While I agree that the challenge could have easily gone another way, my disappointment is that this challenge was potentially set up as unfair. For example, Jamie didn't get a chance to present her dish, so who knows whether her chickpeas were troublesome or delicious. But it was also unfair to Mike Isabella. He didn't get a chance to serve his dish--and therefore was also not eligible for the win. No shot at Italy or wine for Isabella. (But yay to Carla!)

As is so often stated, this is a cooking competition and while the chefs work in teams on occasion, they are also gaged on their individual work. It doesn't seem that all the chefs were allowed to compete--and as a result they could neither lose nor win.

Never understood why Jamie was in this season to begin with. IMO Oh don't get me wrong she seems to have done well but All Star?..hmm.

She is playing the game well though. Not gonna take one for the team... no way, no how. She stated something along these lines in the first episode if I'm not mistaken.

On a side note...Fabio my love...lets try something new next time k?..LOL

Always a good day when Tom is on the air..

I agree with you!!!! The team should have called Jamie on what she agreed too! It will catch up with her...she can't hide forever!

Fabio's gnocchi are truly light and airy! He's a master with that form of potato. The shrimp with no flavor was not something one could savor.

Every American assumes that eventually, probably after the end of season 8 and not sooner, Jamie finally cooks a dish that is judged by someone. Advancement by passive-aggressive avoidance is snoring us.

SEND JAMIE HOME!!!! I am so tired of her, she doesn't even cook!!! She should have some guts to take a chance and be part of the team, she has NOT once been part of any teams she has been on. Even in her interviews, she is so sour, annoying, and selfish! I am tired of her!! SEND HER HOME!!!!!!!

We're five weeks in and Jamie has presented food just 3 times. The judges and producers are getting gamed.

Survivor: Top Chef

(Great show otherwise!)

I think the way this challenge played out was unfair due to the fact that this is clearly a cooking competition of ALL chefs on the show not just the chefs who happen to go up head to head against each other. Jamie's food should have been tasted as well as Mike's. Without the judges being able to taste these two dishes it takes the competition out of the show. Who knows if Mike's dish could have won the challenge and well, the cooks say Jamie's dish was the worst, but there's not a knowledge of that fully because the judges didn't taste it. So to me to keep the show fair, I fully believe that spike should be given another chance against the remainding competitors and ALL dishes should be tasted. To me it is unfair that this was an elimination challenge with which there were two dishes not tried, and those two dishes are dishes which did not have immunity so more or less, they won out of sheer luck. Please take this into account. If this is the way top chef is going to be handled I really don't believe it's the food competition show that it always has been. I would have to sincerely have to think about whether I want to continue watching it.

Jamie is a wimp, a lot of talk and NO COOKING. Sorry, but every dish should have been considered and tasted. This was a poorly set up challenge by allowing any cheft not to plate up to taste.

Hi, Top Chef 'All Stars',

I am not quite sure if I have been liking the judges' decisions lately, I mean for the last few seasons. I have been kinda disappointed in the decisions they have made. I also have to admit I was quite surprised with this season all stars show because I thought the show had the strongest chefs there and some of them did not bring their 'A' game. I noticed those who did not have a good season back then would most likely do good for the second time around, but for those who were close to winning from their season would not do so good in this season. That is what I have noticed. I feel all the chefs should bring their A game and cook good! I mean, there is no excuse for not cooking good. Its embrassing, I know.

I was kinda disappointed that Jen and Spike have left the compeition so far. I thought they were the strongest on the brunch. I did like Fabio, but I feel he needs to be aware that he does mess up the dishes sometimes and needs to accept his mistakes. He should not be given so many chances to stay in the compeition. It is really not fair to the others. And beside, with Jamie, I feel she had an attitude and thinks she is the best chef. First of all, she should have honestly shown her dish on the 4th espoide. A true chef would show their mistakes and make it better the next time. She was trying to make it look like she is perfect. She is not. She got lucky throughout the competeion. If this was a real job, she would have been fired or kicked out of the competetion. She does have an attitude and I really do not like her at all. Jamie should have been out, not Spike.

Hi, Top Chef 'All Stars',

I am not quite sure if I have been liking the judges' decisions lately, I mean for the last few seasons. I have been kinda disappointed in the decisions they have made. I also have to admit I was quite surprised with this season all stars show because I thought the show had the strongest chefs there and some of them did not bring their 'A' game. I noticed those who did not have a good season back then would most likely do good for the second time around, but for those who were close to winning from their season would not do so good in this season. That is what I have noticed. I feel all the chefs should bring their A game and cook good! I mean, there is no excuse for not cooking good. Its embrassing, I know.

I was kinda disappointed that Jen and Spike have left the compeition so far. I thought they were the strongest on the brunch. I did like Fabio, but I feel he needs to be aware that he does mess up the dishes sometimes and needs to accept his mistakes. He should not be given so many chances to stay in the compeition. It is really not fair to the others. And beside, with Jamie, I feel she had an attitude and thinks she is the best chef. First of all, she should have honestly shown her dish on the 4th espoide. A true chef would show their mistakes and make it better the next time. She was trying to make it look like she is perfect. She is not. She got lucky throughout the competeion. If this was a real job, she would have been fired or kicked out of the competetion. She does have an attitude and I really do not like her at all. Jamie should have been out, not Spike.

I disagree with you about Spike's dish. Tiffany stabbed Spike in the back because if you really look at the tape as you said you did you would have seen Tiffany also telling Angelo what to put in Spike's dish. Angelo also did Trey's fish and ruined it for him, I don't understand why Trey did not speak up at the elimination round. It made Trey look like he didn't care because he had immunity and that was not the case. Angelo is out to hurt the other chefs so he can take the entire competition and you judges continue to let him do this. It seems to me that if you had to ask Tiffany the question about Angelo doing things to the other chefs' dishes during the regular season he was on then it happens again in the all star competition then it should dawn on you that Angelo is intentionally trying to hurt the other chefs. Angelo needs to go just because he is a cheat.

I have to say Tom I am always impressed with your professionalism and love for food. You truly inspire people to cook their best and demonstrate their ability to cook good food. In regards to the challenge I think you are 100% correct with your view on the events as you spoke above. I truly believe everyone is responsible for their own dish and Angelo needs to told leave my dish alone. The stakes are too high to have a fear of confrontation. If you say the episode I did you would agree Angelo can tend to get involved where he doesn't need to. He wanted to help Tre but ended up over cooking his fish. Maybe that was his strategy who knows but after all it is a competition and you are always as good as your last dish. Happy Holidays to you and your family.

My wife and I were yelling at the television when Spike went home, but he indeed needed to be more assertive with his dish. I looked at it from a writer's point of view. If before going out to an editor to be considered for publication someone grabbed my manuscript and was like, "Wait, before it goes to the editor, I'm gonna throw a zombie in chapter seven..." and I let him do that..especially when the same person was sending a manuscript against mine...I'd be the one at fault. It seems the contestants are a little more feisty this season, too -- especially with the judges. I like how you maintain your composure through all of it. I'm looking forward to watching the "All-Stars" go against you next week...Great show.

This was the BEST Top Chef challenge ever!

Yes, Jamie should have gone home. Her luck held out again. But in fairness, that's the way the game played out when the team waffled on its strategy.

YES!!! Bring on more challenges like this. That said, developing a way to control the fairness factor will likely not guarantee the "right" outcome and will only diminish the suspense!

Tom Colicchio--

I've been watching Top Chef from the very beginning. I'm a hugh fan, but I'm disapointed that jamie's still there. Sh'e yet to compete, or cook. I feel that she's hiding so she won't be sent home. After all this is a competion & if she's not going to compete then she should be disqualified.

I have always found the judges to be fair, but I think you guys are dropping the ball on this one. It's not fair to the other chefs who are being judged for the food they bring to the table--and her not bringing anything & still being in the competition.

Sincerely-- Cynthia Duncan

I have never disagreed with judges decisions before, as I don't think you should have an opinion about the food if you haven't tasted it. I am, however, extremely upset with the fact that Jamie stays in the game after once again never serving a dish. You addressed this in your blog, which I appreciate- the team should have made her go whether she was ready or not- I agree. It's just so hard to see her stay when the only thing she cooks is soup and scallops and she uses every opportunity not to be judged on her food. This type of challenge, in my opinion, needs to be tweeked so that everyone's food is tasted! I'm sure this won't be published, but I needed to get it off my chest!

Thanks for posting the blog so quickly. I enjoyed tonight's show and while kind of irked by how the results played out, I can see how you came to that conclusion. I think given the circumstances Jaime should have been up for elimination as well. I love the head-to-head challenge combined with team scoring. I enjoyed the fact that the teams tried to use strategy. However, in the future for judging such a challenge, might I suggest the winning team and only the winning dishes from the losing team be exempt from elimination. Jamie wasn't on the winning team and didn't have a winning dish. If only winning dishes from the losing team are exempt, one team could sweep the other and the entirety of the losing team would be up for elimination. Judges would taste all the dishes up for elimination whether they got to compete or not, the teams would still have to have a strategy in order to win and no one gets a free pass. Thanks again, looking forward to next week.

omg, jamie = coward. she's not going to make it to the finale so she might as well go home now, especially if she's not going to cook.

So will Jamie actually have to cook this season or not? I don't think there should ever be a challenge where not every competitor is judged.

I have been a fan of Top Chef from day one, and although I haven't always agreed , I have never commented on any decision. Tonight though, was a huge mistake. Say what you want, but Jamie has skated by 2 weeks without participating. How can you possibly justify eliminating very talented chefs and choose to keep her. While I understand you need to create drama, you have done this by sacrificing talented chefs. Jen had a nasty attitude this season, and from what I understand her dish was just not that good. But Dale and Spike, I apologize for the poor judgement of the Judges Table. Best of luck to you both. Here's to better decisions in the future.

i c

Survivor Chef NOT Top Chef

Tom, I agree with your assessment that there needs to be more thought put into the challenges. You said in your last blog that you ultimately have to judge the quality of the food that's put in front of you. Is it then acceptable for a chef to NOT put any food in front of you (ie Jamie over the span of two episodes) and still be in the running for 'Top Chef'? It seems to me that she is more a 'Survivor Chef'. That may be a better title for this show, the way things are going.

The current challenges allow for too much strategizing and creates opportunities for free-ridership. I think that the judges should taste all of the food regardless of whether a challenge has been decided or not, because that's the only way you are going to get the absolute best from the chefs. Feedback from the judges is what helps the chefs improve and is also the ultimate carrot and stick.

Episode 4 got too cute with the US Open theme and lost track of what really mattered. In addition to trying all of the dishes, I think you needed to have a better guest judge who could also comment more on the nutritional value of the dishes as an athlete preparing for game time.

Overall, I think this season is excellent. I love the idea of bringing back the all-stars from seasons past who have something to prove. Episode 1's final challenge and Episode 3's mis-en-place quickfire and four restaurant elimination challenge were all thoroughly enjoyable.

For the record, I am neither a Jamie hater, nor a disgruntled Jen or Spike fan. You questioned the objectivity of some of the postings here, so for full disclosure, I am a Blais fan. I wish him all the best.

I love this show and I hink you do an amazing job at judging. I think this was a truly great idea for a challenge, actually both challenges. People may call Jamie a coward, but if she knew there was a possibility of not being judged, she should take it. She was the smartest one there because of that. If the judges don't have your food, they can't judge it. I also love these blogs, I feel like they give true insight to what bein in this show and judging is really like. I was also so happy to see Tiffany not go home, I loved her on D.C., and still do. She, along with Carla, Tiffani, Casey, Tre ( basically because of his laugh), Antonia and Richard are my favorite, and I now realize that that is over half of the remaining chefs. At least someone I like will win! here's my order of chefs: 1- Tiffany 2- Carla 3-Casey 4- Tiffani 5- Tre 6- Antonia ( I can't believe she smoked pot!) 7- Richard 8- Angelo 9- Dale 10- Fabio 11- Jamie 12- Marcel 13- Mike 6- Antonia ( I can't believe she smoked pot!)

Tom - I appreciate your thoughtfulness about future challenges of a similar nature - but I always seem to have something to say. You have always said it makes no difference when it comes to personality, defensive behavior, etc. The worst dish goes home. When you can't judge every dish to determine the worst because you didn't taste every dish, how can you send anyone home? And, as you've said a million times before, this is a cooking competition. How can you stay if you don't cook? It's completely unfair to the other legitimate competitors who put their blood, sweat, fingers and tears on the line and face the competition in a responsible way with honor and integrity. In the end it's your reputation on the line on national t.v. The chefs I know are in it for the love of food. They would no sooner compromise a colleague's opportunities for success than sabotage another's food. this is not Top Chef behavior.

Top chef I blame you for causing Spike to leave. There should never be a challenge set up where everyone doesn't have to participate. So clearly in this challenge it wasn't about what you made it was hedging enough so you didn't have to serve. Jamie has refused to participate in 50% of the challenges and she has not ben accountable for anything. This show is dead to me until Jamie is gone.

as a can't miss fan of the show from the first season, this last episode has left a bitter taste -- by far the worst episode churned out thus far. my disgust stems from jamie's situation. for the second time this season she was able to not submit a dish to the judges and did not receive any (on air) scrutiny. the appeal for top chef to me was that it was a cooking competition, but now, slowly, i see the integrity of that competition questioned. in an attempt to reinvent different challenges the show seems to be competing with the 56th season of survivor for ingenuity. in more than four decades, the superbowl and football seasons continue to be some of the most lucrative television in the world without any major alteration in the rules because people admire the competition on a level playing field. The change from TopChef to TopAdapt-to-this-week's-BS-challenge-so-maybe-you-won't-have-to-serve-that-POS-dish is unnerving. Stick to the basics that gained such a loyal following, cooking, Padma's cookbooks will still sell, trust me.

Yes I think Jaime should be held accountable for the fact that her dish wasn't strong enough to even be served??? How is it that she gets a free pass for the week because she refused to serve it. Not fair in my eyes. I liked Jaime in her previous season. This season however she seems like she would rather not be there. Jen was sent home the week that Jaime cut her finger leaving Jen to take care of everything herself. As Jaime came back with TWO whole stiches it wasn't fair to Jen. Jamie don't you think it's time to put up or shut-up and get out of the way so those who want to compete can do so without carrying you. I can only hope that Karma comes into to play soon for Jaime.

If they had forced Jamie to go up, they would have looked like they were trying to sabotage her by not giving her time to get her dish ready. The other team switched their order based on whose food was ready; it's good sportsmanship. Throughout Top Chef, the chefs who help their competitors because they want to win fairly look so much more classy than the ones who try to work an angle.

I'm not sure I understand the rationale of "immunity by avoidance", which is literally what Jamie pulled. It's a cooking competition - why should strategizing have any part in it? I'm not sure that it raises the stakes at all - if they're going head to head, then they need to be at their best anyway - Casey and Fabio would be a good example. You said it - Casey was solid, so she wasn't sent home. Good on Blaise for calling Jamie out. There's been 4 EC's and she's missed two, and two stronger chefs have gone home for in part not throwing her under the bus. I definitely think it's a lot fairer to taste everybody's dish.

Also didn't think it was worthy of JT to bring up mention of Angelo's "sabotaging" - it sounded like Spike's shrimp had a lot to do with it, and Angelo had no part in that. Plus, as you say, Spike should've stood firm. But still - bringing back an old storyline that made little sense last season and adds nothing really? Classy.

On a happy note - it looked like fantastic food tonight - this season has been awesome, and I would love to try almost all the dishes :D Happy holidays everyone!

I need to go back and rewatch the show again, because I was watching while doing something else, so I might not have been paying close enough attention. Was there a reason that Jamie didn't have to present her dish? Were the teams not even or did I miss a rule?

Jamie is a coward and deserves to be sent home for avoiding to present her dish twice. This is the 2nd contestant sent home because she's too much of a coward to compete

"It's a cooking competition. You didn't cook anything" Your words from a previous season Tom. So now twice this season a contestant advanced another week without presenting any food to the judges. First because of a cut finger, now because of a poorly designed challenge. And your response is 'perhaps, uh, maybe in the future, uh, I'm not sure,uh' Seriously? How can you have a challenge where you don't taste two of the dishes?

I get that there is strategy behind the challenge. And that it was up to the teams to decide who would be pitted against who for each point. But it was a little sad on the judges part to decide who would leave the competition based on whose dish they tasted.

Everyone is up for elimination throughout the whole competition. So the judges should taste everyone's food regardless on who gets pitted against who. They should have had a final round round and pitted the last two against one another. For an extra point/reward for the winning team. You all sent Sam home in season two for not cooking in the second to final episode. Jaime hasn't cooked for two out of the four episodes...

Jaime just seems pathetic and not worth being in the competition in the end. She got lucky this week, but I am still SO HAPPY Carla won!!

"I’m trying to think, for the future, about how better to structure the challenge to avoid another situation in which a competitor might elude possible elimination as Jamie did."

smart, cause little miss moody knickers is getting away with murder this season.

Did I misunderstand about Anthony Bourdain being a permanent judge ? So far he has only been there 50% of the time. A bit like Jamie. However, Anthony brings something to the program, unlike Jamie.

It does kind of bother me that a chef has now skated by without presenting any food in two challenges. By the same token, the chefs knew the rules of the challenge and should have made sure that Jamie presented her dish. It cost them dearly, because Casey's dish was strong and may have been able to beat one of the winning dishes from the other team. You could add some sort of element to any chefs that don't get to present their dish; whether it be by circumstance or if it is by strategy. I would do something like "Any chefs that don't present are all eligible for elimination, regardless if the other members of your team win or lose". So, after the competition is done, you ask all remaining chefs to present their dishes - whoever makes the worst dish joins the losing team at Judge's Table.

From what I remember, this show is called Top Chef. The contestants are suppose to COOK in challenges. In episode 2, I agree it wasn't completely "fair" to send Jamie home based on an injury. Also, Jen did state it didn't make an impact on the dish even though Jamie wasn't in the kitchen. But in this episode, Jamie refused to serve her dish in fear of being sent home. I have lost total respect of her as a professional chef and a contestant.

Love the show, always have... just found these blogs and I really appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts and the behind-the-scenes machinations at judges' table. I can't understand where all the commenters from previous posts get off questioning the judgment of food that they themselves did not taste. Calm down a bit people, it's just entertainment.

If you really want to know how to improve the challenge -- Have each team submit a written list of the order the dishes are to be served prior to getting out on the court instead of just having the call out who is going next once there. That way there would be no hemming & hawing and general unorganized chaos as they would have to stick to the pre-determined order or be DQ'd for that round. I usually respect your take a lot, but your suggestion this time that they team should have just called out Jamie is pretty lame. Review the tape again -- she was being very rude & stubborn about the entire thing. I don't think it is fair to require her teammates to have to create more conflict with her to try to force her to be a team player. The problem was Jamie and her attitude, not her teammates'. She created a terrible dish & used that fact to her advantage knowing that whether her team lost or won there was a good chance her dish wasn't going to even be judged. Blatantly unfair but the flaw was in the challenge itself, not the fact that Jamie exploited it for her own ends.

Dear Tom, Happy Holidays to you and the rest of Top Chef. I love this challenge. You did something similar with the Super Bowl but this was better because of the strategy. Jamie may have lucked out again but sooner or later, she will have to step up to the plate: then we shall see. I was sorry to see Spike go but you have to stand behind your dish. He didn't. He should have stood up to Angelo and Tiffany. The fact that he didn't says he doesn't have enough confidence in his cooking. His team should have stuck with their strategy. They might have done better. Oh, well......hindsight is 20-20. Happy New Year to you and yours.

That's two challenges Jamie has not had to present a dish. This is top chef correct? She refused to put her dish out, what's the team supposed to do, lose on purpose? You guys should have not let tre compete since he had immunity. Which has been done before..Kevin season 6

What has happened to my favorite experience while watching Top Chef and BravoTV ??? Wednesday's was always a must see TV day.

Bring back the Live Chat!!! The twitter, and Facebook crap is not the same... I emplore you to bring back MonicaB, MattyB and JohnnyB to stimulate discussions about the show, and with all the Live Chat fans coast to coast that you have alienated. Again, bring Live Chat back!!! And take into account what we, the viewers see.

With no Live Chat, and with Jen gone, Bravo is already on thin ice with me this season, what with casting for drama instead of cooking and quality food.

I will never enjoy any challenge where all the participants' food is not tasted/judged. Perhaps Mike had the best dish but it will never be known because it was never tasted. And it appears that Jamie has found the best way to advance in this competition--find methods to insure that her food is not tasted. I hope there are no challenges near any animals as I fear the next excuse would be "The dog ate my homework."

Why oh why would you design a challenge where not every member of the team needs to present their dish to be judged? All it would have taken is to say that every pair will compete, even if the team itself has already won or lost. You do realize that in the current rule set it would have been possible for 3 members of a 7 person team to not cook anything if one team won 4-0? That would have been nearly half the team with practical immunity from elimination. Who comes up with these challenges anyway?

First off - I was never more excited for a season of TC than I was for All-Stars. I thought it would be great. That being said, the last few weeks I have been thoroughly disappointed. I was a fan of Jen's (I think enough has been said about all that). I didn't have a problem with her being sent home if she actually had the worst dish. I have faith that the judges are impartial as possible. However, after this week, I find it just bogus. I'm not sure if the judges/producers think Jamie is good TV (she's not), or what the deal is. Either way, I'm not sure how someone can be sent home when not all dishes were tasted. Isn't the first rule of your judging rubric to go by TASTE? How can you go by taste and not taste all the dishes. This seems like a huge flaw in the planning of the challenge (which was otherwise enjoyable). Jamie once agains gets to slide by.

I, for one, am tired of her terrible attitude (injury aside). I've decided to stop watching the show until she gets sent home. Once that happens, I'm sure there will be cheers of joy all over. (PS - I find Eric Ripert's commentary on her insightful and also hilarious. "She should just go home". I agree Eric, I agree).

Again - the planning on these challenges, the lack of enforcing the same rules challenge to challenge has just proven to me what a biased competition this really is. I know I shouldn't be surprised, it's reality TV, but TC was my last hope! Farewell. I will be back once Jamie is gone (hopefully next week)!

Tom, This is a post directing more to the Top Chefs..I hope that is okay!

I have been a Top Chef fan since Season 1. I have loved every season and re-watch every episode again and again. I have never posted a comment before, but after last night's episode, I feel compelled to for the first time.

First, as Dale stated: Carla "Man" 'ed up! You sure did Carla and I am so impressed. In a split second, you must make a decision that will carry with you forever. In that moment you not only showed what strong determination you have but then to go on and win! This shows what a strong chef you are. Way to Go! Carla, you will never forget that moment in time.

Now, on to Angelo: I am not as outraged about the Angelo sabotage as you may think. Anyone who watched last season knows to never let Angelo's devilish fingers to touch any fellow chef's dish. Unfortunately, Spike and Tre did not view that season as closely as I did.

Jamie...wow! You know, I really loved her season and respected her as a female chef that could play (cook) with the baddest of boys. She handled herself really well in that season. Jamie...now...who is this person? She has come in talking a lot of trash, and yet when it comes to the cooking she cannot even complete challenges due to a minor cut. Again, she runs away from last night's challenge. If you are so insecure to run your mouth but yet run away from challenges every chance you get, why come on this season? I get that Jamie corrected her celery dish from season past, but this is not Top One-Dish Chef...this is Top Chef All-Stars.

I know that her team let her out of her rotation because they as a team really wanted the win. Individually, it was a fatal mistake to Spike; he got screwed every way he turned. This may be a game with a dozen challenges where chefs will have good days and bad. But what Jamie should realize is she has a career and a life after this. Her character decisions in this season will carry with viewers and customers long after these challenges end.

As a viewer, I cannot taste the food but I do see the heart and character of each chef. Fire within, determination to be the best they can be, and strong character are qualities that seperate the average from the great...the best. The way you present yourself is how people will value you...and Jamie, I am afraid this season and the way you handled yourself will live long after the Quick Fire buzzers end!

Thank you TC for letting me vent! SLA

Angelo knows exactly what he is doing. He is sabotaging other chefs.

Jamie know exactly what she is doing. She is slinking under the radar.

The other chefs are too smart for this. Tom, you are right. The other chefs have to reconcile their responsibility in letting it happen.

A better structure would be to take the line-ups in advance, as in baseball. It still allows the strategizing over how to set things, based on the planned menu and perceived strengths of the chefs, but it also avoids allowing chefs to hide from competition once things have gotten going.

I do not blame the show, but 5 episodes and Jaime has not had to present a dish in 2 of them. I feel like I am watching Survivor.

Jamie has been a dud this season. Jamie and Angelo should concentrate on the plate and not how to one-up the other chefs. Spike deserved to go since it was his idea to use "strategy", but Jamie has gotten away with just being on camera. Hopefully she will join Spike next week.

Jamie was on the losing team, she did not present a dish, she virtually hid from the competition....she should have been eliminated. This is not the first time she didn't participate and someone else went home.