Most undeserving winner of all time?

[MrYunis]

Hello guys

Who in your opinion is the most undeserving winner ever? Or who did you like the least?

I decided not to make a poll on this one since it would be stupid to name someone like Rich, Tyson, JT, Kim, Tony, Boston Rob etc. But then again, what I find deserving you might find undeserving, so I'm curious to know your opinions.

For me I would have to say Amber. Boston Rob pretty much carried her to the final and in my opinion, the only thing he didn't win that season was the title of sole Survivor. Honorable mentions could go to Fabio and Michelle (from Koah Rong). I was gonna go with Michelle but Amber wins by a small mile. Only reason I remember both is because when you think about Boston Rob, you remember Amber, and I just re-watched Michelle's season to see how she actually won. I failed to find anything that would justify her win. I was rooting for Tai that season but of the final 3 that season, Aubry deserved to win the most in my opinion.

Feel free to prove me wrong and I look forward to hearing your own reason for least deserving winner of all time.

[peachmangosteen]

Bob. It's Bob. Fucking Bob!

I hold the belief that every winner is deserving/there is no 'deserving' when it comes to winning this game, but it's really hard for me when it comes to Bob.

Edited June 11, 2017 by peachmangosteen

[enlightenedbum]

It's Todd.  Fuck Todd.

[simplyme]

25 minutes ago, peachmangosteen said:

Bob. It's Bob. Fucking Bob!

I hold the belief that every winner is deserving/there is no 'deserving' when it comes to winning this game, but it's really hard for me when it comes to Bob.

But peach, Bob built a chair! Even if he sat there at FTC and answered the question "What decisions did you make in this game?" with "I really didn't make any." And he almost lost to someone socially inept who had managed to piss off absolutely everyone in the game multiple times! But he was good at challenges and he reminded Sugar of her dad and he built that chair!

Okay. Yeah. It's probably Bob for me, too, despite holding the same belief that if you can get the jury to vote for you, you win. There is no deserve. In the case of Gabon, though, there's a decent chance that had it been possible to give the million dollars to a random gorilla, the jury would have done that. Possibly unanimously.

As for Michelle, she appeared to play a good social game. Everyone liked her. I don't know that it was a game that was particularly easy to show, though we did see her doing things like listening to Nick and then saying something like she was willing to let people think she was just a pretty face and they were using her. I think Aubry was unlucky in the sense that she was thrust into conflict earlier and more often than Michelle due to TCs, and the more conflict you're in, the more likely it is for people to dislike you.  But Michelle played a superior social game, which is what gave her the win over Aubry and Tai. (She also won the final IC and its advantage and made the correct call on which juror to remove: Aubry's biggest advocate.) I can see why she won, even though I really liked Aubry.

Edited June 11, 2017 by simplyme

[simplyme]

I still maintain that most of the time, the way a juror votes is the same as their answer to the question, "Which of these people do I least mind losing Survivor to?" In that sense it's very much a game about both the juror's ego and the social games each F2/F3 castaway has played.

ETA: I am totally avoiding laundry.

Edited June 11, 2017 by simplyme

[MrYunis]

I don't remember anything from Gabon. I totally forgot a guy named Bob won. Same goes for Todd, I don't remember his season at all.

I do agree with your assumption that people most of the time vote for people they least mind losing to @simplyme. I guess that helped Michelle win the million.

[LadyChatts]

Michele (most of this is due to being soured with the jury to begin with, but maybe if they made her more visible I'd except it more.  Aubry and even Tai had story arcs.  I remember nothing about Michele.  The only bright side is that Probst hates her win).

JT (sorry, but after his HvsV and GC blunders, I can not take his win seriously).

Chris (can't really remember why, but I loved Twila, and hated Eliza, and Eliza hated Twila, so I wanted Twila to win.  Chris got super lucky with the tribe division, because had it been 5 younger guys to 4 older men, he would have been first boot for his challenge blunder).

Amber (should have been Rob's win, and it sort of was since they got married.  But she got there because of him, and she won because of a bitter jury that was pissed at him for doing the dirty work.  Seriously one of the worst juries ever).
 

Quote

 

I don't remember anything from Gabon. I totally forgot a guy named Bob won. Same goes for Todd, I don't remember his season at all.

I do agree with your assumption that people most of the time vote for people they least mind losing to @simplyme. I guess that helped Michelle win the million.

 

I remember Kelly Wiglesworth saying she was told by Sean and Greg that they only voted for Rich because it was easier to lose to the obnoxious, older fat guy than the fit, 20 something female.  Whether that's true or not, I don't know, but I do agree that that could factor into a jurors decision.

Edited June 11, 2017 by LadyChatts

[MrYunis]

9 minutes ago, LadyChatts said:

Chris (can't really remember why, but I loved Twila, and hated Eliza, and Eliza hated Twila, so I wanted Twila to win.  Chris got super lucky with the tribe division, because had it been 5 younger guys to 4 older men, he would have been first boot for his challenge blunder).

Oh ya, Chris! I disagree with you here, Chris did deserve that win. He recovered tremendously after almost being the first boot. Lucky? No doubt. However he's one of the most satisfying winners for me. I would re-visit his season but the rest of the castaways are pretty dull in my opinion, so I'm probably not going to do that.

[cooksdelight]

I wish Todd hadn't won, in retrospect. He might not be hanging by a thread nowadays if he wasn't led from one celebration to another.

[Nalan]

52 minutes ago, MrYunis said:

Oh ya, Chris! I disagree with you here, Chris did deserve that win. He recovered tremendously after almost being the first boot. Lucky? No doubt. However he's one of the most satisfying winners for me.

Noooooooot for me.  Sorry.  He won because he was lucky that the women's Eliza hate made them implode so badly.  That is all.

[MissEwa]

9 minutes ago, Nalan said:

He won because he was lucky that the women's Eliza hate made them implode so badly.  That is all.

I don't like Chris particularly but he, like Todd, played FTC exactly right. Plus I am always wary of 'X only won because they got lucky with Y' - every single win involves some luck. I'm currently re-watching Micronesia, a season with a winner most people feel is deserving and it's all what-ifs. What if Penner isn't medivaced? What if Chet doesn't roll over, holds it together through the vote and they boot Ozzy? What if Kathy doesn't quit? Nobody, not even the GREAT winners, wins Survivor purely off their own gameplay - other people's decisions and fortunes are always a factor. 

[LadyChatts]

9 minutes ago, MissEwa said:

I don't like Chris particularly but he, like Todd, played FTC exactly right. Plus I am always wary of 'X only won because they got lucky with Y' - every single win involves some luck. I'm currently re-watching Micronesia, a season with a winner most people feel is deserving and it's all what-ifs. What if Penner isn't medivaced? What if Chet doesn't roll over, holds it together through the vote and they boot Ozzy? What if Kathy doesn't quit? Nobody, not even the GREAT winners, wins Survivor purely off their own gameplay - other people's decisions and fortunes are always a factor. 

Perhaps the biggest 'what if' is what if Cirie sided with Penner/Yau/Eliza/Ami and booted Parvati third?  That's a whole domino effect, because not only does she not win, but it's unlikely she'll return for HvsV, which could turn that entire season around.  Even if the other events did happen in Micronesia (Penner's medevac, the quits, etc), I often wonder what would have happened if Parvati was the third boot.  Would Cirie have been able to rally the girls at the merge for a female alliance-maybe a female alliance that includes Eliza?  Does Cirie get booted before she can convince Erik to make one of the dumbest moves in Survivor history?  Do the fans tolerate each other enough to work together?  Does Eliza not find herself in trouble that she plays the stick? 

I realize that every season can have 'what ifs' sceanrios, but I often think about Micronesia, especially since it could spill over into another season and drastically change the outcome of that game.

[MrYunis]

1 hour ago, Nalan said:

Noooooooot for me.  Sorry.  He won because he was lucky that the women's Eliza hate made them implode so badly.  That is all.

He still had to get the votes in the end. I think we can agree that every winner has had some portion of luck in getting the title of sole Survivor. Some more than others, but still, luck is needed in order to get to the end.

Most will probably hang me for saying this, but what did Sandra ever really do in getting her 2nd win? I wont comment on her 1st since I don't really remember what she did to win that one. But if I remember her 2nd season correctly, she got in an alliance whom Russell and his alliance took out one by one. Her strategy was then to 'get rid of Russell', which she never could accomplish. She even admitted to that as well. The only reason she was in the final was because Russell underestimated her big time. I know many of you guys hate Russell, so you naturally root for Sandra when she says 'I'm against you Russell'. I'm not hating on Sandra but her 'Anyone but me' strategy is severely overrated and she is probably the luckiest Survivor to ever win (at least in her 2nd season).

[Whimsy]

These topics are ok as long as you guys don't start arguing with each other. If you do, I'm locking them. 

[simplyme]

I assume by arguing, GenL means not being civil or beating a topic into the ground. There's a point where you just agree to disagree and move on to something else.

You know, like when your grandad starts on one of those harangues and you kind of go, "Uh huh. Hey, how bout them (insert sports team here)?" Only the Survivor version. ;)

I'll defend Sandra as a deserving winner. Heck, I just watched that finale and reunion tonight. One point she made in TC is that because she didn't have numbers, she was the one making sure at every tribal that her torch stayed lit. Her social game was more apparent and more palatable to the Heroes, who made up the majority of the jury. At the time when they voted, the Heroes saw Parvati as somewhat riding Russell's coat tails, even though as viewers we know she didn't (and the villains knew she didn't, but they were only 4 votes and Sandra had Courtney's due to her loyalty). But from their questions and comments to Parv, that stood out to me tonight.

The Heroes didn't feel that Sandra had controlled the game, but she told them several times (and they acknowledged) that she had done what she could without removing herself from the game, and their own dumb asses kept screwing up. So she just kept herself in the game.

So overall, Russell completely screwed up his social game, and Parvati, admittedly already at a disadvantage with some of the Heroes, didn't distinguish her game enough from Russell's so that the Heroes could give her credit for the moves she made. They couldn't tell what he did versus what she did. Sandra sold herself the best to the make up of the jury. That's what makes a winner.

[SVNBob]

3 hours ago, MrYunis said:

To discuss numerous topics in a civil manner.

That's debating; which is what we are currently doing.  Arguing includes anger and uncivil behavior, which is a road we don't want to go down...

 

5 hours ago, MrYunis said:

[Sandra's] strategy was then to 'get rid of Russell', which she never could accomplish. She even admitted to that as well. The only reason she was in the final was because Russell underestimated her big time.

Her strategy wasn't to get rid of him; her goal was to beat him, either by 1) eliminating him or 2) winning at FTC, or preferably 3)both.  Her strategy for accomplishing that goal was to try to ally with the Heroes, but that failed because of JT and Candace (in that order).   Because of that she dropped the elimination goal and went straight for the "Victory is Mine" goal.  

Because the main goal of Survivor is always to win the game.  So sometimes you have to drop the smaller goals, doubly so if circumstances ("inconvenient" immunity wins, failed alliances, medevacs, etc.) dictate those goals can't be accomplished.  That's what happened with Sandra here.

With a change of goal came a change in her strategy; to play into the fact that he thought she couldn't win, based on her lack of ability at challenges and her other apparent "weaknesses".  But a weakness to one player is a strength to another.  And Sandra's strength is her social game, which he is an absolute failure at recognizing or utilizing in any form.  So Sandra may have voted out the members of the jury, same as both the others at FTC, but she was more gracious and not unnecessarily cruel about it.  That also helped clench the win for her.
 

Edited June 12, 2017 by SVNBob

[Daisy]

For me, I don't like saying "undeserved" winner. I may not like the winner or don't get how they won - but I always say if you can pull out the win then you deserve it. But in the spirit of answering the question... 

Bob. and Todd. Bob and Todd. 

[Oholibamah]

My survivorpartner and I get around the whole "deserved" aspect by saying who we would/wouldn't personally vote for if we were jurors and why. Obviously that has flaws of its own, but it can make for some interesting discussions. The ones we fight about most often are Natalie/Russell and Sophie/Coach. I'll give you one guess who's on which side of those ones. 

I personally would've voted for Aubry in Kaoh-Rong, but I would have considered voting for Michele. Her game may not have made flashy television, and she got a lot of lucky breaks, but she navigated the endgame on her own, won key challenges, and most importantly, made people like her. 

[Trick Question]

Every winner deserved their victory.  However, if we're talking LEAST deserving, I'll go with Parvati, Cochran and Tyson since they had such a big advantage with seasons where half the cast were newcomers.

Edited June 14, 2017 by Trick Question

[peachmangosteen]

6 hours ago, Trick Question said:

Every winner deserved their victory.  However, if we're talking LEAST deserving, I'll go with Parvati, Cochran and Tyson since they had such a big advantage with seasons where half the cast were newcomers.

Should Rob not be included in that, too?

[ProfCrash]

7 hours ago, Trick Question said:

Every winner deserved their victory.  However, if we're talking LEAST deserving, I'll go with Parvati, Cochran and Tyson since they had such a big advantage with seasons where half the cast were newcomers.

 

1 hour ago, peachmangosteen said:

Should Rob not be included in that, too?

Yup. I would say that Rob is the least deserving winner. He played with one other returning player, someone who was such a giant ass hat that event he newbies knew Russell had to go home. I have no idea how the tribes are seeded by the Producers but Rob ended up on a tribe of fan boys who let him lead them around by the nose. Seriously, people were wandering around in pairs and refusing to talk to the other tribe because Rob told them to wander around in pairs and not to talk to the other tribe. You can say Rob played masterfully, I say he was handed a tribe of followers who he could steam roll over. The game was handed to him, he could fuck it up but I am not sure that even that was possible.

A three time player with good social skills and survival skills against a tribe of newbies. Yeah, that was complete and utter BS.

For balanced seasons, I would say Tony and Fabio. I don't remember much about Fabio's season but the idea that he could win anything is freaking ridiculous. Tony played with a group of idiots who allowed him to play erratically and in a paranoid manner and get away with it. The Brain tribe imploded because they bought their own press. Kas was not interested in playing the game but in being a villain and was impossible to work with. Woo picked the wrong person to go to the final with, although I am pretty sure that Woo loses no matter what because Woo was an even worse player then Tony. Seriously, Tony went out early not because he was a winner but because his style of play is too awful to live with. Would you really want to play the game with Tony? It might make for good TV, I know I spent a lot of time asking how the hell he was still in the game with his awful game play but living with him and his paranoia would be near impossible.

[Nashville]

2 hours ago, ProfCrash said:

Woo picked the wrong person to go to the final with, although I am pretty sure that Woo loses no matter what 

Had Woo picked Kass, I would respectfully disagree:

1. Physical: between Woo and Kass, not even a pause for station identification.
2. Social: relatively speaking, Woo had a superior social game to Kass.  Not that that's a ringing endorsement; the same could probably be said of Ted Bundy.
3. Strategic: this is the one arena where Kass could run circles around Woo.  IMHO though, Kass was so universally disliked I believe the Jury would be grasping at ANY straws presented to justify awarding the win to Woo over Kass - and the simple choice of Kass over Tony constituted prima facie evidence that at least a whisper of strategic thought was whistling through the yawning caverns of Woo's brain, so....

So - if Woo could manage to frame even a modicum of a baseline FTC speech, I think he could have beaten Kass.

Maybe nobody else on the planet.  

But probably Kass.

[KimberStormer]

Man I would love to see a Woo/Kass final 2.  The Internet would have exploded and I think Spencer would have voted to have himself thrown into a volcano instead of voting for either one.

[ProfCrash]

1 hour ago, Nashville said:

So - if Woo could manage to frame even a modicum of a baseline FTC speech, I think he could have beaten Kass.

Woo would not be able to frame a modicum of a baseline speech if it was written for him by John Cochran who was reading it to him to repeat through an ear piece. Woo couldn't handle the most basic of lie to Tony after spending hours being prepped by Spencer on a reward challenge.

 

1 hour ago, KimberStormer said:

Man I would love to see a Woo/Kass final 2.  The Internet would have exploded and I think Spencer would have voted to have himself thrown into a volcano instead of voting for either one.

I was dreading that outcome because it would have been horrific but I think I would have preferred Kass to Tony because as awful as she was as a player she at least had some reasons for her flipping all over the place and being generally speaking awful. I think she would have argued that she was intentionally awful so that she would be taken farther along as a goat and given how her game started that was the best way for her to get to the end. She is a lawyer, one who I believe actually tries cases in court, so I think she would have been fine at final tribal. And I don't think Woo could survive after stabbing Tony in the back.

It would have been a fitting end to an awful season

[peachmangosteen]

On 6/14/2017 at 10:41 AM, ProfCrash said:

Tony played with a group of idiots who allowed him to play erratically and in a paranoid manner and get away with it. 

 

Tony is definitely a winner that almost certainly could not have won if he was playing with a different set of people. Like sure the circumstances and people you're with are a factor in every winner's win, but some of the winners would likely not have much of a chance with a different group (like Tony and Rob), while others could probably do as well with a lot of different types of groups (like Kim and Sandra).

On 6/14/2017 at 1:57 PM, KimberStormer said:

Man I would love to see a Woo/Kass final 2.  The Internet would have exploded and I think Spencer would have voted to have himself thrown into a volcano instead of voting for either one.

I wanted a Kass/Woo F2 so bad just for the sheer delight I would get from the fans being pissed over it.

Edited June 15, 2017 by peachmangosteen

[phlebas]

I agree that winning means you deserved to win. Each jury is different, and if you get to the end and either figure out or stumble across something that appeals to your jury, then you earned it.

But there are winners who seem to have gotten votes because they were sitting next to people the jury resented. Natalie White is, to me, the poster child for this, although she did do the legwork of building relationships (especially compared to Russell).  Amber is another example, and I think you can make a case that it's true of Sandra in Pearl Islands.

I would probably say Fabio, though that might be because I hate that season. The end of Nicaragua was such a cluster with NaOnka and Purple Kelly quitting. Fabio seemed affable enough, but only marginally aware of what was going on. He had to go on an immunity run just to sit next to Chase and Sash. I can't say he didn't deserve it, but I never any real game from him.

[ProfCrash]

I think people underrate Sandra very, very badly. Pretty much everyone she played with this time was in awe of how she plays. They thought they knew how she played, they had seen her win twice and they knew how hard that was, and they saw vets being sucked into her vortex. She is far more dangerous then people, including players, give her credit for. Sandra is loyal to her alliance and they know it. She will pretty much always have the votes of the people who she is working with because she bends over backwards to take care of them. She is far better at the social game then we understand. She is straight up honest with people, we are shown that, but she also does more behind the scenes then we see. Sandra legit won both of her season. Yes, she was up against Lil in her first season but Sandra would have been fine against a lot of folks that season. I also think she is far better at answering the final questions then most folks.

Amber is one of the few winners I can point to and say that she won because the jury hated the other player. I don't think Natalie White falls into that category. Russell was an ass but I suspect that we did not see much of Natalie's game because TPTB thought that we wanted to see Russell. I know some people love Russell but I loathe him and I wanted his arc buried pretty much after the second episode. I don't find him entertaining, bullies and bullying do not entertain me. Assholes do not entertain me. Russell is a whole host of things but he is not good TV. I would rather see Rupert return then Russell. I will not watch a season that includes Russell. TPTB obsession with Russell led them to barely focus on anyone else's game, including Natalie. I firmly believe that she did more then enough to win and that it was not all about the jury hating Russell.

Fabio's season was awful and Fabio is an awful winner, mainly because he seemed to be high the entire time. But the people he was playing against were overall one of the worst casts ever, Gabon gives them a run for their money, and Fabio was the winner that season deserves. Fabio = Woo. Actually, Woo might be more clued in the Fabio was.

[kikaha]

I agree completely with Prof. C that Woo could not deliver a good finals performance.  Kass would likely destroy him there.  Easy for me to believe she could flip some jurors and come out the winner. 

I disagree completely with Prof. C about Sandra.  For me her win in HvV was a miscarriage of justice: Parv should be Survivor's first two-time winner.  And Sandra's play this season did not impress me either.  She got booted real, real early. 

I think Parvati was just as big a target in HvV.  But she survived and went to the end.  THAT is what a great Survivor player does.

[303420]

4 hours ago, ProfCrash said:

I think people underrate Sandra very, very badly. Pretty much everyone she played with this time was in awe of how she plays. They thought they knew how she played, they had seen her win twice and they knew how hard that was, and they saw vets being sucked into her vortex. She is far more dangerous then people, including players, give her credit for. Sandra is loyal to her alliance and they know it. She will pretty much always have the votes of the people who she is working with because she bends over backwards to take care of them. She is far better at the social game then we understand. She is straight up honest with people, we are shown that, but she also does more behind the scenes then we see. Sandra legit won both of her season. Yes, she was up against Lil in her first season but Sandra would have been fine against a lot of folks that season. I also think she is far better at answering the final questions then most folks.

As Sandra's biggest Fandra, I'll +1 this all day. Shell never win again, because now everyone knows how dangerous she is. She won the second time precisely because she was underestimated. 

2 hours ago, kikaha said:

And Sandra's play this season did not impress me either.  She got booted real, real early.

Because they knew she'd win! They booted her when they realized she was starting to persuade them that she shouldn't be booted. They saw how she was playing them like fiddles and FINALLY realized that she needed to go.  She got a standing ovation when she was booted, FFS.

Danielle in the final 3 instead of Sandra gives Parvati the win. It's not the jury's fault Parvati didn't win HvV, it's Russell's. 

[simplyme]

5 hours ago, ProfCrash said:

Fabio's season was awful and Fabio is an awful winner, mainly because he seemed to be high the entire time. But the people he was playing against were overall one of the worst casts ever, Gabon gives them a run for their money, and Fabio was the winner that season deserves. Fabio = Woo. Actually, Woo might be more clued in the Fabio was.

Actually, since I'm now just past where NaOnka and Purple Kelly quit in my rewatch of Nicaraugua, I'm going to say that on rewatch I have a new appreciation for Fabio. It's clear that he decides to play an under-the-radar game and deliberately tries to anger as few people as possible. He wants to be underestimated and liked as long as possible. When Alina approaches him about voting out Marty instead of her, he tells he that would make a lot of people angry with him. He even says that he wants to stay under the radar as much as possible in some THs.

He's not stupid, either. He does well in the memory challenge, and there are a number of times when someone says something stupid and he realizes it immediately.  I'm not saying he's brilliant, either, but he isn't dumb.

He definitely tanks at least one immunity challenge when he feels safe: The one that Jane wins, supporting your weight over water on a rope, moving down knots on the rope. He clearly drops out in a respectable position but lets Benry, Chase, and Jane fight it out and put targets on themselves.

IMO, given the volatility of the Nicaraugua cast, Fabio had the best strategy to make it through and get votes at the end. And given some of the things he said throughout the game, it was an actual strategy, not just luck.

[KimberStormer]

As I said before, I don't get why so many people say Fabio is the worst and rank him so low.  I haven't seen Nicaragua since it aired, because why would I do that to myself, but at the time I found Fabio a deserving and satisfying winner, which gave the season a minor redemption at the very end.  Of course I'd rather that Brenda had made it to the end, but once she was gone, I was Team Fabio for sure.

[Wings]

Vecepia.  I could not stand that woman.  

[MrYunis]

7 hours ago, ProfCrash said:

TPTB obsession with Russell led them to barely focus on anyone else's game, including Natalie. I firmly believe that she did more then enough to win and that it was not all about the jury hating Russell.

That's pretty much speculation isn't it? That Natalie must have done something else in order to win that season? I believe her strategy was to hide behind Russell, let him take the bullets and then showcase what an angel she is compared to Russell at the FTC. It worked, and to her credit, she did not doubt that she could beat him. I just don't find that kind of strategy deserving. I don't like Parvati, but at least you could argue that she dominated the season she won or most of it strategy wise. That I can respect.

[ProfCrash]

4 hours ago, kikaha said:

I disagree completely with Prof. C about Sandra.  For me her win in HvV was a miscarriage of justice: Parv should be Survivor's first two-time winner.  And Sandra's play this season did not impress me either. 

If Parvati wanted to win she shouldn't have played the way she did. She and Russell went out of their way to make fun of the Hero's once the Villain's had the numbers. She didn't lose because she was associated with Russell, she lost because she participated in the mocking and ridicule of the people who she knew she was going to be on the jury. She played a crap social game. The interviews after that season made it clear that Parv was almost as bad as Russell.

Parv is suppose to be a great social game player and she completely blew the social game. I have no idea why, but she was aligned with a bully and played his game. She should have known better. All of the Vets know that the social game is important/ Some, like Ozzy, try and pretend that it is not important but they are in the minority. Parv knows how important the social game is and she is out there reading the JT letter regularly with Russell and encouraging is awful behavior. Her decisions cost her with the jury.

Let me see, do I vote for the person who told us all along that Parv and Russell were targeting us and we did nothing with that info or do I vote for one of the two people who spent days on end mocking my game play, to my face, and bullying folks? The only miscarriage of justice for that season would have been a Russell or Parvati win because bullies should not come out on top, even in a game like Survivor.

"That's pretty much speculation isn't it? That Natalie must have done something else in order to win that season? I believe her strategy was to hide behind Russell, let him take the bullets and then showcase what an angel she is compared to Russell at the FTC. It worked, and to her credit, she did not doubt that she could beat him. I just don't find that kind of strategy deserving. I don't like Parvati, but at least you could argue that she dominated the season she won or most of it strategy wise. That I can respect."

I can't help what TPTB show. The interviews from the other players that season pretty much said that Natalie did a lot more than we saw. I do not rewatch seasons, and if I was I would not rewatch one with Russell.  I do firmly remember cheering when Natalie won because what I saw of Russell was that awful. And given what we were shown of Russell, I have no trouble believing what I was reading in interviews. TPTB wanted people to love Russell and shoved him down our throats, the same way they had done with Rupert and Coach. People loved or hated Russell, I think he benefited from a split vote on the fan favorite. The people who thought he was great voted for him, the people who hated him voted for a multitude of people.

[MissEwa]

6 hours ago, kikaha said:

And Sandra's play this season did not impress me either.  She got booted real, real early. 

She was booted sixth, after a tribe switch left her on the wrong side of the numbers. Before that she survived four tribal councils. It's early in the overall context of the game, but it's not nearly as early as everyone was predicting she'd go. 

[Nashville]

On 6/14/2017 at 2:08 PM, ProfCrash said:

Woo would not be able to frame a modicum of a baseline speech if it was written for him by John Cochran who was reading it to him to repeat through an ear piece. Woo couldn't handle the most basic of lie to Tony after spending hours being prepped by Spencer on a reward challenge.I

Granted it would've been a helluva big "if", and not necessarily one for which I would root.  In truth, I was pulling for Kass at that point because I almost always favor the most intelligent player of available options - and am frequently disappointed.  But I never discount the possibility of the blind hog finding that one damn acorn.

[LadyChatts]

2 hours ago, MissEwa said:

She was booted sixth, after a tribe switch left her on the wrong side of the numbers. Before that she survived four tribal councils. It's early in the overall context of the game, but it's not nearly as early as everyone was predicting she'd go. 

Sandra was also good friends with Troy, so I think she could have made it quite far had she been able to get with him if he had the numbers.  At the very least she might have made the jury.  It's why I sometimes hate swaps.  She got royally screwed, though she won't be the last.

[piequinn35]

Michele MICHELE michele! bitter jury, she just got lucky.

[phlebas]

20 hours ago, kikaha said:

I disagree completely with Prof. C about Sandra.  For me her win in HvV was a miscarriage of justice: Parv should be Survivor's first two-time winner.  And Sandra's play this season did not impress me either.  

This isn't really the right thread for this, but it might be fun to rank the Survivor runners-up.  Do you put Parvati from HvV and Boston Rob from Amazon at the top? Or Colby?  Do you stuff Katie Gallagher or Phillip Shepard at the bottom?  (Hey, it's a long off season. Sometimes I also cast Survivor: Psychotics v Sociopaths in my head.)

[Nashville]

2 hours ago, phlebas said:

Sometimes I also cast Survivor: Psychotics v Sociopaths in my head.

Personally, I'm not real comfortable with the notion of a 34-way tie for first....

[azshadowwalker]

On 6/15/2017 at 4:17 PM, LadyChatts said:

Sandra was also good friends with Troy, so I think she could have made it quite far had she been able to get with him if he had the numbers.  At the very least she might have made the jury.  It's why I sometimes hate swaps.  She got royally screwed, though she won't be the last.

Exactly. The reports were that they had a pre-show alliance, and we saw some evidence of that in editing. Without the swap, I could see her winning a third time. Regardless, Queen Sandra is still Queen, and I won't mention her in any other way. 

As for this thread, there's only one answer. It starts, continues and ends with Bob. 

[ProfCrash]

On ‎6‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 4:39 PM, MissEwa said:

And Sandra's play this season did not impress me either.  She got booted real, real early. 

She should have been the first boot at her first tribal council. She was a two time winner. No matter what you think about her, she won the game twice, that makes her dangerous. She should not have made it to sixth. She survived a joint tribal for gods sake.

 

On ‎6‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 4:39 PM, MissEwa said:

She was booted sixth, after a tribe switch left her on the wrong side of the numbers. Before that she survived four tribal councils. It's early in the overall context of the game, but it's not nearly as early as everyone was predicting she'd go

Exactly. She survived four tribal councils, one that was a joint tribal with one of her tribe mates trying to get her voted out by the other tribe. Zeke flat out said that she was amazing with how she roped people in and he was not the first person to say that she had a great social game. She got away with being blunt, which we saw, because she was only blunt when the situation demanded it. They never show how she converses with folks around camp and pulls them in, probably because people would complain that it is boring.

Russell and Parvati clearly thought the way you did. Russell was sure that Sandra had no chance of winning, and Sandra was fine with that. She agreed with him and laughed her ass off as she won her second title. She knows the game well enough to know that Russell and Parvati had no chance of winning because their game play had been that awful. Sandra saw the situation for what it was, played the best she could. She told Rupert and the other Hero's what was happening and then rolled with the punches when the Hero's did nothing with the info she provided. In the end, she knew that she could beat Russell because of how he played the game and she was right.

[kikaha]

Prof C: Russell was an idiot, agreed.  Parvati was not.  She wanted to boot Sandra.  

I still think Parvati faced as big a target in HvV as Sandra did this season, yet still made it to the end.  100 times better than Sandra this season.   

[ProfCrash]

Yet, Parvati was unable to boot Sandra because she was aligned to an idiot who she cold not control. In the end, Parvati was seen as a goat. Sandra knew how poorly Parvati and Russell had played. She knew that there was no way they were going to win because of how poorly they had treated folks. Parvati hitched her wagon to Russell but was unable to control him or separate herself from him.

Sandra would have been in a different position if there had not been a second tribe swap and she almost made that work. How many tribe swaps did Parvati survive?

Sorry, but you are trying to convince me that someone who thought it was fine to re-live one of the stupidest plays ever in Survivor history regularly, mocking the person/people responsible for that move is a superior player to someone who won twice and managed to survive a series of tribal councils and swaps.

Not gonna happen.

[kikaha]

I don't think the jurors saw Parvati as a goat.  The ones who voted against her were pissed she (and Russell) orchestrated their boots.  A couple of them (Amanda and Candice come to mind) admitted this afterwards. 

btw, with one exception, only the so-called heroes voted against Parv.  The one exception was Courtney, who voted for her BFF.  Other than that the villains, who knew what really happened at their camp, all voted Parv.   

I truly am not trying to convince you of anything.   

[Daisy]

On 6/14/2017 at 5:49 PM, peachmangosteen said:

Tony is definitely a winner that almost certainly could not have won if he was playing with a different set of people. Like sure the circumstances and people you're with are a factor in every winner's win, but some of the winners would likely not have much of a chance with a different group (like Tony and Rob), while others could probably do as well with a lot of different types of groups (like Kim and Sandra).

I wanted a Kass/Woo F2 so bad just for the sheer delight I would get from the fans being pissed over it.

 

I honestly can't remember if I liked/did not like Kass the first go around... but i wanted a Kass/Woo F2 for Spencer's reaction alone

[Daisy]

On 6/15/2017 at 2:29 PM, wings707 said:

Vecepia.  I could not stand that woman.  

may i ask why?

On 6/15/2017 at 2:53 PM, MrYunis said:

That's pretty much speculation isn't it? That Natalie must have done something else in order to win that season? I believe her strategy was to hide behind Russell, let him take the bullets and then showcase what an angel she is compared to Russell at the FTC. It worked, and to her credit, she did not doubt that she could beat him. I just don't find that kind of strategy deserving. I don't like Parvati, but at least you could argue that she dominated the season she won or most of it strategy wise. That I can respect.

Not sure. I mean they very rarely showed Dani  (Guatemala) and Dani to be fair said she didn't show a lot of stuff in her talking heads anyway. So you could easily argue that she wanted Steph to take the bullets (which she did) and Dani was the angel. but Dani did a lot of things. I don't think Natalie's plan was to hide behind Russel, But I can't really argue for/against her because I usually don't read a lot of things re: survivor post show except for some RHAP stuff, and Natalie's not really out there. 

 

On 6/15/2017 at 4:39 PM, MissEwa said:

She was booted sixth, after a tribe switch left her on the wrong side of the numbers. Before that she survived four tribal councils. It's early in the overall context of the game, but it's not nearly as early as everyone was predicting she'd go. 

I agree with this. if not for the swap, I think that Sandra would have flown right through and would have been safe. while she did her thing (though Sarah wasn't having any of Sandra's voodoo. so maybe not). but remember why she said she had to go. Because she was seeing how she won and could win again. and the times she went to tribal - even when you thought, yah her name should be down - zero votes. My girl is awesome. 
 

On 6/15/2017 at 7:17 PM, LadyChatts said:

Sandra was also good friends with Troy, so I think she could have made it quite far had she been able to get with him if he had the numbers.  At the very least she might have made the jury.  It's why I sometimes hate swaps.  She got royally screwed, though she won't be the last.

I don't like them either. i mean. i get why they have them, but i don't like it. 

On 6/20/2017 at 5:13 AM, azshadowwalker said:

Exactly. The reports were that they had a pre-show alliance, and we saw some evidence of that in editing. Without the swap, I could see her winning a third time. Regardless, Queen Sandra is still Queen, and I won't mention her in any other way. 

As for this thread, there's only one answer. It starts, continues and ends with Bob. 

with a pit stop at Todd. 

Edited June 21, 2017 by Daisy

[Daisy]

2 hours ago, kikaha said:

I don't think the jurors saw Parvati as a goat.  The ones who voted against her were pissed she (and Russell) orchestrated their boots.  A couple of them (Amanda and Candice come to mind) admitted this afterwards. 

btw, with one exception, only the so-called heroes voted against Parv.  The one exception was Courtney, who voted for her BFF.  Other than that the villains, who knew what really happened at their camp, all voted Parv.   

I truly am not trying to convince you of anything.   

So you basically mean Parv's original alliance (that was Jerri, Coach and Danielle) voted for Parv? Remember it was Rob/Sandra/Tyson/Courtney  and Russel/Danielle/Parv. Coach + Jerri was in the middle, and Jerri + Parv were close. Coach had the crush on Jerri, but Tyson was on Coach Patrol.  So I don't know if "they knew what "really happened at their camp" applies. Like what really happened? Sandra was over Russel and wasn't really in the thick of it with those guys. Which was why she was trying to work with the Heroes who shot themselves in the foot every time Sandra got a plan together.  I figure Candice + Amanda could have been mad re: how the boots got orchestrated, but it doesn't change the fact that Sandra had always had a plan so that wouldn't have happened but Candice wanted to be a Russel's angel or whatever, and I truthfully can't remember what got Amanda. Rupert wanted to trust Russel over Sandra, (hence the quote, Imma gonna vote you out and you're still going to give me the million dollar vote). 

I don't think, or ever got the thought that the reason why Sandra won was because the others were 'mad'. she played a really strong game, and articulated her point. now the question will be if the Heroes didn't tank their games one by one and it was Hero + Hero + Sandra (possibly) if Sandra wins. maybe she doesn't. maybe she will because of how she is strong during FTC. 

I do feel for most juries they always know who they will vote for. I think i can count on one hand how many bitter betty juries i've seen that the person i didn't think will win, did win, but i never got the idea that it was because they hated the other person. I don't always think it's because they "like them better as a winner." I do think that your FTC final performance does have some sway (maybe i'm romanticizing it i'll own that). I firmly felt from what I saw, Aubrey could have won. that's how it was showing on television. I was surprised/mad that Michele won but I can see why she did (now) . 

I do get its always an each their own though :)

[kikaha]

Coach hated/feared (tick your pick) Parvati and wanted her gone from the start.  Her original alliance only was with Russell and Danielle.  She was so far down in numbers, she was buried.  A combination of great play, idol trickery, social brilliance and foolishness on the part of some other contestants dug her out of what looked like an impossible hole. 

I also believe Parvati faced MUCH tougher competition back then than Sandra did this season.  Seems like many/most comments on the boards here all during game changers was how uninspiring the play and players were.  The exact opposite was true of HvV. 

[Daisy]

1 hour ago, kikaha said:

Coach hated/feared (tick your pick) Parvati and wanted her gone from the start.  Her original alliance only was with Russell and Danielle.  She was so far down in numbers, she was buried.  A combination of great play, idol trickery, social brilliance and foolishness on the part of some other contestants dug her out of what looked like an impossible hole. 

I also believe Parvati faced MUCH tougher competition back then than Sandra did this season.  Seems like many/most comments on the boards here all during game changers was how uninspiring the play and players were.  The exact opposite was true of HvV. 

She was. 
until Tyson voted himself out. Leaving a split of 
Rob/Sandra/Courtney  vs. Russel/Danielle/Parv. 
Parv became friends with Jerri, Coach was attached to Jerri. Parv was no longer in trouble with the villains especially when Rob got voted out (then Courtney).

JT was targeting Parv (hence the whole letter thing) and Amanda sucked at lying to, so saved Sandra/Jerri, knowing she's safe, boots out JT, and she was constantly on top. Parv was a target but again after Tyson went home, she was never legitimately in trouble anymore. i may be missing something I'll admit it.  

Coach would never vote for a Sandra archetype in a zillion years. Like i feel very confident in saying, if Parv was like Sandra (ie: she sucked at challenges), his vote goes to Russel at that point.. I mean. again millage may vary which is why these places are great.  But again I say simply saying they lived with Sandra and Parv and voted for Parv = they know what's what doesn't really fly, basically for what I said.  Danielle wasn't voting for Russel, and she + Parv were alliance mates. Jerri was closer to Parv than Sandra, and Coach wasn't voting for a Sandra type player. 

Also the Heroes lived with Sandra too.  And they voted for her to win.