The Amazing Race   American Idol   The Apprentice   The Bachelor   The Bachelorette   Big Brother   The Biggest Loser
Dancing with the Stars   So You Think You Can Dance   Survivor   Top Model   The Voice   The X Factor       Reality TV World
   
Reality TV World Message Board Forums
PLEASE NOTE: The Reality TV World Message Boards are filled with desperate attention-seekers pretending to be one big happy PG/PG13-rated family. Don't be fooled. Trying to get everyone to agree with you is like herding cats, but intolerance for other viewpoints is NOT welcome and respect for other posters IS required at all times. Jump in and play, and you'll soon find out how easy it is to fit in, but save your drama for your mama. All members are encouraged to read the complete guidelines. As entertainment critic Roger Ebert once said, "If you disagree with something I write, tell me so, argue with me, correct me--but don't tell me to shut up. That's not the American way."
"Varner's take on 'Varner X'"
Email this topic to a friend
Printer-friendly version of this topic
Bookmark this topic (Registered users only)
Archived thread - Read only 
Previous Topic | Next Topic 
Conferences Survivor Spoilers Forum (Protected)
Original message

smokedog 1885 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

03-22-02, 00:10 AM (EST)
Click to EMail smokedog Click to send private message to smokedog Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
"Varner's take on 'Varner X'"
In his latest column for etonline.com, Jeff Varner says he gets a kick out of the attention his picks are getting.

He claims his picks were made with his intuition and background as a former Survivor, and nothing to do with inside information.

He claims to have got 3 out of 4 picks correct so far, with Gabe and/or Sean the next to go. This means Varner has 'forgotten' the initial list of names in his column.

List 1 was: Pete, Pat, Hunter, Kathy, Zoe, Robert
List 2 was: Pete, Pat, Gabe, Sean, Sarah, Gina

Your thoughts?

  Top

  Table of Contents

  Subject     Author     Message Date     ID  
 RE: Varner's take on 'Varner X' JohnMc 03-22-02 1
   RE: Varner's take on 'Varner X' SurvivorBlows 03-22-02 2
       RE: Varner's take on 'Varner X' Spidey 03-22-02 3
 RE: Varner's take on 'Varner X' Java 03-22-02 4
   Varner X is dead dabo 03-23-02 5

Lobby | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

Messages in this topic

JohnMc 2679 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Survivor-themed Cruise Spokesperson"

03-22-02, 12:01 PM (EST)
Click to EMail JohnMc Click to send private message to JohnMc Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
1. "RE: Varner's take on 'Varner X'"
Varner X is a red herring

He may have been right about the first 3 on the first list. But why are there 2 lists? And if there were 2 lists, then why not at least edit them to have the correct bootees?

I seriously doubt he's posting 2 lists based on actual knowledge of boot order. He picked 3 from each team, and with the switch that list had to be changed. Plus he didn't include Hunter when he knows he's been booted. Doesn't make sense, and even if it is a smokescreen, all we really know is that the first 4 boots are Pete, Pat, Hunter, Sarah.

I see little spoiler value from this list (or these lists.)

  Top

SurvivorBlows 15230 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"

03-22-02, 12:32 PM (EST)
Click to EMail SurvivorBlows Click to send private message to SurvivorBlows Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
2. "RE: Varner's take on 'Varner X'"
>And if there were 2 lists, then why not at
>least edit them to have the correct bootees?

Um John, I think you should EDUCATE yourself to the history of "Varner-X" before commenting on it.

If you had a clue about the lists, you'd know that both lists were posted BEFORE SURVIVOR 4 STARTED

>of boot order. He picked 3 from each team,
>and with the switch that list had to be changed.
> Plus he didn't include Hunter when he knows he's
>been booted.

Again, THE ARTICLE (BOTH VERSIONS) WAS POSTED WELL BEFORE THE SWITCH. What part of that aren't you understanding? Do you really think folks are getting excited about a list of six that was published AFTER the first three bootees and just happened to list the first three bootees??? Come on... give folks some credit.

-SB

  Top

Spidey 6259 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"

03-22-02, 04:26 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Spidey Click to send private message to Spidey Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
3. "RE: Varner's take on 'Varner X'"
What I find so odd it that if Varner got too many of the bootees right on the first list, why would the forces that be change it to ADD Sara, now gone, and Sean, most likely not long for this game? And why remove Zoe and Robert, who seems as safe as any to make the merge at this point? Gabe is a tough one. Seems likely to stay, but big challenge threat, so maybe early boot.
Assuming the above (I know what happens when I assume...) Just why, oh why, would one correct boot pick (Hunter) and 2 false (Zoe and Robert) and one iffy (Kathy) be replaced with at least 2 correct boot picks (Sara and, again assuming, Sean - or Gina, or both)? It just doesn't make sense.

Patricia was an easy pick on Varner's part, Peter seemed odd from his profile alone, so no shock there. Lord, and we keep waiting for Kathy to go too. So no real surprises in those picks.

As far as I can tell only Hunter is unusual as a early boot pick. Why go to all that trouble to hide the fact that Varner correctly predicted Hunter on his intuition alone? And possibly Kathy (to come?)


This whole thing is totally bizarre. At this point I can't make head or tails of it except to know something is very fishy here. And EPM is laughing his ass off at us trying to figure this out. (Doesn't mean I'll stop though!)

No chance Varner just changed his mind after more pre-show analysis and then changed his list? What is the time frame between the orig. and the update? His lack of recollection about the first list is also very interesting, although he very well may have been brainwashed by EPM to forget...

  Top

Java 519 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

03-22-02, 11:44 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Java Click to send private message to Java Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
4. "RE: Varner's take on 'Varner X'"
FWIW, Varner's original picks weren't that surprising and I don't believe he had any inside information. He picked six people that he thought wouldn't make the merge. To be safe, he picked 3 from each tribe: The weakest (Pat, Kathy), the physically strongest (Hunter, Robert), and the weirdest (Peter, Zoe - remember how goofy her head shot was?). The first boot for a team is usually the weak one, then they get rid of the weird one, then (as individual immunity approaches) they boot the strong one.

Why did they substitute the names they chose? I dunno.
If this is so obvious to me, why can't I pick the bootees in Spoiler Island? I dunno.


Goe Zoe!

  Top

dabo 26942 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"

03-23-02, 01:11 AM (EST)
Click to EMail dabo Click to send private message to dabo Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
5. "Varner X is dead"
They made the substitution in order to make Varner X more visible than it would have been. He got the first three right and in order by sheer chance, MB/CBS took advantage of that, made the substitute list, and drew attention to it, end of story. Varner X should be ignored now, the dynamics of the switch have changed things too much. Someone on either Varner X list could go next, not saying that's not possible, just saying this one is just part of the smoke and mirrors this season. Forget about it.
  Top


Remove

Lobby | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
about this site   •   advertise on this site  •   contact us  •   privacy policy   •