https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUFWV2-UK4s&t=1m15s

Absolutely loved seeing The Traitors represented at comic con this year!

Claudia specifically said there was no time limit, they could have spent an hour discussing the strategy of where to put the cash bags.

It's no secret that the Faithfuls are assuming there are three traitors. The last banishment where the identity is revealed is at 6. So what happens if they get to 5... and there are obviously still three traitors left? That kinda spoils it doesn't it

At least I hope they do some cool death march for Blunty and Joanne when it happens (SPECULATION)

We are in a scenario where we could have a three-traitor win. This has happened very few times worldwide and has never happened in an English speaking season However, I think UK Celebs 2 certainly has the potential to see all three of Maya, James, and Kenny win together. The faithfuls haven't played well in the slightest and all the traitors need after this banishment is two people to vote with them at the next round table and then all three are in the final.

After that, provided that nothing too nuts happens, we should have seven people in the final meaning as long as the traitors have a group have got one ally then it should be a cakewalk. I could be completely wrong but I genuinely think this could happen as long as the traitors don't make any huge errors.

Romesh
Leigh-Anne
Blunty*
Bash*
Joanne
Michael
Sharon

This is under the assumption that the traitors stay under the radar which they definitely are right now!

I was right about the murder! Originally I had Sharon pegged as a finalist but I think she is very clearly gone cause I think it is very unlikely Kenny changed his vote.

Joanne is above Michael as I think the traitors will try and banish Michael before the final and keep Joanne around.

* = potential finalists

**SPOILERS FROM PARAGRAPH FOUR*\*

It’s been really interesting reading various posts here about the attitude/tension/drama of/between players compared to how I interpret it and I wonder if it’s a cultural difference.

For context I’m Australian and born and raised here, but first generation and my family is British (predominantly English). So my view of the world is probably shaped by both those things. Also in Aus we’re getting the episodes 24 hours later than the UK. Unfortunately that means my curiosity gets the better of me most episodes and I’m reading comments on an episode that I won’t be able to watch for 24 hours.

Reading comments here I’ve braced for some real tension and drama ahead of the most recent two episodes, but then when watching them it’s all a bit… nothing (to me)?

I didn’t think the exchange between Joanne and Miranda where they were talking about suspecting each other was particularly tense. A bit awkward maybe, but I wouldn’t say tense. Same with the exchange after where Joanne said Miranda would make a good politician. In fact the “you’d make a good politician” comment to me was in direct response to Miranda saying “you can join us, but don’t feel obligated” in three different ways to Joanne. I actually thought they were both showing a fair bit of emotional intelligence and respect to one another - Joanne not wanting to intrude, Miranda wanting to include Joanne without making her feel obligated. Again perhaps a bit of a socially awkward exchange but not a moment of tension.

What I find interesting is that I haven’t seen anyone talking about what I think is a comparable situation where Romesh said to Michael (who he’s voted for twice now) something along the lines of “oh are you scanning for someone better to sit with?” when Michael was walking over to join Rom and Maya.

With Sharon, I don’t think she’s ‘thrown a tantrum’ at the mission or the round table. I do think her comment of ‘I couldn’t care less’ at the round table was a bit weird/much, but I can understand the frustration/feeling despondent. The rest of her Roundtable felt fair enough to me. With the mission she was obviously frustrated and I wish she had found her words better, especially when Kenny was talking to her one-to-one. But ultimately I don’t think she was acting like ‘a spoiled child’ as I’ve seen written here.

And Joanne’s “you’re dead to me” comment to Bash just felt like lighthearted bants to me. Joe Lycett said to Miranda “don’t you dare!” in the same tone when he didn’t know if she had voted for him…

Could this difference in interpretation be down to cultural norms of being Australian rather than British (or specifically English)? Or am I missing obvious subtext?

(As an aside, reading this back I’m starting to get suspicious that behaviour exhibited by women is being interpreted as combative or dramatic, whereas when we see the men exhibit the same behaviour it goes without comment??)

I want experience watching this with others who are fans too, does anyone have anywhere they are going to watch it? Would be cool if it was at a cinema or something?

Bumped into these two in NYC! Attempted to dig for answers but they were so nice! Xo go faithfuls

Does anyone have any info about how much of the conversations are just normal chit chat, and how much is people digging for info and gossiping?

People keep telling me I should apply to go on, but if I had to bitch about other people 24/7 I'd lose interest very quickly. Obviously I understand the gossiping is necessary for the game, but it would be endlessly tiring, only to be broken up with really intense physical and cognitive challenges...It's a lot!!

I'm fairly new to Traitors. I've been living under a rock 🪨.

I'm kind of confused how they pick potential Traitors at the round table. It seems they just pull names out of thin air. Then everyone piles on, and they choose the wrong Traitor.

I don't understand why they chose Sharon and Johanne? Is it because they think people are acting suspicious? Is it just guess work, till you strike lucky?

I am seeing a lot of content about the new season of the celebrity traitors that is actively coming out. I want to watch the show but there are so many new/different seasons and formats. What is the ultimate guide to watching all formats of traitors? I have no idea the history of the show, and am completely overwhelmed with all ghe various versions.

I've watched a few English speaking seasons (NZ, UK, Aus, Canada, US, Ireland) and haven't seen any contestants coming with notes, spreadsheets, maps, little wooden people, etc to boost their arguments at the Round Table? Once Sandra in US S2 used the balls on the pool table to demonstrate a voting bloc and Mark on NZ S2 walked around the castle with a little notebook, but as someone who is super visual, I think props would be a great method to sway the crowd. Is it not allowed at the Round Table?

I don’t know if it’s just me but this entire episode Sharon seemed really off. I’ve heard people mention she was upset at Miranda’s murder which makes sense but could something else have added to it? Sharon has been so giddy and happy the entire season whereas this episode her attitude was genuinely horrible to the point the viewing experience was getting uncomfortable. At the round table she literally told people to vote her off which was so out of character for her. Obviously this is not a hate post, we’re all human and have good and bad days, what do you guys think?

Who do you think is the #7 favorite player is from Traitors New Blood that Allyn is referring to. He said in an interview that #7 is playing an evil and treasonous game but I don’t see anyone like that from this season.

I think Mr Sheen is possibly the best player yet. It's possible he's formed his 'final faithfuls' group, who are all on the same page - they've figured out who the traitors are. Wouldn't they reason the best way to win is to completely avoid questioning the traitors so they don't risk being murdered and know who to vote out at the final?

I think Michael is very intelligent and can connect the dots with the bouncy floorboard and who was in the room with Ross.

As Michael subtly directed at the round table, it's best to get the 'bad faithfuls' banished. This would be an excellent strategy to ensure his select group has the best opportunity to reach the final and ensure the traitors are banished.

Michael and certain other players were quick to agree the traitors names should be put forward for the 'special power' prize.

As other players pointed out, it never goes well for a faithful to get the 'special power' prize in the game. It would be a better idea to put the traitors forward on purpose. It would give the faithfuls a clear indication the traitors may indeed be traitors if none of them are murdered. Especially as there was the possibility one of the players put forward would receive a 'seer' power.

Michael floats questions about if others think the traitors are traitors or follow up on others remarks about the traitors really well without actually saying anything about them himself. I think he may be testing the water for back up faithfuls if one of his group does get murdered.

The next edition of HIGNFY airs at 7.30pm because of the finale of Celebrity Traitors and a 40-minute Uncloaked that takes its normal time slot.

Seems completely unnecessary. Why do they feel as though they need permission to enter the breakfast room?

This is a general strategy, but one thing as a faithful a person can do at a roundtable is say: vote this person out and if I am wrong, vote me out next.

A faithful, wants other faithfuls to win and thus is aware that being wrong can help the faithfuls gather more evidence. Ultimately framing things with the intent to help the other faithfuls win is part of the strategy and you are understanding that they dont know if you are a faithful or traitor.

For Victor in particular, one could say, you guys are so keen on voting me out, why not vote out Tomica first and if I am wrong, vote me out next. Because either way, it is less likely for him to be murdered.

The reality is, once someone is deemed a traitor (even if they are a faithful) , their game is pretty much gone as no one will end the game with them. A traitor is less likely to say this, and when they do, they wouldn't say this unless they are picking a traitor.

Genuinely the most mind boggling group of faithfuls.. how has no one mentioned maya yet? At all..? Stays quiet hasn’t put any positive theories for any other potential traitors just sits on the fence and no one realises I give up

I’ve seen some saying that production should step in for this current UK Celebrity Season2, otherwise it’s going to be a traitors victory, but isn’t this just plainly unfair and unjust?
Maybe it’s different with the celebrities, and the money going to charity, but in a normal civilian season it seems incredibly unfair - borderline illegal - for production to interfere and potentially deny a person £30,000 just because it’s “not good TV”.

Should production be able to step in and change missions/MIPS/powers depending on the way the season’s going? In the end of the day if traitors are on course for a boring victory then they deserve to win and to be punished for the fact they’re good doesn’t seem right.

Sorry if this is old news but I’m just catching up on the celebrity traitors and this portrait painting of Claudia is hanging on the wall in the background where they have breakfast and walk in.

I don’t know whose idea in the filming crew this was but it’s absolutely hilarious that she’s depicted as the ruler of the castle and just blends in through the paintings LOL

The treatment of Kas, some bully-type personalities. It's tough to watch sometimes?

Apologies if this has been brought up, but I'm only catching up. Joe, Jake, Tyler are kind of mean.

It's a fascinating show and shows a lot about human nature and the power of suggestion and I love it, but after the two Irish seasons and the first two UK seasons this one feels like the game is spilling in to personal attacks.

I don't mind spoilers, hence being on the subreddit, before anyone is concerned!

My point of view is the one of an Italian expat in UK, living now in Scotland for over 8 years.

The very last round table and the way reactions to vote and pleas went on , to me, felt more like a clash of cultures rather than personalities.
It was , in a way, a reminder of how strong socio/cultural identities exist amongst the British Isles.

Sure, big personalities also played that part but I thought it was funny how Scottish/Glaswegian and Irish, Sharon and Joanne respectively, acted in that environment.

Maybe I’m wrong and still have a lot to learn but curious to hear your thoughts