S42.E13: It Comes Down to This

[iMonrey]

Quote

Best: Knowing I don't have to hear Jonathan say, "Mr. Jeff" again, at least until he plays in a returnee season because you know they're bringing that mfer back.

And am I going too far to suggest there may be a bit of misogyny to Jonathan's character? Maryanne clearly deserved the win over Mike and he was the only one who couldn't bring himself to vote for her. That and the way he tended to talk down to other women just rubbed me the wrong way.

[Chicago Redshirt]

4 minutes ago, iMonrey said:

And am I going too far to suggest there may be a bit of misogyny to Jonathan's character? Maryanne clearly deserved the win over Mike and he was the only one who couldn't bring himself to vote for her. That and the way he tended to talk down to other women just rubbed me the wrong way.

I don't think his vote for Mike is evidence of misogyny. There are lots of reasons one might vote for Mike that have nothing to do with Maryanne's being a woman, or Maryanne in general. Mike has more stuff on his Survivor resume than the others. Jonathan and Mike were close, and I'm pretty sure that Mike would have had Jonathan's jury vote against any possible field of the post-merge tribe. And Jonathan was shown to have been miffed by Maryanne a couple times, so I don't know if Jonathan would have voted for her against most fields.

I think that we were shown enough examples of Jonathan mansplaining that it's a strong inference that he has a degree of misogyny, though.  

[Haleth]

I was surprised it was a 7-1 vote. I don’t think Mike played a bad game, although he was definitely a legend in his own mind, thinking he was in control and a shoe in for the win. Still I thought it would be a closer vote. Maybe it would have been without Maryanne’s coup de grâce. 

[GenerationX]

I have not felt this disappointed to see someone on the jury (Omar) since the Amazon (Rob C).  In both cases, the players were too strategically ahead of everyone else to be taken to the finals.  It's kind of a flaw in the game that it rewards lesser players with making the finals.

The jury questioning was, as Probst rightly mentioned, one of the best I've seen in 42 seasons.

The post-decision discussion was a complete mess.  Every question was designed to top the previous question in eliciting a response praising Probst for his idiotic advantages/twists indulgence. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, fishcakes said:

I've been neutral on Lindsay all along, but she lost me this episode. First that dumb argument with Jonathan where she was trying to claim he betrayed their alliance by not telling her Omar was the target. Jonathan's repeated, "you voted for me, Lindsay" was pure smug, but he wasn't wrong. So she loses points for being an idiot, but mostly for making me side with Jonathan. Then her attempt to guilt Mike into saving her, with the tears and the, "I just don't want to go out that way." That way meaning ... by being voted out? Not really the injustice she was was trying to make it seem.

Lindsay's twisted logic in that firelit post-Omar vote conversation was a low point, for sure, but I still give her a pass because 1: she was probably feeling a bit desperate at the unexpected loss of her ally and was scrambling for something to say, and 2: Jonathan was being a dick to her both before and during that moment and I like Lindsay a lot better, so I'm biased XD.

I definitely give her a pass on the Mike conversation, though. Right before that, she flat-out told us that she was going to work him as hard as she could to guilt him into giving her his idol as he hinted he might do. So a lot of that was for Mike's benefit and not necessarily what she actually believed. And I give her a pass for crying as well, because I could see it being easy to get so into your argument that the emotion becomes real and you find yourself reacting more than you expected. And I don't doubt that she was feeling overwhelmed because she could see her chances dwindling and so she couldn't hold it in. Plus it was Mike, who despite his "integrity" flaws seems like the kind of guy you could feel vulnerable/comfortable enough with to let out some tears.

1 hour ago, fishcakes said:

Speaking of the Lindsay/Jonathan argument, I notice he called her aggressive the same way he called Drea aggressive when she talked about her feelings at the TC where Tori was voted out. Based on one of Drea's exit interviews he apparently also called her aggressive when she asked him about the fishing net. So for Jonathan, woman speaking = women being aggressive.

Yeah. This is the kind of thing that makes me give Lindsay (or any woman), a pass when it comes to conflicting with Jonathan. Reminds me of old movies where a man's response to a woman speaking out was "you're being a child". God only knows what other condescending, "you're not listening to me", "these girls just won't stop talking" moments there were.

I have never used the phrase "give [someone] a pass" more than this moment.

[HurricaneVal]

Maryanne deserved the win.  She had game.  Her game wasn't a visible game until the end, and that was on purpose.  I think she surfed the wave until the merge, then set her sights on the endgame and jury management, and straight up owned both of those elements.  The only other person who was working those elements was Omar, and she orchestrated his ouster with her extra vote.  The Omar blindside wasn't going happen otherwise.  Mike and Jonathon were too fixated on Romeo and Lindsey was too fixated on Jonathon.  If she hadn't pulled Romeo over from his, what, Jonathon vote, and clinched the deal with her extra vote, Omar very well may be a millionaire today instead of her. 

Convincing and manipulating Mike into playing his immunity idol for her was also masterful.  It ultimately didn't mean much in the end, but it ensured she didn't have to risk Mike's ping-ponging game play taking a swerve and bestowing immunity on Lindsey--which would ruin all of Maryanne's carefully laid plans.  Maryanne worked it.  She was just so sweet while she was accomplishing all her machinations that you just didn't see it.  We all noticed--and admired--Sandra's machinations, because Sandra didn't bother with working from behind a smoke screen.  Maryanne had to be stealthy, she had to keep it on the down low, because her strategic play was counter to her sweet giggly girl social game.  And she pulled it off!

Her pre-FTC jury management was very good, but holy cow, she ran rings around both Mike and Romeo at FTC.  Then she pulled out a truly hidden, hidden immunity idol and....yeah.  I think prior to that she still had the edge on Mike, but after that moment?  *BAM*  Maryanne had it in the bag.  (Much like her idol....  😆)

Man, Mike just really crashed and burned at FTC.  His slow realization that the game he thought he was playing in his head was very different from the game he actually played was hard to watch.  I mean, he just crumbled before our very eyes.  Romeo actually had a stronger FTC than I expected.  He wasn't going to win, that was painfully clear, but he gave a good narrative about how he had to adapt and change his game when circumstances and game flow put him on the bottom and even side tracked him after the merge.  I liked that he recognized he was on the "wrong" side of every vote, and spun that to make it out like he was throwing hinky votes to break up the flow and cause a little chaos.  I'm not 100% sure that's 100% true, I think a lot of the time Romeo was sincerely clueless stumbled or was manipulated into the wrong vote, but it was a good spin.  Nice try!  I believe his emotional speech about the emotional growth he had during the course of the game and enduring to the end and having that experience give him the strength to live his life openly once he returns to the world was worth more to him than winning.  I think he was sincere, and I just wanted to hug him.  After he showered and shaved.  And then very carefully, because that boy is about to snap like a twig.

Good season.  It rose above all the unnecessary gimmicks and twists.

[paul4295]

The "reunion" is so much better without the distraction of the studio audience.  Instead of wedding proposals and inane comments from past contestants/celebrities/random audience members, we get actual discussion about the season.  I do, however, think they should have the non-jury members come back.  It wouldn't be that hard to do, and they sometimes have interesting things to say.  And I still think it's fun when Jeff picks on the first player who got voted out.

[Taeolas]

I think Marianne bringing Romeo in for her Omar ouster was also part of her plans, or at least it became part of her overall plans. On the one hand, Romeo was her only choice given how everyone else was locked into their decisions. But it also gave Romeo a little boost, making him realize he was still part of the game and still had some power, and that others were willing to ally with him. 

So when we got to Final 4 and Romeo won the immunity, there were logical reasons for picking Marianne, but there was also a degree of social payback involved as well that may have affected his choice. Mike and Jon all but ignored him through the game, but Marianne was willing to reach for him and to bring him into her plotting; so even though bringing her along was dangerous, it was also a bit of a thank you payback for the earlier consideration. 

Romeo winning the final challenge was probably the second best result Marianne could have hoped for (after winning it herself). Mike or Jon winning would have locked the other in, and lead to a Marianne and Romeo firemaking challenge. And Marianne probably would have been able to beat Romeo, it probably would have been challenging. (there's a lesser chance that Mike would keep Romeo and send Jon to the fire against Marianne; but I doubt Jon would send Mike).

Marianne in the Final 3 against any of the others was probably a good lock for her, especially with her final HII bombshell. If she wasn't in the F3, it's hard to say who would have it; Probably Mike with a narrow win over Jon (5-3 maybe), probably based on who beat Marianne in the end. 

[30 Helens]

5 hours ago, JudyObscure said:

What bothers me is that either one of them could have won at the end if he had a better narrative or was better at sales then Maryanne.

I never thought the game should be won only by the Ozzies who were fabulous at challenges or that people should be out of the running for lying, but now it seems like challenge wins mean nothing at all and lying is a requirement.  If the game has come down to nothing at all but being the best talker at final tribal then there's no point in any other aspect of the game. No reason to win challenges other than immunity at that particular tribal, no reason to be a nice person, no reason to do any work around the camp, just lay low till the end and sell a story you might have worked on before the show. 

Challenge wins will always mean something, as long as there are challenges. But for too long, they have been overvalued in terms of defining a worthy winner. I’m glad to see more emphasis being placed on other parts of the game.

Lying has always been a requirement. Has anyone ever won without lying to several people along the way? They’re just more upfront about it now, and thank god. There was nothing more annoying than listening to people’s speeches about “integrity” (although I think Mike may have missed that memo). Being nice, being productive— these will always be part of a good social game.

To be a good salesperson, you need something good to sell. Mary Anne was able to sell a stealth strategic game with a little bit of flash because that’s the game she crafted. True, she wouldn’t have gotten the win without making a good pitch, but that is also part of the game— and it’s an aspect that many potential winners have underestimated, to their detriment. 

So again, good on MaryAnne. And good on the jurors for appreciating the many things she did right, both large and small. While a part of me will always miss the fun of bitter jurors of years past (“My question is: How dare you!”), I think the recent change in jurors’ ability to look past themselves and evaluate the whole of a person’s game is the best part of the game’s evolution, not Jeff’s curveballs and tricks.

[Haleth]

I like Lindsey and had some hopes she’d win but her confrontation with Jonathan was pretty cringy. She was all “Why didn’t you tell me your plan?  We’re allies!” right after trying to vote him out. Hey, Linz, I think voting out your “ally” means you really can’t be indignant about not being in the loop. You can’t have it both ways, hon. 

[meep.meep]

I don't know why Lyndsey didn't ask Jonathan if he'd ever voted for her?

They got up to the top of the hill and showed the ball machines and I said, this might be one that Romeo could actually win.  My wish, along with getting rid of half of the advantages and idols, is that they would have more variety in the challenges so that the smaller people weren't always at a disadvantage.  If they'd used this challenge earlier in the season, someone like Hai or Drea might have lasted longer, for example.

Congrats to MaryAnn!

[JudyObscure]

4 hours ago, tracyscott76 said:

Maryanne never made an oath to never vote out a Black person. She said she couldn't do it at that specific tribal council (where Tori was voted out) because seeing the jury to that point both being Black people evoked strong, outside-the-game feelings in that moment, to the extent that she couldn't bring herself to vote for Drea and have African Americans go out back to back to back. Neither she nor Drea ever stated that they would never vote for another black person again.

Maryanne's exact words, with extreme emphasis,  were this: 

"I can't write Drea's name down, I literally can't. If I write Drea's name down it means I'm part of the perpetuating problem. Morally, I cannot write her name down."

If she was adding qualifiers in her head then they must have been along the lines of fingers crossed behind her back.  I can't see  how if it was morally wrong one day it would be fine the next or that the perpetuating problem only existed in relation to who was voted out the day before.   

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, meep.meep said:

I don't know why Lyndsey didn't ask Jonathan if he'd ever voted for her?

Possibly because at that point, the only vote Lindsay had received all game was during the Lydia vote-out, and it came from Rocksroy. Back then the four Takus were still strongly aligned, so I'm sure she knew it wasn't Jonathan who voted for her.

(I looked up the voting history; I haven't been paying that close attention to Lindsay lol)

[jaigurudeva]

I'm so glad Maryanne won! She and Lyndsey were my favorites to win in the final 5, though it makes sense for Maryanne to get Lyndsey out when she did to secure her win. She played it perfectly, a great mix of social game and strategy to make it to the end and win over the jury.

This is the second time Jonathan has used tone policing to shut down women in a conversation when they are rightfully agitated. He's never faulted any of his bros for being too "aggressive," that's just being a macho alpha. Like tracyscott76 said, men have been putting women down for being "too emotional" and "hysterical" for centuries.

[JudyObscure]

46 minutes ago, 30 Helens said:

Challenge wins will always mean something, as long as there are challenges. But for too long, they have been overvalued in terms of defining a worthy winner. I’m glad to see more emphasis being placed on other parts of the game.

Lying has always been a requirement. Has anyone ever won without lying to several people along the way? They’re just more upfront about it now, and thank god. There was nothing more annoying than listening to people’s speeches about “integrity” (although I think Mike may have missed that memo). Being nice, being productive— these will always be part of a good social game.

To be a good salesperson, you need something good to sell. Mary Anne was able to sell a stealth strategic game with a little bit of flash because that’s the game she crafted. True, she wouldn’t have gotten the win without making a good pitch, but that is also part of the game— and it’s an aspect that many potential winners have underestimated, to their detriment. 

So again, good on MaryAnne. And good on the jurors for appreciating the many things she did right, both large and small. While a part of me will always miss the fun of bitter jurors of years past (“My question is: How dare you!”), I think the recent change in jurors’ ability to look past themselves and evaluate the whole of a person’s game is the best part of the game’s evolution, not Jeff’s curveballs and tricks.

I agree with all this, it's just seems to me the jury speech has gradually become more heavily weighted, so that the other things barley matter at all now.  When the jury first questioned Maryanne I didn't feel like they had her as the winner at all, but while she was talking you could see their faces light up, Hai's in particular, and I knew she had won. 

I honestly thought Romeo had a chance while he was talking and if he had, based just on his good sales pitch?  Well, just not right.

Maryanne was my favorite from the start so I'm glad she won, just didn't like the whole jury thing.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, JudyObscure said:

Maryanne's exact words, with extreme emphasis,  were this: 

"I can't write Drea's name down, I literally can't. If I write Drea's name down it means I'm part of the perpetuating problem. Morally, I cannot write her name down."

If she was adding qualifiers in her head then they must have been along the lines of fingers crossed behind her back.  I can't see  how if it was morally wrong one day it would be fine the next or that the perpetuating problem only existed in relation to who was voted out the day before.   

There is literally nothing in that statement from Maryanne that constitutes an oath to never vote out a Black person again, or even to never vote out Drea specifically. There are ample explanations of Drea's and Maryanne's thinking at that moment in that episode's thread (and possibly in their exit interviews) so I'm not going to hash it all out here again, but simply put, this quote leaves out the context of the situation and what caused Maryanne's reaction to that specific situation. If her voting out Drea was some kind of betrayal of a solemn oath, you'd think Drea would have had something negative to say about it in her exit interviews.

[Chicago Redshirt]

6 minutes ago, Brendan Birch said:

Did he?  Most of Mike's game involved getting led around the nose by others -- first by Daniel, then by Hai, then by Omar (with an assist from Lindsay).  If I squint, I could maybe give him credit for Drea's boot, but even that was lucky for him since he only pulled it off because Omar opened his mouth to him about Drea's Knowledge is Power advantage.  I can't see a single thing he did to help himself other than find an idol, win the F5 Immunity Challenge, and win the fire-making challenge.  He was pretty hapless otherwise.

That said, still a better resume than Romeo's, I guess.  But better than Maryanne's?  Not a chance.

I guess it depends on how you constitute a "resume." 

I give Maryanne full credit for her game. But it doesn't have much in the way of specific accomplishments.

Here's how I see their respective resumes:

Mike 

Individual immunity wins: 1, which led to challenge monster and potential FTC threat Lindsay to get booted.

Role in booting other post-Merge Survivors: 4, Mike was a driving force behind getting Chanelle, Rocksroy, Hai and Drea booted.

Social game: Seemingly on good terms with everyone for most of the game.

Other significant actions/attributes: Protecting his idol from the knowledge is power threat, being a friendly guy, built the shelter

Maryanne

Individual immunity wins: 0

Role in booting other post-Merge Survivors: 2 - she was instrumental in getting rid of Omar and Tori.

Social game: Irked several Survivors, had to admit her social game was sloppy/messy.

Other significant actions/attributes: Found a HII and kept it secret; resisted inclination to wear her heart on her sleeve.

Romeo

Individual immunity wins: 1

Role in booting other post-Merge Survivors: 1 - teamed up with Maryanne to get rid of Omar

Social game: He basically had no allies after the merge.

Other significant actions/attributes: Stole rice, was on the outside of the vote in most cases, being the plan b of boots.

[Whimsy]

This isn’t the thread to talk about things that happened in other episodes (specifically, things that happened in episode 9). Posts not talking about THIS episode will be removed. 

[AntFTW]

22 minutes ago, Chicago Redshirt said:

Other significant actions/attributes: Found a HII and kept it secret

I would rephrase to "...and convinced someone else to play their idol for her."

Keeping it a secret is not that significant... well, maybe for Maryanne it is.

[eel21788]

17 hours ago, Lantern7 said:

Anyone else think Romeo's final Immunity win is this generation's Lil Morris beating Jon on Day 38 of S7? Of course, I don't think there's much in the way of strategy when it comes to the ball machine (for lack of a better term). Just make sure you space your balls out (*snicker*) and stop their motion before removal and reinsertion (*chortle*). 

I do wonder if it would make any difference if they were allowed to use both hands. It seems as though being able to use both hands simultaneously would be more of a distraction, and the game would end even faster.

[After7Only]

9 hours ago, JudyObscure said:

Maryanne called it herself when she said she knew she could "close the deal."  I said Maryanne would win after she made her speech about what it meant to have black people seen winning Survivor when Tori was evicted.  Maryanne showed her seminary student chops with that mini-sermon, never mind that it was something said a thousand times during the last two years and probably used by her in student-sermons, and never mind that a few days later she went back on her oath to never vote out a black person and voted out Drea.

I didn't see seminary student at all.   A mini-sermon would have been more of Mike's pitch, focusing on being honorable and his comments after he lost about Maryanne doing "good things" with the prize.    Maryanne stuck to actual facts of her personal gameplay with specific examples.  I don't think she mentioned the prize money or what she might do with it at all.     If seminary school doesn't work out, she'd make a pretty good lawyer.    

[DEL901]

Rewatching the tribal.   When Jonathan confronts Mike about needing to own his deceit, I think he was trying to coach him to adjust how he was answering.   And re Jonathan, he is very religious and performing service is meaningful to him….I wonder if his church influences how he sometimes treats the women?   In my sister’s church, the men are in charge. Period.  And good for Romeo learning to swim and overcoming his fear of heights for the show   

And finally, a big woo hoo to MaryAnne.  I was hoping she was playing all along. In an EW article, she admits when she was crying about sitting out over rice, she cried as a strategy.  She was smart and social, competent at challenges and more strategic than anyone but Omar knew.  

[eel21788]

17 hours ago, Brendan Birch said:

Earl, Todd, and Sarah never won challenges in, respectively, Fiji, China, and Game Changers.

Tina Wesson also only won one reward challenge that let her live chat with her boyfriend with Yahoo messenger. It really didn't give her any advantage in the game such as immunity or fortification with food. 

[Guest]

36 minutes ago, AntFTW said:

I would rephrase to "...and convinced someone else to play their idol for her."

Keeping it a secret is not that significant... well, maybe for Maryanne it is.

Considering the way everyone else was spilling their guts about their various advantages, often to their detriment, I'd say keeping her idol a secret was significant.

[DEL901]

Survivor Canadian tally

Season 39, 60 year old Tom landed on the wrong side of the numbers in a tribal swap and was the 5th voted out   

Season 41, Erika won

Season 42, Drea (From Texas, lives in Montreal) 7th, Omar 6th, MaryAnne won

No wonder there are no Canucks next season…but I’ll still watch.

2 minutes ago, tracyscott76 said:

Considering the way everyone else was spilling their guts about their various advantages, often to their detriment, I'd say keeping her idol a secret was significant.

Even the Idol Nullifier which was never played was known to a number of people.  

[eel21788]

14 hours ago, GaT said:

I'm so glad nobody voted for Romeo

I'm also glad that Mike won the fire-making challenge. Jonathan learned he wasn't as unbeatable as he thought he was, and Mike learned that he wasn't as likeable as he thought he was. That was poetic justice.

[JudyObscure]

38 minutes ago, After7Only said:

I didn't see seminary student at all.   A mini-sermon would have been more of Mike's pitch, focusing on being honorable and his comments after he lost about Maryanne doing "good things" with the prize.    Maryanne stuck to actual facts of her personal gameplay with specific examples.  I don't think she mentioned the prize money or what she might do with it at all.     If seminary school doesn't work out, she'd make a pretty good lawyer.    

Oh, sorry,  I was talking about what she said in another episode.   Last night, at final tribal, I agree, she sounded more like a lawyer. 

Edited May 26, 2022 by JudyObscure

[eel21788]

16 hours ago, eskimo said:

Hey, does anybody happen to know how long Mike's been waiting for this?  

Did you know he is 57 years old?

[violet and green]

7 minutes ago, eel21788 said:

Did you know he is 57 years old?

He kept repeating it because it is significant.

The cast was, as usual, mostly young. As usual, the middle-aged people were voted out earlier. You could hardly not notice you were the oldest person left there, and parts of your body would let you know sleeping in those conditions anyway.

[peachmangosteen]

Seeing Jonathan shot down twice was worth the price of admission. Such fun! 

[30 Helens]

3 hours ago, JudyObscure said:

I agree with all this, it's just seems to me the jury speech has gradually become more heavily weighted, so that the other things barley matter at all now.  When the jury first questioned Maryanne I didn't feel like they had her as the winner at all, but while she was talking you could see their faces light up, Hai's in particular, and I knew she had won. 

I honestly thought Romeo had a chance while he was talking and if he had, based just on his good sales pitch?  Well, just not right.

Maryanne was my favorite from the start so I'm glad she won, just didn't like the whole jury thing.

I think they may just be showing more of the final TC than before? (Which may make sense, since they no longer have to save time for 8-year-old audience prognosticators and the like.) I’m not sure the jurors were placing more weight on the jury speeches as much as they needed the speeches to go a certain way in order to secure a vote.

Pre-TC, some of them specifically said they wanted MaryAnne to give them a good reason to vote for her. They also said they needed Mike to own his game. I got the impression they were leaning toward Mike, but liked MaryAnne more, and if she could give them some persuasive info, they would be happy to be swayed. Bottom line, she won by giving them what they needed. Mike lost by not giving them what they needed. Fair enough, I think. 

And I don’t think Romeo ever had a chance, no matter what he said. He didn’t have enough to sell.

1 hour ago, AntFTW said:

I would rephrase to "...and convinced someone else to play their idol for her."

Keeping it a secret is not that significant... well, maybe for Maryanne it is.

Keeping a secret in Survivor should not be significant… yet, why do so many fail to do it? So yeah, I think it is. Convincing Mike to play her idol for her was also a great move she could have added to her resume. She didn’t need it, but it kept him from playing it on Lindsay or anyone else, so it gave her control.

I would also add that, in comparing MaryAnne’s resume to Mike’s, the fact that she made her moves later in the game should not be discounted. Some may not think that’s fair, but it’s a strategy. There is such a thing as recency bias, and MaryAnne is smart enough to know and capitalize on that.

[eel21788]

2 hours ago, Chicago Redshirt said:

Here's how I see their respective resumes:

Mike Other significant actions/attributes: Protecting his idol from the knowledge is power threat

I really attribute that to Omer, not Mike.

[DEL901]

2 hours ago, Brendan Birch said:

It was obvious that Romeo was never really in it.  But the points he could make, he made very well.  The jury even seemed to understand, which they should have, knowing it was their own gameplay that left him in the position that he was.  A few of them even seemed to sympathize with him, at least a bit.

Still was obvious that he was likely not getting a vote for them, though.

He ended on a good note considering the cards he was dealt and can leave with his head held high.  

I don’t know if Mike ever got that they weren’t criticizing him for lying, they were criticizing him for not owning up to the fact that his “integrity“ was partially game play.  All he had to do was say that was part of his strategy but he just couldn’t see that.  

Edited May 27, 2022 by DEL901

[Chicago Redshirt]

2 hours ago, 30 Helens said:

Keeping a secret in Survivor should not be significant… yet, why do so many fail to do it? So yeah, I think it is. Convincing Mike to play her idol for her was also a great move she could have added to her resume. She didn’t need it, but it kept him from playing it on Lindsay or anyone else, so it gave her control.

I would also add that, in comparing MaryAnne’s resume to Mike’s, the fact that she made her moves later in the game should not be discounted. Some may not think that’s fair, but it’s a strategy. There is such a thing as recency bias, and MaryAnne is smart enough to know and capitalize on that.

Yeah, there's something to be said for other than winning Individual Immunity, Mike hadn't really done much of note in recent episodes. And Maryanne had done a great endgame. But for my money, her endgame was not really one that shows up on a traditional resume.

1 hour ago, eel21788 said:

I really attribute that to Omer, not Mike.

Obviously, Omar made it happen. But Mike got to take the credit (at least initially) with the jury when he got to look somewhat defeated and then be like, no idol here! And there was of course something that Mike brought to the table that made Omar want to give him that information and put him in that position.

[jsm1125]

I generally like Hai, but was Romeo lying about not voting for him at the Chanelle boot really gaslighting?

[ICantDoThatDave]

7 hours ago, 30 Helens said:

But for too long, they have been overvalued in terms of defining a worthy winner. I’m glad to see more emphasis being placed on other parts of the game.

I'm not sure I agree, but I am open to being shown differently.  How often in the past has a winner who was a "challenge beast" actually won simply due to being a challenge beast?  My recollection is that "winning at least one challenge" has been a fairly important part of former resumes, but I don't recall that being anyone's, ever, entire reason for being a "worthy winner".  It may have happened once before & I'm just not remembering, but that certainly doesn't mean it's ever been a point of emphasis.

As shown in this season: I don't think Lindsay or Jonathan could have won based solely on "I won a bunch of challenges".  Even if either had won many more challenges than they did.

[txvoodoo]

22 hours ago, Brendan Birch said:

Maryanne was in no way "undeserving."  As was stated by many last week, she played her game.  If the beef one has against her win is that she didn't make any big, flashy moves, she never had a reason to.  She also didn't win challenges, because very few of them were tailored that she could.  Between her small frame and low muscular strength, it was highly unlikely that she would win any challenges.

As for "luck," sure.  Everyone who plays has luck, both good and bad.  Maryanne didn't win only on luck, though.  No one who's ever won this game has relied solely on luck to get there.

Agree 100%.

Half the battle in winning Survivor is figuring out which kind of games works best for you, and playing it all the way through. How many times have we seen people get knocked out because they start to believe their own hype that they have perpetrated themselves?

Maryanne knows who she is and knows her own skillset, and she used it perfectly.

And with regards to her size, that really came home to me on the bit where they had to go over that bridge with the circular spaced out tile-thingies. It almost seemed even to make her do it - she could barely stretch that far because her limbs just weren't long enough! 

[LadyChatts]

Not sure if anyone's mentioned it, but is this the first time in a while that we haven't had a live tribal, where everyone gets out of their seats and starts whispering to each other?

[SVNBob]

On 5/25/2022 at 11:13 PM, DEL901 said:

Canadian women = 2. :)

Canadian Women Of Color = 2.  And I believe the first time 2 women of color (regardless of citizenship) have won back to back.

On 5/25/2022 at 11:14 PM, Nashville said:

One last lingering question: is Maryanne the first person to win the season without ever winning a single challenge?

[Taeolas]

13 hours ago, DEL901 said:

Survivor Canadian tally

No wonder there are no Canucks next season…but I’ll still watch.

Even the Idol Nullifier which was never played was known to a number of people.  

Don't worry, we're just shifting our focus and going after Tough as Nails next. :) 

12 hours ago, 30 Helens said:

Keeping a secret in Survivor should not be significant… yet, why do so many fail to do it? So yeah, I think it is. Convincing Mike to play her idol for her was also a great move she could have added to her resume. She didn’t need it, but it kept him from playing it on Lindsay or anyone else, so it gave her control.

Keeping advantages and idols a secret SHOULD be the default for players. But I can also understand why you tell that you have them as well. Alliance building is important in this game, pretty much since Survivor 1. One way to build an alliance is to show you are strong at Challenges, especially in the early game when you want you and your allies to not be voted out, and it's more Tribe vs Tribe. 

But the other way to build alliances is to show you have another edge; and advantages and immunity idols are the currency of those edges. If you're trying to convince Jack and Jill to vote with you, then showing you have an extra vote or an immunity idol or other advantages is away to convince them to ally with you. Thus the secrets get out and become part of the strategies people have to work around. 

That said, later in the game when it's more individual, keeping those advantages secret is more important. When Marianne got her idol it would have been a tough call; it was on the edge when showing she had it might have been good for alliance building; but it was also a good time to keep it completely secret and hold for the blindside. Clearly Marianne felt her position was strong enough she didn't need to use it for alliance building, and it served its greater purpose in the FTC reveal for the win.

[peachmangosteen]

11 hours ago, jsm1125 said:

I generally like Hai, but was Romeo lying about not voting for him at the Chanelle boot really gaslighting?

No. Hai really gets so offended when people play the game lol.

[Lamb18]

6 hours ago, LadyChatts said:

Not sure if anyone's mentioned it, but is this the first time in a while that we haven't had a live tribal, where everyone gets out of their seats and starts whispering to each other?

Yes, I noticed they hardly did that at all this season.

[Ms Blue Jay]

Hai explained perfectly well how it was gaslighting in this interview.

https://ew.com/tv/survivor-42-hai-giang-interview/

When you know that something occurred, and you want the other person to admit it, but they swear up and down that it didn't, and you're crazy, and you're imagining things, yes, that's gaslighting.  Yes, it's also a lie, but I don't think it's fair to dismiss Hai's term just because it's maybe too fancy or something.  I think it works.

Quote

t's interesting because you took your blindside so well but got really up in arms about that one stray insignificant vote that Romeo put on you a few Tribals back. Why get so upset there?

I love Romeo today, but he really played a game tied to his religion. And as someone who is an atheist, I came out there saying that no one is going to use their personal beliefs to persuade me. And when I confronted Romeo about the information being relayed back to Chanelle, he was swearing up and down on his faith that he did not tell Chanelle this information. Same with that night. I asked him straight up. I'm like, "Did you vote for me?" "No, Hai. I swear on my creator. I did not vote for you."

I took that very personally. I'm like, "Don't do that. Don't use religious whatever to persuade me because I don't buy it, first of all. And second of all, it's really out of bounds." So that was part of where my intense reaction was coming from because I felt as though people were trying to use their personal beliefs to gaslight me. And that is something that I did not appreciate.

Edited May 27, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[Tsunami1981]

I love Maryanne. She's super sweet and a really great person, but I thought Mike deserved to win. I don't know, it seems things have changed. It used to be about whoever played the best game. It was more about respect than likability. Manipulation is part of the game of Survivor. 

There was a lot less backbiting and meanness this season, so there's something to be said for that. Survivor is definitely evolving. 

Edited May 27, 2022 by Tsunami1982

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

Hai explained perfectly well how it was gaslighting in this interview.

https://ew.com/tv/survivor-42-hai-giang-interview/

When you know something is true, and you want the other person to admit it, but they swear up and down that it's not, and you're crazy, and you're imagining things, yes, that's gaslighting.  Yes, it's also a lie, but I don't think it's fair to dismiss Hai's term just because it's maybe too fancy or something.  I think it works.

Romeo's use of religion to back up his lie isn't great (though not much different than swearing on a family member's life), but this still seems like kind of a stretch to be considered gaslighting. Gaslighting usually involves a drawn out period of time and is much more complicated, psychological, and insidious than simply denying that you voted for someone on Survivor. So if Hai wants to call it gaslighting, fine, but I think Romeo's position that it wasn't gaslighting but just a lie is perfectly defensible. 

Edited May 27, 2022 by tracyscott76
then vs than

[DEL901]

15 minutes ago, Tsunami1982 said:

I love Maryanne. She's super sweet and a really great person, but I thought Mike deserved to win. I don't know, it seems things have changed. It used to be, whoever played the best game. It was more about respect than likability. Manipulation is part of the game of Survivor. 

There was a lot less backbiting and meanness this season, so there's something to be said for that. Survivor is definitely evolving. 

I don’t think the problem they had with Mike were lies or manipulation.  I think the problem was that he didn’t own it or explain how he lied or manipulated as a part of his strategy.   He started FTC by claiming he never lied except to Rocksroy.   

MaryAnne otoh, explained her strategy clearly and owned her actions.  

[Angeltoes]

I got tired of many on the jury with their over the top reactions to things.  Tori with her mouth hanging open and the exaggerated gasps of surprise from others.  They came across as a bunch of junior high kids looking for attention.   I wouldn't be surprised if production eggs this on but it needs to stop.  The jury is supposed to watch and listen like flies on the wall and not wrestle for the spotlight.

[HurricaneVal]

8 hours ago, LadyChatts said:

Not sure if anyone's mentioned it, but is this the first time in a while that we haven't had a live tribal, where everyone gets out of their seats and starts whispering to each other?

Yet another reason why this season was so good!

[Taeolas]

So another thought; judging from this thread, it seems everyone seems to like the instant-reveal vs drawing it out to the LA Studio audience. And I do agree with that somewhat. 

But I do wonder if it may be a bit better to have a slight draw out. Do the voting as normal, and then give everyone a day break. Let the final three clean up a bit, let the moments sink in, let production do some more reaction footage filming.

Then call everyone back to the Council set the next evening and do the reveal then and there and continue like we had this time. 

Watching the finale, one of the main thoughts I had is how utterly exhausted everyone must have been. Not to mention how eager the Final 3 were to get off the set and get a proper shower/bath and clean clothes.... and then Jeff comes out and basically says "You gotta stick around for a few more hours, but we'll give you pizza.... and we'll tell you who won." Kudos to the Final 3, because at that point (especially if I were someone like Romeo who probably knew he hadn't won), I would probably have been completely checked out once the vote happened and not ready to chat for hours longer. 

[Ms Blue Jay]

3 hours ago, tracyscott76 said:

Romeo's use of religion to back up his lie isn't great (though not much different than swearing on a family member's life), but this still seems like kind of a stretch to be considered gaslighting. Gaslighting usually involves a drawn out period of time and is much more complicated, psychological, and insidious than simply denying that you voted for someone on Survivor. So if Hai wants to call it gaslighting, fine, but I think Romeo's position that it wasn't gaslighting but just a lie is perfectly defensible. 

How was that Romeo's position?  He admitted it straight up at Tribal Council.

Hai:  You gaslighted me about that vote.
Romeo:  Yes, I did, because you replaced me as Drea's #1 and I didn't understand why.  I'm sorry.
Hai:  Thank you for admitting that.

Here's the clip

Edited May 27, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay