Survivor 20**HvV**No SPOILER THREAD**

[DisneyMomx7]

I've watched every Survivor since it started and I cannot think of a bigger sore loser, or someone with less class, than Russell.

 

[andrews_dad]

I think the flaw
in the game has become
that the jury is still bitter when they vote, so they vote for the person who had nothing to do
with ousting them---which generally is just a floater player that mAkes it to
the end. I don't think Sandra won bc she was Sandra, but bc she wasn't russell or parvati, and I think whichever player was LUCKY enough to be taken to the finals by those two would have won. Nothing about Sandras game play ensured she would make finals--could have just as easily been Jerri and then she would have won.

I think Parvati deserved to win, honestly.

Agreed. These people are not voting rationally. They are voting emotionally. It is all sour grapes. Natalie last season? Sandra this season? Pa-leeze. I think the jury should not vote until the final live tribal council 4 months after filming. Quit voting based on the emotions of the moment. Allow time for you to think it through rationally to see that a bump on a log like Natalie or Sandra or Vecepia do not deserve the top prize and your vote. Boston Rob's Amber fits that bill too. She only got the million because everyone hated Rob.

 

[declansdad]

Rupert redeemed himself a bit when he gave his speech when he was voting for Sandra and at reunion- he is not annoying when he isn't talking about heroes and integrity all in that phony pirate voice.

I thought it made him look even more hypocritical. He doesn't vote on game play, he votes on who he likes.

Me too! I was surprised nothing was mentioned of that. Jeff was too busy spending 20 minutes on Russell

Jeff spent the time with Russell because he make good tv, Coach and Jerri don't.

 

[PixieDust32]

I've watched every Survivor since it started and I cannot think of a bigger sore loser, or someone with less class, than Russell.

 

[declansdad]

Russell's loyal fans have the same misguided idea of what makes a good Survivor player that Russell does. To play the game successfully you have to maintain the respect of at least some of the people you are playing with. Russell can't do that.

So Jeff Probst must be a loyal fan because he has consistently said Russell is a great player.

 

[declansdad]

Yeah, but remember Russell EASILY could have been out early on in this season if Tyson hadn't decided to switch his vote last second! Rob had everything all figured out to get Russell eliminated. There was that bit of luck that both Tom and Colby were talking about in the reunion right there!

And Tyson said that his vote switch to Parvati was strategic..

 

[declansdad]

Did anyone notice that one of the constant that kept asking Russell if he had any regrets and Russel kept saying NO. Then the girl said that's to bad no one on the jury was going to vote for him. I wonder if they talk about there vote before they vote. I had always thought they were ketp seperate.

They are not kept separate at all, except that they each have their own huts. The all discuss the game at the Ponderosa.

 

[daughtersrus]

Agreed. These people are not voting rationally. They are voting emotionally. It is all sour grapes. Natalie last season? Sandra this season? Pa-leeze. I think the jury should not vote until the final live tribal council 4 months after filming. Quit voting based on the emotions of the moment. Allow time for you to think it through rationally to see that a bump on a log like Natalie or Sandra or Vecepia do not deserve the top prize and your vote. Boston Rob's Amber fits that bill too. She only got the million because everyone hated Rob.

I don't think that would make it any better. After all, remember that Russell tried to BUY the title from Natalie. If given the chance, I have no doubt that he wouldn't have been trying to BUY votes from the jury.

Also, what's shown on TV is only what CBS chooses to show us. A lot can go on behind the scenes that the audience and jury would never know. It would be easy for the producers to edit the show so that they show good things about one person and the bad things about the others.

Do you think that the jury would have voted for someone that did his darnedest to make their lives miserable around camp (hiding things, sabotaging fellow tribe members, backstabbing...) I doubt it.

Imagine how mad Russell would have been if Sarah had put his hat in the fire sooner!

 

[cats mom]

For everyone that complained about spoilers on this thread, please go back and look at the SECOND post on this thread.

It is the boot list!!!

Yes, but I don't think anyone realized that's what it was when it was posted, and I also don't think anyone would have been going back to the first page of the thread to look at a rumored contestants list, posted before the season ever started, in order to pick up on the fact that it was in boot-off order... until someone felt the need to point out the fact that a spoiler list had already been posted.


Luckily I missed out on most of the spoiler drama because I saw the OP's warning in the thread title, so I stayed away for awhile, and never went back to re-read that part of the thread.

I am surprised Russell won Fan Favorite, AGAIN. Also didn't think JT should have won "dumbest survivor move" ever...I thought the other ones were even more dumb.

I was surprised about JT taking that trophy too. Yes, it turned out to be a really dumb move, but if he had been right about what was going on at the villain camp, it would have been seen as a bold, game changing move. At least there was some stategy behind what he did, unlike some of the other choices.

I voted for Tyson on that one, but I admit it was partly because I was bitter about him screwing up my boy Rob's game.

Yep, not necessarily loving America's choices (Rupert for fan favorite this season... really?) and I also agree that what America thinks can be very easily manipulated with editing choices, so I think Russell's give America a vote idea is nonsense.

 

[Toad_Passenger]

Agreed. These people are not voting rationally. They are voting emotionally. It is all sour grapes. Natalie last season? Sandra this season? Pa-leeze. I think the jury should not vote until the final live tribal council 4 months after filming. Quit voting based on the emotions of the moment. Allow time for you to think it through rationally to see that a bump on a log like Natalie or Sandra or Vecepia do not deserve the top prize and your vote. Boston Rob's Amber fits that bill too. She only got the million because everyone hated Rob.

Why is it so hard to see that in order to be a Survivor winner you have to have some form of a social game? It may be "sour grapes," but that's the way the ball bounces. You've got to find a way to get to the end and not give people a reason to vote based on bitterness.

Russell's strategy of bullying people is a strategy that is built around ultimate failure. If he was such a great player he would've realized this and tried to play a social game. He is very good at reading people, but not good at interacting with them. You'll never win this game with the, "with me or against me, attitude." You could have let that jury sit for 2 years and they still would not have given Russell the title based on the game he played.

 

[wisblue]

And Tyson said that his vote switch to Parvati was strategic..

That episode really highlighted the fine line between a great strategic move and a really stupid one. Rob had things pegged perfectly when he arranged for 3 votes for Russell and 3 for Parvati so that one of them would be gone whether or not one of them played an idol. If Tyson had not actually switched his vote, or if Rob had pegged him to vote for Parvati instead of Russell in the first place, Russell would have been voted out after giving Parvati the idol. That would have put him in line for one of the dumbest moves ever, and would have completely changed how the rest of the game played out.

There clearly is some element of luck in these things, and that's part of what makes it fun to watch.

 

[Dismagic1]

Pretty much as I expected - 0 votes for Russell.

As for the fan vote, means zip. We see about 1% of what goes on out there, and that's what the producers want us to see. Russell has been the star of the show for the past 2 seasons, and as Rob said, he's good at getting to the end, but won't ever win.

neither will Rob as Russell pointed out and Rob has played 3 times.

 

[parrotbay]

I still want to see a Celebrity Survivor. I think there are plenty of B-C-D list celebrities that would do it for a chance at a million and the TV time.

Of course with no special treatment... they get what the reg player would get.

 

[TeresaBelle]

Why is it so hard to see that in order to be a Survivor winner you have to have some form of a social game? It may be "sour grapes," but that's the way the ball bounces. You've got to find a way to get to the end and not give people a reason to vote based on bitterness.

Russell's strategy of bullying people is a strategy that is built around ultimate failure. If he was such a great player he would've realized this and tried to play a social game. He is very good at reading people, but not good at interacting with them. You'll never win this game with the, "with me or against me, attitude." You could have let that jury sit for 2 years and they still would not have given Russell the title based on the game he played.

Totally agree!!

 

[Dismagic1]

Russell >>>>>>>>>>> Rob

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

Agreed. These people are not voting rationally. They are voting emotionally. It is all sour grapes. Natalie last season? Sandra this season? Pa-leeze. I think the jury should not vote until the final live tribal council 4 months after filming. Quit voting based on the emotions of the moment. Allow time for you to think it through rationally to see that a bump on a log like Natalie or Sandra or Vecepia do not deserve the top prize and your vote. Boston Rob's Amber fits that bill too. She only got the million because everyone hated Rob.

So what? Who said that "voting rationally" is a requirement of the game? Or that your idea of voting rationally is in fact rational and would have had the same outcome you believe it should have been? This isn't a show with a judge weighing the value of decisions and moves made and adding up the points in the end. It's a bunch of people, who develop friendships and enemies and respect (for the good or the bad moves), put into a group making human decisions. That's what makes it the game that it is. I may want a certain person to win, and I may admire a certain person's playing skills, for whatever reason, but every season, the one who "should have won" did win, because of the very fact that they did. Tom said something to that effect last night on the finale reunion.

I seriously doubt that the 9 people on the jury, all these months later, sat back last night and said "Darn...I sure do wish I had voted for Russell instead...he played so well."

I wouldn't be surprised to see Russell on Dancing with the Stars, spouting off how this is America's chance to do right by him by voting for him. LOL

 

[lacrosse_lady72]

Also didn't think JT should have won "dumbest survivor move" ever...I thought the other ones were even more dumb.

I agree. I think the move in Micronesia when Eric gave Natalie his challenge won immunity necklace was the absolute STUPIDEST move. I could not believe that when I saw it...

 

[wdwgirl03]

I still want to see a Celebrity Survivor. I think there are plenty of B-C-D list celebrities that would do it for a chance at a million and the TV time.

Of course with no special treatment... they get what the reg player would get.

I was just saying the exact same thing last night. A Celebrity Survivor would be amusing.

 

[tammymacb]

Agreed. These people are not voting rationally. They are voting emotionally. It is all sour grapes. Natalie last season? Sandra this season? Pa-leeze. I think the jury should not vote until the final live tribal council 4 months after filming. Quit voting based on the emotions of the moment. Allow time for you to think it through rationally to see that a bump on a log like Natalie or Sandra or Vecepia do not deserve the top prize and your vote. Boston Rob's Amber fits that bill too. She only got the million because everyone hated Rob.

But winning the votes of the jury is a huge part of this game.. I remember reading an article about Survivor prior to the first ever show. ( I think it was in TV guide ) and they laid out the rules and how the game would be played. Making it to the end AND having the jury feel you are deserving of the final vote is your ultimate goal. Russel makes it to the end. And the jury hates him. He'd never win the title of Sole Survivor.

 

[Dismagic1]

I was just saying the exact same thing last night. A Celebrity Survivor would be amusing.

The only way this would work is if you find celebrities who really need the money! Like a Gary Coleman.

I'm tired of the whole celebrities playing for charities thing.