[strike]It wasnt CT , it was evan who was carrying big easy in his back. In the oficial page of the gauntlet 3 in MTV, there is link called strong army moments and there is a video when evan put eric in his back and started running[/strike]
It wasn't CT, it was Evan who was carrying Big Easy on his back. On MTV's page for Gauntlet 3, there is a link called "Strong Army Moments" and there is a video where Evan put Eric on his back and started running.
A challenger that many people seem to underestimate and find quite annoying is Paula. Since she's my all time favorite, I've observed her every challenge she's on. She is actually a good competitor, maybe not like Ev, Laurel, or Rachel but she has her moments.
Duel- She was a rookie in the this one and it's a tradition to go home early. She did give Anessa a fight though.
Inferno III- She was under the radar and made it to the end. I think she competed the best in the final challenge.
Gauntlet 3- Once again she was under the radar and performed well in the final challenge.
Island- She was screwed in the end, enough said. I still think she performed well again in the final challenge here too.
Duel 2- It was not her season and that sucks because I thought it was the best chance for her to make it to the final challenge. Stupid Dunbar.
Fresh Meat 2- She performed awesome in the exile, it was Jeff's fault she was eliminated.
RECAP:
She performs excellent in the final challenges and it seems like men are the wall that block her from a win.
[QUOTE=RWRRdude;185053]Island- She was screwed in the end, enough said. I still think she performed well again in the final challenge here too.[/QUOTE]
She wasn't screwed over in the end. I was at the Fresh Meat 2 reunion and it was brought up that the plan from the beginning was that Kenny would get Paula and key, and that was it. He had a promise from the beginning with Ev that she would be on his boat and the reason Paula got so upset was because Kenny didn't screw over Ev and put Paula on his boat.
She was screwed over in the fact that Kenny didn't tell Paula he wasn't going to put her on his boat. That being said, I actually like Paula, despite the opinions of many people on this board!
[QUOTE=Youssarian;185081]She was screwed over in the fact that Kenny didn't tell Paula he wasn't going to put her on his boat. That being said, I actually like Paula, despite the opinions of many people on this board![/QUOTE]
No, Kenny and Ev both said that Paula knew the whole time she wasn't going to be on the boat, but Paula had wanted Kenny to screw over Evelyn and when that didn't happen she got upset.
[QUOTE=yankeegurl93;185086]No, Kenny and Ev both said that Paula knew the whole time she wasn't going to be on the boat, but Paula had wanted Kenny to screw over Evelyn and when that didn't happen she got upset.[/QUOTE]
I kno this topic has been debated a lot, but I still think Paula got screwed over on the Island. If not by Kenny, then definitely by John...
[QUOTE=Moonpaw;185104]I was under the impression that Evelyn being on Kenny's boat was a last-minute deal to save Johnny. Was that not the case?[/QUOTE]
I always thought that too, but apparently Kenny told Ev in the beginning of the game he would take her on his boat if she made it to the end with a key.
He told Paula he will take her to the end and MAKE sure she got a key.
[QUOTE=RockSteadyVybes;184064]Am I the only one who thinks TJ is an ********? He's sooooo monotone. I don't want to listen to anything he says ever. And the **** he said to Ev when she was eliminated was stupid. He's never played the game, he should go screw.
He's the most boring host ever.[/QUOTE]
TJ is an ********. And so is Ryan and Kenny :)
I don't think TJ is a horrible host. I really liked him until episode 3 of the Gauntlet 2 and I actually think he's a little better than Dave Mirra. I don't think they need to completely get rid of TJ, but it would be nice if they had another host in the mix and each host did one challenge a year. For a little while it seemed like Dave Mirra and Johnny Mosely were taking turns hosting.
Sometimes I find myself missing the half hour format. I think it's mostly because somebody can be the 8th person eliminated but in the hour format, they go home in the fourth episode. I don't feel like we get enough time with everyone. Then again I felt the same way during the half hour format, so I guess there's no winning with me? Ha I think I just preferred when there were more challenges and it there were "guy days" and "girl days" instead of two getting eliminated at a time. Anybody else ever feel this way?
[QUOTE=mph922;185145]Sometimes I find myself missing the half hour format. I think it's mostly because somebody can be the 8th person eliminated but in the hour format, they go home in the fourth episode. I don't feel like we get enough time with everyone. Then again I felt the same way during the half hour format, so I guess there's no winning with me? Ha I think I just preferred when there were more challenges and it there were "guy days" and "girl days" instead of two getting eliminated at a time. Anybody else ever feel this way?[/QUOTE]
I feel this way as well. I don't know what the reasoning is either, I just always felt as though the storytelling was a lot better in the half hour format.
If MTV only ordered 12-13 episodes, then they have to show a lot in one hour, inlcuding 2 eliminations. If they ordered 23-24 episodes they could have 1/2 hour episodes with one elimination (1 week a guy elimination, the next week a girl eliminatio). I miss the 1/2 hour episodes. I liked them better than the hour long ones. I just thought it was edited better. I also liked the longer run.
But 12-13 episodes are much cheaper then 23-24, and with the ratings, who would want to order 11 more episodes?
[QUOTE=Youssarian;185243]I'm kind of confused. Was it Holly Brentson or Holly Shand who was married to Chadwick? And are they still together?[/QUOTE]
Holly Brentson. And according to IMDB, yes.
[QUOTE=molds13;185245]Holly Brentson. And according to IMDB, yes.[/QUOTE]
Oh okay. Thanks! I thought it was Holly Shand but I just looked Battle of the Seasons up on Wikipedia and Holly Brentson was on Theo's team, and I was like, "Wait, what?" :P
They should ask Gladys back! She didnt get a fair shot in my opnion on BOTS 1 because she was pregnant. I would like to see what kind of changes shes made to her life and how shes matured as a person.
I was wondering why the producers invited Gladys to be on a challenge if she was pregnant. I mean, they might not have known, but still, why would you even show up pregnant?
I love how people constantly ***** about someone, but then when you say someone else is equal to them, the script just completely flips, and suddenly everyone loves that person and think they are just the best player on the whole show. It just goes to show you that arguing about who is better than who is just pointless and doesnt get anywhere, because in a couple of weeks your going to be arguing a completely different point.
[QUOTE=CrazyRealityGuy;185435]Some of them are like Rookies, even if they are considered Vets. I feel like Tyler, Melinda, Shavoun and Sarah are all still rookies. I know they have been on 2 challenges, but they all left early on atleast one of their challenges. But Maybe the "Real" rookies (Dan, Laurel, Brandon, Cara Maria, etc...) are taking out there fellow rookies.[/QUOTE]
How does one define a "rookie" or a "vet"? Sarah made it to the end of the Ruins and experienced plenty of the regular "drama" that goes on every season, and she may or may not have lost early in FM2 because of her partner (I don't remember and I can't rewatch the episode here at work). She's probably not a vet but I wouldn't consider her a rookie. Is rookie status relative to your performance? If that's the case, they should force Danny to wear a shirt with the word emblazoned across the front in large font.
[QUOTE=Aereas;185442]
How does one define a "rookie" or a "vet"? Sarah made it to the end of the Ruins and experienced plenty of the regular "drama" that goes on every season, and she may or may not have lost early in FM2 because of her partner (I don't remember and I can't rewatch the episode here at work). She's probably not a vet but I wouldn't consider her a rookie. Is rookie status relative to your performance? If that's the case, they should force Danny to wear a shirt with the word emblazoned across the front in large font.[/QUOTE]
a ROOKIE is a castmember that has been on one or no challenges, a VET is a castmember that have done 2 or more. That was MTV's definition for Gauntlet II and III. Sarah would be considered a VET, even though I believe she doesn't deserve that status, because she really only competed in one full challenge and got eliminated quickly in the next.
[QUOTE=Aereas;185442]
[B]How does one define a "rookie" or a "vet"?[/B] [/QUOTE]
The BMP historical definition of veteran has been to appear on one's third challenge, no matter the length of time spent on one's first two challenges (one episode each and one becomes a vet on the next challenge). The weekly payment has reportedly been different for rookies vs vets, which for many is what matters most.
I knew MTV's definition of a vet was someone in their third+ challenge, I was more posing the question to Vevmo for everyone's personal opinion.
CrazyRealityGuy, what do you think a contestant needs to achievie in order to qualify for "vet" status? If player X went on 5 challenges and lost in the first week of each one, would he/she be considered a rookie?
I personally would say that someone is a vet when they have been on at least 3 challenges and have made it at least halfway through each time. Someone like Shavoun who has been on 2 shows and has gone home the 1st and 2nd week and then lets say for her 3rd show she makes it all the way, then maybe I'd consider her a vet on her 4th challenge. I guess it just honestly depends on who gets camera time. Coral was a rookie on Gauntlet 1, but really did anyone call her a rookie? Then theres someone like Robin who was a vet on Gauntlet 2 and everyone found that strange due to the fact that her season hadnt aired that long ago.
[QUOTE=Aereas;185471]I knew MTV's definition of a vet was someone in their third+ challenge, I was more posing the question to Vevmo for everyone's personal opinion.
CrazyRealityGuy, what do you think a contestant needs to achievie in order to qualify for "vet" status? If player X went on 5 challenges and lost in the first week of each one, would he/she be considered a rookie?[/QUOTE]
Honestly, my perception is a bit skewed, because MTV already defined it for me... But if I had to change the "terminology" of what a true Vet is, I would say a Vet is a castmember who has been on a show ON or BEFORE 2004-2005 (obviously each year it would go up one a year) and a Rookie would be considered someone who has appeared on shows after those years.
Brad, Derrick, Coral, Katie, Veronica, Rachel, Robin, Timmy, Mark, Abe, Adam, CT, Etc... I would consider "True Vets"
Melinda, Shavoun, Sarah, Jenn, Evan, Danny, Kenny, Ryan, Ev Etc... I would consider "Rookies" (Doesn't matter how many challenges they did, and we all know, with the exception of Melinda and Shavoun, they all have atleast 4 challenges under their belt)
But Like I said, since they didn't go by year and by how many challenges one was on, I would say a Vet should be considered someone who has been on at least 2-3 full challenges, or, at the very least, 3 challenges if they lose within the first 3-4 weeks. Shavoun and Sarah I would not consider a true Vet, especially Shavoun, Since she was out first on her first challenge and 2nd on her 2nd challenge. Sarah did make it all the way to the end on the Ruins, but went out 2nd on FMII. If she would have made it to the end, than I would probably consider her a vet.
Obviously that is just my opinion, and I know at the time of The Gauntlet II, everyone was wondering how they would consider a vet and a rook.
Pages