Will there ever be a Big Brother contestant as good as him? Will there ever be a reality tv contestant as good as him? He's the best I've seen, both in terms of gameplay and in terms of entertainment value. Victor BB5 used to be my favourite ever BB contestant until I saw this guy. No disrespect to the Slick Man, but he blew him out of the water. I think he will always be my favourite ever, on either side of the pond. He went into BB2 and told everyone on the first night that he was going to lie to everyone's face in order to win, and he won doing exactly that and in such an entertaining way. That has to be respected.

I would argue that Dan Gheesling is the marginally better player in terms of overall gameplay but it is very close between the two.
See what you mean by entertainment value though although Evel Dick gets an awful lot of points for that category too.
I find it hard to watch the UK version now, overall entertainment value is so much greater in the US and Canadian versions, be great if the UK version changed to a similar format.

In the public voting BBs, I think Tim Dormer from Big Brother Australia 10 was one of the greatest.

He was a great entertainer.

I think Dan is the best player that has ever been in Big Brother USA.

I think Will Kirby is extremely overrated (sorry not sorry) I mean he came FOURTH on All Stars. I really think if he ever returned to the game again he wouldn't even make Jury.

Yep ,
I'm another Dan over Will fan .

I don't think Will is in any way less of a player because he "only" made fourth in Allstars. He entered the house with the biggest reputation and target on his back, and still managed to become the power player of the game and get himself in a winning position, again without ever even vaguely attempting to win a competition.

I guess it's fair to say that they did underestimate the chance of Janelle and Erika teaming up, but I think he'd have almost certainly made the final two and won had anyone other than Janelle won the final veto, and it wasn't exactly his fault that Janelle was still there, considering she won a competition every single round bar from the top 11 to the top 4.

Saying that, I think Will does attract a lot of fanboys who elevate him to some kind of God status that no player imo deserves, but I think that's also a lot to do with his oozing charisma! Still though, I personally think Will is handsdown the best player - only the also awesome Dan even touches him for me!

I think Will is a good player but a lot of equally great players are overlooked because he holds some sort of legacy that means NO ONE can beat him.

Britney Haynes (despite only placing 8th in BB14) is one of the best social players of all time. She had nearly everyone on a leash in BB14, and had Dan not realised this and gone against her, she probably would've been unstoppable. Eric Stein from BB8 is also very overlooked, he was an excellent strategist, even if he wasn't a great personality. America put a lot of tough stuff in his way and he brushed it off easily.

I think a lot of players are overlooked because Will was very over-the-top about how much of a villain he was. Had he not been so loud, I don't think he would be considered as great as he is.

Not to mention BBCAN2's Neda, who imo is on Will's level.

That said, I do think he is one of the best and he's one of my favourites, but I think there are people who are just as good who don't get attention just because Will is over the top. I'm also one of the "Dan is Better" club. He's my favourite of all time.

I definitely think there is a tendency to hype up and perhaps overvalue strong players who are very vocal about their strategy in the DR. As good as it can be to see someone plotting in the DR, then flawlessly follow through on their plans, I think there are many undervalued players who don't get the credit they sometimes deserve, in part because they didn't talk the talk in the DR first.

Not that she's anywhere near a Dan or Will level, but for example, I think that Maggie in BB6 played a very underrated game and was by a clear mile the best strategic player of her season, yet she's often regarded as a poor, even terrible winner. Of course being a part of the most hated alliance ever doesn't help her rep, but I think that if Maggie had been more vocal all season about how she was utilizing that bunch of horrors, then she might have been given more of the credit she probably deserved. She kept that group so closely knit that they were never going to turn on each other, and whilst that was unspectacular to watch, it was the perfect match against the rival alliance, which literally managed to stay together a week before fracturing, and pretty much blew every chance they got to get back into the game. Remember when Howie was HoH? Maggie completely rung rings around him and got him to put up James and Sarah, in my opinion the absolute key to the Nerd Herd winning S6, yet its hardly ever talked about it when discussing great game changing plays, perhaps in part because Maggie, she of little personality, never really talked it up as an important move herself.

Whilst I've mentioned James, isn't it interesting that from that season, he's is the one who is regarded as a "strategic player", despite playing a horribly misjudged game that was never going to work in that particular season. The fact that he always gave a good account of his attempts to play both sides of the house in the DR surely can't be coincidence?

I think another great example of what I'm trying to say is Survivor's Russell Hantz. He's regarded (by some, certainly not me) as an epic player, robbed of the win by a bitter jury blah blah blah. I know its a season that will always divide opinion, yet for me Natalie played a much smarter game and thoroughly deserved the win. And again, I'm not saying that Natalie is anywhere near the level of Will or Dan, yet I'm sure if she had gone to the camera and said "I'm going to milk Russell for all he's worth, make connections with the jury, then reap the rewards when his horrific personality and ego pisses everyone off" then people might be more accepting of her as a winner. It's never really mentioned that Natalie was instrumental in the move against Eric in the merge episode, probably because we saw Russell mouthing off about how many idols he'd found to the camera instead.

Dan is arguably the better player just on numbers. But in terms of gameplay and entertainment Will wins hands down.

I don't rate Will for entertainment value at all. I thought he behaved like an arrogant and creepy adolescent. He played a good game in his season because the game was relatively new and he thought intelligently and creatively about how to play it but it's much harder now and I doubt he'd get any further than Boogie did in 14.

The problem with Russell Hantz's game is that his social game is virtually non - existent. Something his fans seem to ignore. Its part of Survivor/BB and great players recognise that. Bitter juries are a part of the game and their bitterness is often enhanced by the way they perceive themselves to be treated.
Boston Rob probably got the bitterest jury of all in All-stars whilst I think they were a bunch of hypocrites Rob created the problem (although to be fair he at least had more insight than Russell and knew this). Personally I think he's a great player because at least each time he played he learned and adjusted his game. In Redemption Island Andrea said his social game was amazing in that he built individual relationship with everyone in his alliance making them all believe they were his number 2.
I agree Natalie's game is very underrated (I also think Ambers was) - mainly due to the editing and complete lack of talking heads she was given.

I think Dan's funeral was an incredibly awesome strategic move probably one of the greatest strategic moves in any of these type of shows.

Maggie and Andy played pretty much flawless games in my view, only shrouded by not being popular with the viewers.

Dan and Will were both also very good, although I lost interest in both of their second-run seasons so can't comment on them.

I think Danielle Reyes deserves a mention in this thread for her gameplay in BB3, probably the biggest injustice in the history of the show was her not winning in the final two.

Ian beating Dan also felt unjust to me, based on Dan's strategical play being far better than Ian's.

Strategically yes, but social game is a part of it as always. Dan's ego had blimped during his second time in the house, especially towards the end. He was aiming for charm with his jury speech but it just came off smug and nauseating IMO.

I imagine if Ian is given another go in the house he'll be even more extreme than the above.