I agree with oval on some points.Point A:
I think that overall Edgic has no use if it's done without much analysing. And I don't know if you're doing it, gamerfan.
There really are some very weird results in your TAR27 edgic, especially with the way you declare winner contenders How is that even determined? A lot of things just don't make sense.
I do analyse. While watching, I take note of several things. (Confessional Count/First-Person Screentime/Second-Person Screentime/Third-Person Screentime).
Confessional Counts are important because unlike most big RTV shows, TAR leans more on voiceovers as well as teams doing things. A team with a lot of confessionals fully explaining them and fleshing their story arc out is due a CP edit. In fact, TAR26 Leg 3 only has 24 confessionals, and that even includes the voiceovers. Mike/Rochelle had NINE of these, and thus, their CP edit in addition to them commenting while doing tasks and they are fully fleshed out in this leg.
Screentime is essentially, how much time we see a team. (can also be defined by number of cuts to teams)
I define it as follows.
First-Person Screentime: How much a team is full front and centre and talks.
Second-Person Screentime: How a team is talked about by another team followed by a quick-cut of them + A team being shown doing basic stuff without any conversation from them (running, doing a task, panting, etc.)
Third-Person Screentime: How much a team can be seen in the foreground of another team's establishing shot.
I combine all of the screentime and divide it by the teams remaining to get an average Screentime score for the leg.
For instance, TAR26 Leg 3 has a total of 296 cuts, and divided by 9 would result in at least a 33 average. Every team this leg satisfies the average, hence, no UTR for anybody, leaving them at MOR. (In comparison, Leg 2 had about 274 cuts, and having 10 teams, an average would be 27. Aly/Steve only hit 16 of these cuts, and no confessionals at all. However, they were seen mostly at the Detour, and their positivity doing the task helped make them UTRP2.)
The teams with multiple confessionals throughout the leg and game-talk would boost them from MOR to CP, and etc. I do notice that TAR uses toning a lot though so there's that.Point B:
I follow Survivor logic mixed with TAR logic. What's that? Well, Survivor likes to reward CP winners. TAR usually loves a combination of CP/MOR/Positively-Toned teams. (As I said, I am only analysing from TAR25 onwards, so earlier seasons are out the window... for now.) Amy & Maya were UTR early on, but they were edited positively (their only one blowup in the Race even got fully edited out). They would then ride on UTR and MOR before finally getting a few CPP edits until they made it to the end. Same with Kelsey & Joey.
I determine contenders based on how Survivor Edgic determines them, in the sense that the teams with a string of CP-MOR-Positively Toned edits each leg have a chance to win.In the End:
Whoa I wrote a lot and again, this is just for fun, I am 100% an EDGIC newbie
Thanks for the comments guys!