - Ian won due to a bitter jury.

Who is definitely worse than Steve?
Adam was not memorable at all, but my impression was that he was a weak winner.

I actually like Dick, but he definitely only won because of America's player.

Jordan's strategic game was non-existent.

Rachel won with a lot of help from production. Conveniently bringing the duos twist back at final 6, and then having the subsequent veto competition be the exact same game as the first HOH she won earlier in the season.

I pretty much agree with what Oling_Roachinen said. Boogie is a decent winner but Will played a lot of his game.

[Street Pharmacist]

And Rachel won with the worst strategy and social game. She won because of competitions, bit those are 50% skill and 50% luck