Another One on One Eviction

[Niamh.]

Third eviction in and we have a one on one again. Anyone else prefer to have few people up to make it more interesting? I can't help thinking that allowing them discuss nominations is a bad idea and the reason why we keep having one on ones

[Black Dagger]

I'd much prefer at least three up each time, it's practically vote to evict at the minute and it'll show if Georgia stays.

[Niamh.]

I'd much prefer at least three up each time, it's practically vote to evict at the minute and it'll show if Georgia stays.

Yeah, that's the thing, vote to Save has no value at all when it's one on one. That would be a good rule change actually, to have the three people or more with the most noms to face the public vote each time

[TheManWhoLaughs]

Third eviction in and we have a one on one again. Anyone else prefer to have few people up to make it more interesting? I can't help thinking that allowing them discuss nominations is a bad idea and the reason why we keep having one on ones

I don't think it's anything to do with noms discussion - it's just a consequence of the house having one large core group and a bunch of floaters who aren't unified against any particular targets. If anything, it should help the floaters get together and decide who to target - noms discussion in BB12 is what helped us avoid having a predictable head-to-head and got Aden evicted.

I don't mind head-to-heads though, unless they're really lop-sided. Faye vs Louise was more tense than it would have been with more people up. But I hate vote-to-save in general, as it's generally an enormous fail, so I'm glad to get rid of it as much as possible

[Niamh.]

I don't think it's anything to do with noms discussion - it's just a consequence of the house having one large core group and a bunch of floaters who aren't unified against any particular targets. If anything, it should help the floaters get together and decide who to target - noms discussion in BB12 is what helped us avoid having a predictable head-to-head and got Aden evicted.

I don't mind head-to-heads though, unless they're really lop-sided. Faye vs Louise was more tense than it would have been with more people up. But I hate vote-to-save in general, as it's generally an enormous fail, so I'm glad to get rid of it as much as possible

I disagree, I think allowing them discuss noms allows them to home in on particular targets where as not allowing them to discuss noms might actually get them to vote for who they actually want out.

[Roy Mars III]

It should be the three people with the most noms up, Vote to Save doesn't work to its fullest otherwise.

[TheManWhoLaughs]

I disagree, I think allowing them discuss noms allows them to home in on particular targets where as not allowing them to discuss noms might actually get them to vote for who they actually want out.

I think the targets are pretty clear when there are obvious outsiders like Michael/Georgia/Twins/Andrew. Even without noms talk, if you're in a big group it's easy to know who is most disliked and you'll follow the herd. It happened in BB10 without noms talk and it's happening here.

Wouldn't mind the three with most noms going up every week though - at least that way, even if one group strongly targeted two people, there's more of a chance of someone from the other side being up

[Niamh.]

I think the targets are pretty clear when there are obvious outsiders like Michael/Georgia/Twins/Andrew. Even without noms talk, if you're in a big group it's easy to know who is most disliked and you'll follow the herd. It happened in BB10 without noms talk and it's happening here.

Wouldn't mind the three with most noms going up every week though - at least that way, even if one group strongly targeted two people, there's more of a chance of someone from the other side being up

Yeah, that's another good reason why it should be a minimum of 3 up

[fruit_cake]

Third eviction in and we have a one on one again. Anyone else prefer to have few people up to make it more interesting? I can't help thinking that allowing them discuss nominations is a bad idea and the reason why we keep having one on ones

I totally agree with everything said here, It's much more interesting when there is more than two up and talking about noms is not only unfair, it makes it too easy to know what the contestants are thinking imo.

[Niamh.]

I totally agree with everything said here, It's much more interesting when there is more than two up and talking about noms is not only unfair, it makes it too easy to know what the contestants are thinking imo.

Yeah, also it encourages the stronger willed to gang up on the weaker ones, which I don't like at all.

[Brother Leon]

The thing that made BB12 for me was the fact there were so many evictions with 5 or so Housemates.


I would love a Michael and three witches double eviction. I would vote for the first time this series then probably.

[Niamh.]

The thing that made BB12 for me was the fact there were so many evictions with 5 or so Housemates.


I would love a Michael and three witches double eviction. I would vote for the first time this series then probably.

Me too. Haven't voted yet this series but as soon as one of them is up I'll be voting like crazy

[fruit_cake]

Yeah, also it encourages the stronger willed to gang up on the weaker ones, which I don't like at all.

Yes that seems true too, a good point.

[Jules2]

Yes that seems true too, a good point.

Definitely..

[Marc]

I much prefer when it's like 3/4 people up at the same time. Especially with the vote to save, you have no idea who is going to be bottom or second from bottom in the votes!

[Marc]

Makes it exciting :)

[Black Dagger]

I much prefer when it's like 3/4 people up at the same time. Especially with the vote to save, you have no idea who is going to be bottom or second from bottom in the votes!

This... who would have thought Faaron would have topped the vote over the wolfpack?

I thought it was magical.

[Scotty07]

It's usually more entertaining when more than two are up. If they stopped p*ssing about letting housemates pick two and did normal nominations instead, then that might help.

[Me. I Am Salman]

Multiple people up for eviction allow popular HMs to stay in.

[Vicky.]

For vote to save to actually work...we need 3 or more every week.

[chuff me dizzy]

I prefer vote to evict

[fruit_cake]

This... who would have thought Faaron would have topped the vote over the wolfpack?

I thought it was magical.

x2

[Niamh.]

This... who would have thought Faaron would have topped the vote over the wolfpack?

I thought it was magical.

aw yeah, that was the best moment ever :love:

[starry]

I prefer vote to evict

I thought that got a bit boring. It's time to get away from the pantomime and the stupid crowd.

[robb]

I disagree, I think allowing them discuss noms allows them to home in on particular targets where as not allowing them to discuss noms might actually get them to vote for who they actually want out.

Totally agree.....it seems more fun to watch them say who they are going after, BUT when there is a gang of 7 against the other 3 (the twins, Georgia and Michael) the outcome is obvious. The votes stacked up for Michael and Georgia BECAUSE 'the gang' knew they were the easy options to get rid of. In fact the task that Nicola and Frankie won and escaped nomination was in the end a waste of time. Neither would have been up anyway.

[TheManWhoLaughs]

I thought that got a bit boring. It's time to get away from the pantomime and the stupid crowd.

The stupid crowd seemed even worse during the evictions last year!

It wouldn't bother me as much if they didn't reveal who got the most votes to save. Aaron being the most popular Week 1 and at the end made the whole show very predictable for me, as you knew there was basically zero chance of him (or Jay) ever leaving.

[fruit_cake]

The get 'so and so' out chanting is really annoying, it's long since lost any meaning to me.

[starry]

The stupid crowd seemed even worse during the evictions last year!

It wouldn't bother me as much if they didn't reveal who got the most votes to save. Aaron being the most popular Week 1 and at the end made the whole show very predictable for me, as you knew there was basically zero chance of him (or Jay) ever leaving.

It takes time for things to change. I'm not even sure the producers really want to make it more of a positive show anyway, they still want to make it a comedy where we feel superior to the HMs. The increasing sarcasm of Marcus shows this.

And the decision to tell us who got the most votes was so stupid. I also think they shouldn't let HMs tell each other who they voted for, as it stops surprises at the interview.