The Celebrity Traitors ‘big dog theory’ explained and analysed

As a fan of the show, I initially had my doubts regarding the celebrity version of The Traitors. My expectation, influenced by the American iteration, was that the participants would be too self-absorbed to seriously engage with the game.

However, I couldn’t have been more mistaken—especially with the introduction of the ‘big dog theory’ in episode three proposed by Joe² (Marler and Wilkinson), showing a depth of strategy that elevates this version beyond the original.

Warning: Spoilers ahead for The Celebrity Traitors season 1

Unpacking the Big Dog Theory in The Celebrity Traitors

Former England rugby player Joe Marler and comedian Joe Wilkinson engaged in a discussion about which contestants might be the Traitors. Marler pointed towards the intellectual Stephen Fry, while Wilkinson astutely identified the legendary chat show host Jonathan Ross as a potential Traitor, cleverly camouflaged in plain sight.

Their dialogue progressed to consider who host Claudia (presumably aided by unseen producers) might select to ensure maximum entertainment value.

Stephen Fry and Jonathan Ross stand out as the most iconic figures in the castle. With their extensive careers in the spotlight, they hold considerable influence over the other contestants, albeit in different fashions. Ross’ affable demeanor often disguises his more cunning nature, as he adeptly persuaded a large group to move outside, thus facilitating Alan’s unnoticed approach to the poisoned lily, leading to Paloma’s demise. So far, he has instilled doubts in others without inciting any disputes.

In contrast, Fry’s sharp intellect helps others think critically, particularly during discussions at the roundtable. He hasn’t let emotions cloud his judgment, enabling him to clarify the rationale behind group decisions during votes. Both players lead the celebrity ranks, a dynamic that would never present itself in the original series where all contestants are strangers.

After discussing why Fry is more likely to be a Faithful, Marler introduced an intriguing concept:

“Perhaps Claudia has orchestrated a rivalry between the Traitor team, led by the dominant Jonathan, against the Faithful team helmed by the influential Stephen…she’s likely thinking, ‘Let’s see which team prevails’.”

I applauded at home—this time, the Faithful were absolutely on point.

Wilkinson suggested that Stephen is particularly skilled at “deciphering the code.” He diverges from typical contestants, opting not to rely on intuition. Instead, he frequently employs logic and skepticism to substantiate his views, providing others the liberty to defend their stances, significantly increasing his threat level in The Traitors.

So why hasn’t the deceitful team targeted him yet?

Strategizing with the Big Dog Theory

As you may know, Marler and Wilkinson introduced this theory during the roundtable discussion. Wilkinson concluded Jonathan was the likely culprit lurking in plain sight. However, this was predicated on his erroneous belief that Ross was the sole contestant ruthless enough to take out Paloma.

We, the viewers, know it was actually Alan Carr who made the final call (who sat with an air of contentment during the ordeal). Despite this, Wilkinson’s accusations prompted others to express their concerns regarding Ross, nearly leading to his elimination.

Ross narrowly escaped being voted out, with Tameka Empson ultimately taking the hit instead. However, his earlier promise of an alliance to Niko Omilana in the car has come back to haunt him. Personally, I think Ross actually forgot about that promise, as it was made prior to him being chosen as a Traitor.

Nevertheless, he ventured too aggressively on the defensive, leading to him being scrutinized by his peers…though Alan Carr and Cat Burns didn’t seem overly concerned.

The duo even had a moment post-roundtable where they confirmed their readiness to backstab Jonathan should the Faithful turn against him—a classic Traitors maneuver. We’ve often seen ‘leaders’ within a group blindsided, and Jonathan would likely be blindsided, too.

It seems increasingly probable that the Faithful may pursue that course of action, especially with Ruth Codd’s continued presence in the game. If Ruth lasts, it’s likely she’ll target Jonathan relentlessly, mimicking how we’ve observed Maddie pursue Wilfred and Jaz pursue Paul in previous seasons. His name will circulate continuously.

There exists the possibility for the team to eliminate Ruth as a bold double/triple bluff move. This option could appear so overt that it redirects suspicion away from Jonathan…or the Faithful could correctly interpret it as a strategic deception.

If Jonathan doesn’t make it through, that eliminates one formidable player. At that juncture, if I were Alan and Cat, I’d look to recruit Stephen Fry.

Why? Fry could either serve as a mastermind directing the Faithful’s focus elsewhere…or his attempts at persuasion might become questionable, making him an ideal scapegoat for the other two. Even if he chooses not to align with them, his vocal admissions could place him in the spotlight.

Marler didn’t overlook Fry as someone to keep an eye on; with his influential presence at the table, he will likely be revisited as contestant numbers dwindle. Eliminating Fry now, while he shows no inclinations towards the deceptive group, would be an ill-advised move.

Of course, this is merely entertaining speculation. Jonathan could very well be secure—the Faithful often have short memories. Regardless, the big dog theory illustrates that this cohort of contestants strategizes several steps ahead, generating compelling television.

…And the comedic moments featuring screen darling Celia Imrie certainly contribute to this year’s must-see TV for The Celebrity Traitors!