Whats wrong with wanting to win?
 

On BBBM Heidi said it best, what's wrong with wanting to win. Why do we seem to frown upon people wanting to win.

UK culture; "He/she wants to win, what a ****"
US culture; "He/she wants to win, that person is cool"

It seems wanting to achieve success is wrong and people should only win BB if they are not out to win it.....which makes me wonder why enter BB if not an inkling of your body wants to win it?

tbh, that is true , there is nothing at all wrong with wanting to win :)
its a good thing...unless youre a fake (nicola)
and you just want the money :rolleyes:

Because they are often quite boring, don't say what they think to people's faces much. They don't make for great entertainment.

Whats wrong with wanting the money, it is the same difference.

most people go in their for the experience :hugesmile:

So wanting money is a bad thing? Your not a **** if you go for the experience but you are a **** if you want money. Regarding the summer addition of BB, there is nothing wanting to win £100,000.

Lets be real - no one in CBB goes in for the experience, they go in for $. Maybe on BBuk people might go in for experience, but even that is a far reach IMO.

That's what I love about Big Brother USA, the houseguests can kill their parents to win $500,000. Love it. :hugesmile:

Yeah - but its always SO predictable. The games are always based on the exact same idea(the worst of those being stand in spot and answer questions, stepping forward or back on a step <--makes me want to smash my head on the wall), and the eviction process is weak - the public should always decide who goes, or at least, I think so :)

I agree, the public should decide not the Housemates.

It doesn't fit the All-American competitive shows pattern though. The public decides about other stuff like America's Player or what the Have-Nots should eat etc...
I think it's another aspect of Big Brother and I'm happy the way it is because we'd never see that in UK. Never.

Reason i have a problem with American BB format is usually ends up with the Alphas and more dominant Housemates ruling the roost. I said before there is nothing wrong with wanting to win, but the public should choose who deserves to win. Keep it fair and balanced.

If there was NO prize money on BB I would still audition and want to go on.. but yeah I would love to go on and win and take the cash :joker: Shame it aint gona happen now!

Nothng.

I have a problem with it in normal BB, because i have this notion that it should be someone winning for been themselves not cause they worked the game.

That's why I believe there nothing wrong in wanting to win, the voters decides who wins anyway.

Yeah - I wish sometimes we voted for noms maybe, and the house voted out. But definitely see your POV on it. It is way different. But america's player is always the biggest fail because american voters are just so predictable(im sure you feel same way bout uk one in a sense) .

If housemates want to use the most underhand and deceitful tactics to obtain the prize money, then good for them. The trouble is, their fans are often under the illusion these people are "honest" and dismiss their plotting and scheming as wholly imaginary.

Is it wrong to reward some for playing the game so to speak? The house has always been a game the moment they walk in that front door.

England loves the confidenceless underdog.

I think Nasty Nick shaped the way we perceive reality TV contestants

Because he was the first person we actively seen trying to win the show, anyone else is just seen as the "new" him especially on Big Brother.

They tried to get the public to get behind the game players during BB9 but it really didn't work.

So because the British have been customed to support the "nice and ordinary people" we end up with Anthony Hutton and Rachel Rice winning brilliant series'.

Yeah, we love the underdog tag cos we as a nation; never win jack sh!t