[Claymores]

If you think about it, they are somewhat compelled into a vote to Evict (if having a distinct weekly round). A vote to save immediately followed by a vote to win would be bound to attract public indignation......essentially you'd be asking people to vote for their fave this week coming, then expecting them to do it all over again from scratch for the finals vote – that makes no sense.

The logical alternative would have been a very long Vote to Win starting tonight, with the two with fewest win votes going next week and the vote count continuing on for those remaining

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Claymores

If you think about it, they are somewhat compelled into a vote to Evict (if having a distinct weekly round). A vote to save immediately followed by a vote to win would be bound to attract public indignation......essentially you'd be asking people to vote for their fave this week coming, then expecting them to do it all over again from scratch for the finals vote – that makes no sense.

The logical alternative would have been a very long Vote to Win starting tonight, with the two with fewest win votes going next week and the vote count continuing on for those remaining

Yes, it should've been a Vote to Win. As JJ keeps saying on LF there's always been at least a week to vote for the winner. Would've made perfect sense.

[Jords]

Originally Posted by Jack_

Yes, it should've been a Vote to Win. As JJ keeps saying on LF there's always been at least a week to vote for the winner. Would've made perfect sense.

I think partly its not a vote to win because Josie got a free pass, so people might not bother voting her until after Friday, where the others would have racked in plenty by then giving her an unfair disadvantage when the pass should be the opposite.

Im happy with it though worry we'll lose Sam in this process.
As long as him or Corin live on to the final to win its all good!

[Mac Hiavellian]

I really cannot understand why people think voting to save will make an impact?

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Mac Hiavellian

I really cannot understand why people think voting to save will make an impact?

Because then the dull housemates leave because they get no votes. See last year when Hira got evicted.

[Patrick]

Originally Posted by Mac Hiavellian

I really cannot understand why people think voting to save will make an impact?

Of course it will

Look at last year, Hira would of been in the final had it not been for a vote to save.

When its a V.T.S all the fans come out and play and the dull housemates like Steve with no fans are left dead at the end of the whole thing, when its a V.T.E the little BB Haters who claim to be fans come out and ruin the show by evicting good housemates.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Patrick

Of course it will

Look at last year, Hira would of been in the final had it not been for a vote to save.

When its a V.T.S all the fans come out and play and the dull housemates like Steve with no fans are left dead at the end of the whole thing, when its a V.T.E the little BB Haters who claim to be fans come out and ruin the show by evicting good housemates.

[Mac Hiavellian]

Originally Posted by Jack_

Because then the dull housemates leave because they get no votes. See last year when Hira got evicted.

Originally Posted by Patrick

Of course it will

Look at last year, Hira would of been in the final had it not been for a vote to save.

When its a V.T.S all the fans come out and play and the dull housemates like Steve with no fans are left dead at the end of the whole thing, when its a V.T.E the little BB Haters who claim to be fans come out and ruin the show by evicting good housemates.

But CBB3 had vote to save and lost both Jackie and John first. And in CBB5 Jackiey was evicted in a vote to save instead of Jack Tweed. I think the only time a vote to save may have made a massive difference would have been Nikki's first eviction in BB7 because all the haters got their way, but had it been a vote to save her fans would have won

[Patrick]

Originally Posted by Mac Hiavellian

But CBB3 had vote to save and lost both Jackie and John first. And in CBB5 Jackiey was evicted in a vote to save instead of Jack Tweed. I think the only time a vote to save may have made a massive difference would have been Nikki's first eviction in BB7 because all the haters got their way, but had it been a vote to save her fans would have won

That's CBB though lol

Vote to save has done wonders in the past.
If they bring BB back on 5 it MUST be a Vote to Save and we will have great winners

[starry]

Originally Posted by Claymores

If you think about it, they are somewhat compelled into a vote to Evict (if having a distinct weekly round). A vote to save immediately followed by a vote to win would be bound to attract public indignation......essentially you'd be asking people to vote for their fave this week coming, then expecting them to do it all over again from scratch for the finals vote – that makes no sense.

The logical alternative would have been a very long Vote to Win starting tonight, with the two with fewest win votes going next week and the vote count continuing on for those remaining

I don't see what the problem is either way myself. I suppose because of how they have developed the show over the years they make more money from hate. It's so much easier for the public to save someone they like than to stop someone they like being evicted in an eviction with several people. I think Endemol have always miscalculated how this annoys the audience though.