Sandra Diaz-Twine is the only person to win Survivor twice after winning Survivor: Heroes vs. Villans. Julie Chen spoke with Diaz-Twine and the other finalists.
the fact that different people felt each single of them deserve to win shows that this final three are strong players and probably one of the best survivor seasons
silverjonquil Ikr? I love final tribal councils where there are very good players fighting against one another. Cagayan is one of my favourite seasons, but I am a bit disappointed by how obvious the winner was going to be at the final two
silverjonquil Definitely, at least in Tony vs Woo we had someone to root for. I like Kass, but I doubt she could have won against Woo... so we would have Woo win which would have been an incredible disappointment.
Jeff every season: you know have to convince a jury of people you had a hand in voting off to give you a million dollars. Russell: Let's scratch that part. That's a little too difficult.
@@matthewdiomidous3796 Someone without social game couldn't get Tyson to change his vote when all Ty's alliance had to do was split votes and one of Russ's team went home...Russ and Rob are the two best to ever play...
If was doing the same moves he did but didn’t call people names or talk with an attitude he would have won both times it had nothing to do with his moves
he has a good social game, he pulled of 4 does not count 3 2 tyson blindside because of social game. the problem is he should understand he will NEVER won if the whole jury hated him. basically there are so many camp footage that we didnt see and based on the whole samoa and HvV cast, he is even worst off camera. so it is his down fall, if he is as kind as parvati or sandra he will take the crown instead of sandra. i mean the whole cast 2 season cast of 38 different people (exxlude russel) literally hated russel so much except for shambo
Russell is very good at not leaving things to chance, but that's a double edged sword, as you need some luck to win Survivor and he doesn't leave himself any room to get lucky.
Yup, she was the only player except Parvati to appreciate Russell for what he was. None of the others had the opportunity to watch his performance on Samoa. The irony is that all of her attempts to get rid of him failed and she won anyway because everyone was furious with him.
The hero’s were so disappointing it actually kind of ruined the season for me. Those were supposed to be some of the best to play. They let a 1 leg James stay over Tom. Tyson’s boneheaded last minute switch also cost Rob the potential million, and kept Russel in. Russel was great in Samoa but he clearly lost his mind in this season so him making the finals guaranteed a lame winner like Sandra
@@brettlarkin1992 nop, he did not win both seasons because a large list of flaws and because Sandra was playing a good game. Winning Survivor twice is not because of luck, Tony and Sandra already proven that.
Russell attacked every single jury in the final TC. He doesn't have jury management. He said it himself, he doesn't play a social game. The jury didn't vote for him because they were butthurt, they didn't vote for him because they don't have respect for him as a person.
His final tribal council skills are sad I mean he had a chance this season if only he had tried to kiss ass for the votes in the end he could have won but Russell is not such a guy and he paid the price, other than that he only made 2 socially bad calls entire game Rupert and Danielle..... Samoa on the other hand bow that was Daylight Robbery 😂
Bunch on retards this season. Literally when they got rob out it was all a circus show. Russell wasn’t a mastermind he was literally just lying to walking idiots
Personally I would have liked Parvati or Jerri won I think they played better games but Sandra did desver to win because she has some of the best jury Magment this game has ever seen
Sandra did nothing but rely on the hatred of the Final 3 to carry her to victory. That's not jury management, it's being less hated by the jury. Parvati had everyone against her DAY 1 for nothing regarding this season. Management is not an option. This alone proves the Jury was Bitter. They wanted Parvati gone from the get go but she made it despite the odds. She played a better game this season than Sandra ever could because everyone was gunning for her. You have to at least give Parvati some credit for that. Russell played the best physical and manipulation game but a horrendous social game.
Mike Smith Sandra spent the whole game gunning to get rid of Russell but the heroes were stupid and got themselves picked off. Her opportunities to make strategic moves were stunted, forcing her to put her strategy in making new allies as the old ones were picked off. Thats why she “didn’t do anything”. She couldn’t get the opportunity. Yet despite that, she unashamedly and openly opposed Russell and allowed him to destroy her intended alliances, because she knew that her being proved right would get their votes. Them knowing that she was out to help them got her their votes. Rupert’s elimination is a perfect example of how brilliant her social game was; she didn’t need the idol, but she was able to make a show of it, prove to Rupert that he was wrong, and impress the jury, because that move showed that she wasn’t trying to take over, she was on the bottom of the pile, but Rupert was still the real target. Everyone saw then that Sandra was having to survive on her own, and was doing it well. She then profited from Russell’s obliviousness that he wanted her as a goat and slipped into the final 3, knowing she could score at least 4 jury votes and that only Parvati was her rival to win.
Playing a more social game proves you can go further despite what Russell thinks. To quote Russell 'I played just one game!', so did Amanda and both players got to finals both times and lost. In saying so we can argue Russell is too arrogant and Amanda too timid in their respective approaches to final tribal council, but in their 3rd attempts Amanda lasted a lot longer than Russell, due to their social games and reality of their perception on a reality tv show.
Natalie White beat him in Survivor Samoa with an underappreciated strategy--she basically told the jury that aggressive women were being voted out (which they were), that her best bet was to play passively, ally with him and let him flame out with the jury. The jury rightly rewarded the strategy. You know it was a good strategy since Parvati tried to the same thing this season.
They actually switched to filming their seasons closer together starting with Samoa, Russell only had not even 2 weeks inbetween them. Rupert Amanda James don't compare to that, there was absolutely no time for his body and mind to recover
lucky fluke? she played the game! she did it twice! just because you don't understand that she actually does have a strategy that has lead her not only to the end but to WIN, TWICE, doesn't mean she didn't play a great game.
The reason Russell is so popular with the public but hated by the jury is because he is great TV, not a great player. People love drama, but only on their TV screens. As soon as people are wrapped up in their own personal drama they hate it. The jury was living with Russell 24/7 and got fed up with him because he is drama they had to deal with personally. If any average american Russell fan was playing with him and living with him I'm sure their opinion of him would change. Great TV, yes. Great player, no.
Ethan Snider not a good player? He got 3 idles in soma and made it to the final 3 twice! The only reason he lost is because people were butt hurt and the reason we saw so much "drama" was because we saw the confessionals which are supposed to be dramatic. He says in his podcast that he had a good social game and he did!
Russell is easily a great player. He's not the ultimate Survivor, but he's still a great player. You make a great point about him being a great TV personality, but not the most loved in person. Still, you're just blind to his greatness.
Russell should have won.... S19 Samoa ;) Only lost to a bitter jury, that's part of the Survivor luck i guess... (Tony won S28 with almost the same game (broken idol aside), difference was jury xD). S20 ? No way. It was simply him not understanding the social aspect of the game and blindly thinking past winners could not possibly be given another million in the F3, though he wouldn't have won against any remaining player from the F6 (even in a Colby/Rupert/Russell situation i doubt he would get any vote from the Villains). I think the moment he lost HvV for good was how the Danielle vote out was handled.
@@dirofreak I wouldn't be mad at all if Russ had won S19 but even there Natalie was playing him! yes, she was hugely riding his coattails, but she realised all the time that she had a very good shot to beat him - her win sure is controversial, but the way she bamboozled Russell is also pretty poetic imo :-)
"I got player of the game, how did that happen? Didn't get one vote but I got player of the game." Um... You got "America's Favorite Player", and judging by everyone who got AFP, it's not exactly based on who's done the best lol. "I play to get to the end" okay then why do you complain about the "system" of survivor? Obviously YOU'RE the issue with you not winning, not the system.
Sam That game doesn't make sense at all. Your whole game depends on how people like you? That's not how it goes in the real life. If it would be good it would be about who is the strongest and most able to survive. Cock suckers won't survive a day.
Russell is so bitter 😂 yea he made good moves in the game, but none of that means anything when you are sitting at FTC with a jury full of people that despise you, you just can't do it.
That is silly logic. If the jury is bitter take that into account how you vote people out and how you treat them days 1-39. Russell had 39 days to make some kind of positive impression on people and he didn't. The door was open for him going up against 2 people who already got a million dollars but he is clueless about how to play the social aspect of the game which is the lifeblood of how the juries will eventually vote always.
Russell alas has a bit of anti-social personality disorder, at least when he is playing survivor. He is hyper-competitive and a bit of a sadist. When juries eventually realize this they frankly can't bring themselves to vote for him.
Amen. You are right about Russell, and he thinks that going with two winners to final tribal council will make him worthy in front of jury members and people will be voting for him 😂😂😂😂
probably only 1 million total after taxes. i don't think winner's of these shows should have to pay taxes or else they should at least pocket the 1 million and the producer's pay the taxes
People give Sandra such a hard time but that’s because you can’t really show friendship building on tv. She made many great subtle moves. These include Going to the heroes at the merge, knowing that it wouldn’t work out while simultaneously making them feel like they were given a chance. This makes it so when she’s up against all villains(as it would) at the final tribal, she gets the heroes votes. She was also pretty nice to them compared to the other heroes which made them think of her as the most heroic vote in a final 3 of villains. And with that theme, you know that heroes are gonna support that. Also, she got in fights with Russel and actively opposed him. This is ingenious because it makes her the anti Russel vote. So then, once all the heroes were gone, she just needed to flow with the votes because she knew she wasn’t getting jerris vote. And even then, if Parv left, she was voting Sandra which just shows the importance of friendships. Also the coach move was amazing and just enough to get her to the merge. She chose quality over quantity. Also, I’m not against Parvati and Russel. Honestly, they all deserved votes. And personally, while Sandra deserved it in my opinion, I think it should’ve been closer than a 6-3 vote. I think that this would’ve been perfect if Amanda votes Parv and it was a 5-4 vote. That’d be such a cool ending
Russel really just has no jury awareness at all. He could be charismatic and nice but still make strategic moves like Boston Rob but instead he was extra ugly this season. In Samoa he was more respectful and would have won if he took Jaison or Shambo instead, underestimating Natalie’s relationship with others
Russell is such a sore loser. the fact that he went out so early next time he played made me really happy. he only got that far because people hadn't seen his season and didn't know what an underhanded player he was.
Asiacheetah so being upset that the jury is butt hurt and because of that you lose almost a million dollars TWICE makes you a sore loser? I think anyone would be upset if they lost one million dollars! Also if your on an all stars season and on the VILLAINS team I think everyone knows that your a underhanded player. Without Russell I bet survivor would be dead, he changed the game.
@@vitauts3500 Wants to buy the title, then he says there's a flaw in the game, and he flat out dismisses the perfectly rational possibility that he is a socially retarded blowhard. Not a sore loser, indeed.
Russels strategy at the end wasnt bad thinking about it. He chose two women to the end who had won before so he thought that the jury would vote him so someone doesn't win twice. Well he had a few flaws (caugh caugh) Jury management (caugh caugh) this is still in my opinion the best and my favorite season I have watched yet!!
@@dom8759 put yourself in the shoes of the jury members, you have a chance at winning the money and a few days before the last day you are out, depending on how the game was for you and the people you are playing the season, you certainly will be having someone in your mind award with your vote to win the game, you are obviously voting for that person or maybe you will be looking for a good player while attending the tribal council as Jury, but you, I and everyone else is not going to vote for someone who backstab you, who cheats and lie at your back just to reach the final. That's what it's often called "Jury management" and this is why it is important and Russell always ends losing
i hate it when people belittle Sandra. She studied the game. Unlike other people so full of themselves joining survivor w/out watching previous seasons. I hate it when they say that Parvati or Rob are better players than she, hey people! Think! Parvati was voted out on her first try. Rob is the worst survivor winner ever. He only learned how to play the game on his 4th try. Sandra deserved to win and she is a better player than Parvati. And she's not boring.. Im not saying she's the best, but we need to see more of other winners (only winners and dont argue that Cirie or Rob C. are great players.)
Agree. No matter what people said, SANDRA will always be the best player of survivor. He's the QUEEN. and PARVATI is the PRINCESS. They are the top 2. Give them that but ROB (urgghh) there are 30 winners of survivor already. He's hands down #30, that's the season made for him to win. (And that's the season that made people lost interest on survivor)
+mark john king rivera Parvati is a great plyer top 6 first time, inner second, runner- up third but it doesnt beat Sandra. Rob is wack and so over-rated. Couldnt make the jury twice and hes considred one of the best ever come on. The only reason he won his season is because he was with a bunch of idiots. If youre a returning player you should at least be on a season when at least half of the cast has already played otherwise its just unfair. Rob sucks
+mark john king rivera I definitely won't argue about Cirie not being a great player. Challenging the Survivor gods is the fast track to incurring their wrath (little hint: Danni and Natalie W did not).
Sandra did a lot! She maintained great relations with almost all the juries and that's saying a lot. The lady did not win the title of Queen of Survivor by being a coat hanger. Love, love Sandra!
Russell got robbed in Samoa and that was definitely a bitter jury because his play was never seen before. He was so abrasive and ruthless. People couldn't comprehend his strategy then. Heroes v Villains he was stupid by destroying every person that was on the jury. All these people are returning players so yes they will admit a good strategic game BUT you also need to be likable somewhat. His 2 seasons definitely gave more precedence on jury management and highlighted the jury relationships.
Natalie made a play on the jury that I thought was underrated. Basically she said that aggressive women were being voted out and she conspired with Russell in order to make him her attack dog. The jury found it plausible and didn't like him, so I actually thought it was a pretty good play, repeated by Parvati this season. TV audiences like arch-villains, but generally juries seem more apt to reward cleaner play.
@@joncheskin Yeah, I admit that is a good defense but people back then and especially now want the finalists to be active. Natalie still got carried to the end. Samoa was way more about the absolute hate for Russell than rewarding Natalie's "strategy".
@@cjtrules1 I think you are correct that jury animosity was a factor, but whenever you play an overly treacherous game, you always run the risk of a backlash. Some people also were probably just rewarding the cleaner game--juries often feel that too much treachery cheapens the victory. In the end, the only thing that matters is who gets the most votes, and if you got fewer then you made a mistake somewhere.
@@joncheskin Oh there is definitely a backlash depending on how well you can explain yourself at Final Tribal Council. Back then Final Tribal Council was horribly structured so Russell was screwed anyways. Of course didn't help when he didn't apologize for anything he did. Russell was the 2nd guy in Survivor history who played a very mean game, but should have won in the end because he was the best PLAYER strategy wise. Boston Rob was the 1st in All Stars. (Yes you could argue Rob C in Amazon). Remember this was back in Survivor when loyalty and honesty was a HUGE thing. Lying, breaking alliances, and other more nefarious things were not common. I don't think there was a president yet to reward the cleaner player, but with Russell it was more about the hatred towards him and the way he played. It got personal instead of strategic for those on the jury. Think Boston Rob betraying Lex in All Stars & Russell burning Jaison's socks in Samoa. There is no question Russell didn't think it through when it came to jury votes and being ruthless to people past the merge. Jury management was 100% his downfall.
Danielle on ponderosa said she was genuinely afraid Russell would get physically aggressive with her, so judging by that-he was extremely unlikable and ruthless to the jury, they probably didn’t even consider voting for him
People are easily intimidated by Russell, and why not? He is very clever and a bit of a sadist. One of the reasons that Sandra and Parvati made it to the end was that neither were intimidated.
I came here for Winners at War (watching from Singapore), because this coming Wednesday, someone will join Sandra in the ranks as the second-ever two-time Sole Survivor (and that $2M prize!!!)
@@suukithesamoan2327 Sorry due, but Sandra had mad friends in the jury, so I think she played a great social game. Sandra made it far by steering clear of rustling feathers and not being a threat. She was bad at challenges, so people didn't vote her out since she was no threat of winning immunity. I don't feel that she rode coattails ( it's cool if you think she did), she tried to align herself in the best way so she wouldn't get voted out. She mentioned early on that she would "Write anyone's name down as long as it wasn't [her]". She actively tried to get Russel and Parvati out of the game but was unsuccessful due to their good placings as well. Weakness has also been shown to be an effective strategy (Natalie White in Survivor Samoa). Sandra truly did deserve to win with the strategy of not being a threat.
@Here's Tommy! I mean, that is how you win survivor. Making friends in the jury is the best way to win survivor. It might not be the best television, but it is surely effective
matthew calvet Yeah I know, but my point is that it’s a boring and unimpressive way of winning the game, especially compare to Russell and Parvati who ACTUALLY worked hard!
This is probably the strongest final 3 you'll ever see in a game like this.. I prefer either Russell or Parvati winning but I'm not mad that Sandra win. They were all likable
I don't know, I really think that the jury is wrong. These people seemed to be self rightchous< Rupert pretty much told Russell that he should be ashamed that russell didn't play like him. Candice said that he crossed the line, if he had crossed the line he wouldnt be there, he didn't break the rules, if you assume he wouldnt do something cause you wouldnt then you are the stupid one, get over it and vote for the best player. I'm not a Rissell fan but he played the best
the fact that the jury already made up their minds on who's winning sucks. Russell never had a chance of winning. Change the name of Survivor to "get by" because thats all you gotta do to win, just get by and hopefully you don't hurt anybody's feelings on the way
@Leafs12Cowboys I doubt dominating the game means becoming any player's ticket to the million bucks, which Russell has eternally become. Sandra knew what the Heroes, who comprised of the jury's majority, wanted to hear, so she gave it to 'em and the votes came along.
People forget. The winner is not always determined by who dominated in challenges. It's also about social strategy and jury management. That's what Sandra did twice and it paid off for her. Also why playing in Game Changers and Winners at War, she wasn't the easy 1st boot.
It's not possible for the best SURVIVOR player to win the game, because if you are that good like Russell is, you can get rid of anybody you want any time you want and it's because of him that they are eliminated. Its like a fight, and Russell beats them up and gets them out, its obvious they are going to be bitter about it and not vote for him. When you think about it Russell could have gotten out anybody he wanted to including Sandra. I JUST DON'T LIKE BITTER JURY MEMBERS VOTING WHO WINS.
Russel is Russel but despite the negatives....Wow. Obviously feelings come into play. And of course, there are many Survivors that the most deserving Didn't win
Yes! People forget how much audience perception is dictated by the producers. No wonder people thought Russell should've won Samoa, based on the edit that he had 90% of and Natalie was just "that dumb blonde"
@wycked40 Guess what? Sandra got 3/4 votes while Russell only had 1/9 votes. She's obviously the better player, especially when it comes to the ultimate challenge called "Get the Most Jury Votes." In the grand scheme of things, Hidden Immunity Idols mean nothing .They only serve to prolong your game life rather than actually win it. And if someone gets benched by it, that person won't be very forgiving.
@wildfast88 Besides, Russel said himself that he plays to get to the end. He hasn't considered that winning means getting those votes needed to win. Tom Westman's description works: the game is 1 part strategy and social (and anyone who thinks the social part shouldn't matter needs to get on the show and see how far being a jerk will get them), 1 part physical, and 1 part luck. Whoever wins deserved to win. Sandra won, Russel and Parvati didn't, cry me a river. It's done now move on.
i believe Parv is still the best. I dont like how Sandra played, but i liked Parvs gameplay. Still, i am glad Sandra won over russel, so not a whole disappointment.
@Phl3xable Sandra didn't do shit in the game but complain how she hated Russel and how she was going to vote him off, but she never did and then she goes in the finale and says she owned russel the whole game and how nobody liked him, yet he got fan favorite twice. Plus she has never won a challenge a challenge! Russel won challenges, worked his ass off and pulled sandra along with him the whole game! Russel's game was way better than sandra's game and nobody will remember sandra in the future.
It's so bizarre to see Julie hosting something related to _Survivor._ I can't imagine her hosting the show herself (nothing against Probst), but she's our Chenbot! Imagine if Probst and Julie changed shows for at least an episode; that'd be fun.
@wildfast88 Really? She knows she isn't a physical person, so her not winning any challenges is used as strategy. Even though she tried to get Russell of alot of times, she played a good enough social game so that Russell didn't want her off. As for as Russell winning fan favourite twice, you need to learn to read. I said it before.
I did not read your previous post, but in my opinion Russell is a good self-promoter and TV audiences simply tend to overrate the strategy game. Was that the gist of your thinking?
Russell went into SUrvivor like a tiger on fire; and he was forced to continue that in Heroes vs Villains. He didn't know that his previous strategy wasn't going to work... he played back-to-back, which is why he was so polarizing. He gave so much. But had he known going into Season 20 his mistakes, I'm sure he would've adjusted.
He knew when he played BOTH TIMES in that the winner is decided by the JURY. It's the way it's been done for the last 20 seasons. So for him to say, "that's not how I play" is just REALLY stupid.
@Bibleonian the goal of the camera man is to capture the most important parts of the game which include what they do around camp, what they do in the challenges, and what the person is thinking. We see more like 85% then 10%. I know some people call survivor the ultimate social experiment but as i see it the title of survivor is OUTWIT, OUTLAST, and OUTPLAY. not SIT ON YOUR ASS, WHINE AND BITCH AND MAKE A FRIEND. The jury always likes the social one not the one who REALLY tried to win.
@Phl3xable my point is that she really didn't do anything except a social game which any person can do and she wins for it! thats just bull shit, if not russel then parviti should have won. I'd say after that one time when Russel voted out tyson he pretty much proved what he could do & proved he is not a poor player. As for the fan favorite thing I dont see how being part of the game is any different to watching it on T.V.
@folktales the sad thing is he had used the exact same approach in the past.He should have learnt his lesson.He is still convinced that people are "hating" that's why he lost.
@JUKIO01 I've watched many of the episodes again and I developed a new opinion at first I felt the same way as you but then after watching episodes again it seemed others got just as much air time (mainly Parvati, Rob, and a few others) I just think many viewers are voting for the people who play strategicly and that Russell has such a big personality he sticks in peoples heads.
JoJo Parvati had so many flaws in her game, I don’t believe she deserved this win. Now if she comes back for another season I’m sure she’d play a much better game like in FansvFavs. I’d love for Parv to be a two time winner I just didn’t like her gameplay this season
@jackface101 well said russell dominated the game and what ever he wanted to happen, happened sandra just laid on the beach for 40 days and got a tan thats all she did parvati deserved the money before she did.
I love survivor ... it's a good reality show, this season I liked a lot because very dear participants came back ... and even though I always support JT besides feeling unfair about their elimination, I have to admit that the villains did it well . My point to debate is that always wait for sandra to be eliminated ... and that is that I never win a challenge, I was always the first to lose or to leave and even then they did not take it out. that at a certain point was unfair, sandra is useless and although I was not a big fan of rusell or parvati ... I would have loved more this season if parvati had won ... she played very well and deserved to win ... not like sandra she was only good with her companions. PS: #teamJT
@sashaqueenie she didn't maintain good relationships with anyone. Everyone just hated Russell so much and then put Parvati as his sidekick so people voted for sandra out of hatred for the other two. Of course she rides coattails she doesn't do any strategic moves and votes with anyone so that she doesn't go home
@jonhaueter Playing the best means playing in such a way that it'll gain you support from the people you've taken out. Furthermore, the jury can vote ANY WAY THEY WANT. If they want to reward the alternate to the objectionable choices, then that's their prerogative.
I think Russell should have won or at least Parvati but I am not for America voting for the winner. The jury is part of the game even if most of the time it is consisted of people who are bitter. I also Don't think that to be considered as one of the best you don't have to win. It's hard for someone who backstabbs to win.
I watched this season on Netflix and it was great however, I don't agree with who won this season because Russell Hantz should have won. He played the game how it was supposed to be played. People come here and expect honesty, integrity and all that stuff but it doesn't get you far. Like the game is called "survivor" for a reason. It's about manipulation, outwitting, strategy. Russell Hantz was awesome in all aspect. If he only had someone like Spencer speak up for him the way Spencer spoke up for Tony Vlachos in season 28. The jury has just bitter towards Russell because he outsmarted them. This situation was similar to survivor: cagayan (season 28). I mean think about it Russell Hantz and Tony Vlachos literally played the same way. They manipulated, outwitted, strategize and blindsided people!! Difference in the outcome was that Jury was bitter towards Russell while Jury considered how the game was truly played in the case of Tony. Because if u say the game is about honesty and loyalty and all that Woo should have over Tony. Like I haven't seen anyone loyal and honest to the core like Woo but even Woo's integrity he still lost.
Even Russell himself Knows now why he didn’t win. Tony won because his Jury was different, and Tony always weathered the storm after tribal council with the help of his social shields. Russell made the mistake to keep Sandra instead of Jerri, but even then Parv would have won, she was the most resent winner of the Villans tribe and had to play hard in the minority alliance on the villains tribe and she won more individual immunities.To this day after 40 seasons the meat shield strategy is one of the most effective ones in survivor. Since Amber won over Bosten Rob. But maybe you should watch more than 2 seasons to understand survivor.
They always vote for the people they hate like what it's a game I will always vote for the person who actually plays the game and people don't respect that
I want to see a survivor cast and a big brother cast to switch and the cast who played big brother plays survivor and vis versa. I think it will be interesting to watch and to see what they are like in a house rather then a island and vis versa. (Sorry if that didn’t make any sense lol)
why does everyone have to fight on here all the time? It doesn't make a difference. Russell lost. Parvati lost. Sandra won, payed her taxes, and you can't change that. And no matter how you did it, if you won Survivor, you deserved it.
the fact that different people felt each single of them deserve to win shows that this final three are strong players and probably one of the best survivor seasons
silverjonquil Ikr? I love final tribal councils where there are very good players fighting against one another. Cagayan is one of my favourite seasons, but I am a bit disappointed by how obvious the winner was going to be at the final two
it will be even more unsatisfying had woo taken kass... LOL!
silverjonquil Definitely, at least in Tony vs Woo we had someone to root for. I like Kass, but I doubt she could have won against Woo... so we would have Woo win which would have been an incredible disappointment.
All three are probably in the Top Five to ever play.
Each finalist had their merits, Russell underrates the social game and how it should be played.
Jeff every season: you know have to convince a jury of people you had a hand in voting off to give you a million dollars.
Russell: Let's scratch that part. That's a little too difficult.
He is a great player, but the one part he lacks is a social game
@@matthewdiomidous3796 Someone without social game couldn't get Tyson to change his vote when all Ty's alliance had to do was split votes and one of Russ's team went home...Russ and Rob are the two best to ever play...
If was doing the same moves he did but didn’t call people names or talk with an attitude he would have won both times it had nothing to do with his moves
he has a good social game, he pulled of 4 does not count 3 2 tyson blindside because of social game. the problem is he should understand he will NEVER won if the whole jury hated him. basically there are so many camp footage that we didnt see and based on the whole samoa and HvV cast, he is even worst off camera. so it is his down fall, if he is as kind as parvati or sandra he will take the crown instead of sandra. i mean the whole cast 2 season cast of 38 different people (exxlude russel) literally hated russel so much except for shambo
Russell is very good at not leaving things to chance, but that's a double edged sword, as you need some luck to win Survivor and he doesn't leave himself any room to get lucky.
Sandra willingly told the heroes to get rid of russell so they would make it to the end but their paranoia and stupidity was their downfall
Yup, she was the only player except Parvati to appreciate Russell for what he was. None of the others had the opportunity to watch his performance on Samoa. The irony is that all of her attempts to get rid of him failed and she won anyway because everyone was furious with him.
The hero’s were so disappointing it actually kind of ruined the season for me. Those were supposed to be some of the best to play. They let a 1 leg James stay over Tom. Tyson’s boneheaded last minute switch also cost Rob the potential million, and kept Russel in. Russel was great in Samoa but he clearly lost his mind in this season so him making the finals guaranteed a lame winner like Sandra
My first 2 seasons live were Samoa & this one. Russell shoulda won both. Glad he got the fan vote, cause he atleast deserves that
@@brettlarkin1992 He did not deserve to win hero’s vs villains. I don’t think he deserved to win Samoa either but definitely not HvV.
@@brettlarkin1992 nop, he did not win both seasons because a large list of flaws and because Sandra was playing a good game. Winning Survivor twice is not because of luck, Tony and Sandra already proven that.
Russell attacked every single jury in the final TC. He doesn't have jury management. He said it himself, he doesn't play a social game. The jury didn't vote for him because they were butthurt, they didn't vote for him because they don't have respect for him as a person.
TheINFINITEfan r u alive
Are you dumb they where so bitter you could see it in there faces especially daniel, candice, jt
His final tribal council skills are sad I mean he had a chance this season if only he had tried to kiss ass for the votes in the end he could have won but Russell is not such a guy and he paid the price, other than that he only made 2 socially bad calls entire game Rupert and Danielle..... Samoa on the other hand bow that was Daylight Robbery 😂
@@philipthomas8928 Yea, Russell deserved Samoa 100%, that was ridiculous
junkraat Why in the world would Danielle and Candice vote for Russell
Host of Big Brother interviewing the Winner of Survivor! lol That's hilarious!
CBS is so incestuous
She actually likes survivor though it’s kind of cool.
Bunch on retards this season. Literally when they got rob out it was all a circus show. Russell wasn’t a mastermind he was literally just lying to walking idiots
Personally I would have liked Parvati or Jerri won I think they played better games but Sandra did desver to win because she has some of the best jury Magment this game has ever seen
yeah, doing nothing with bitter people does wonders
Or being taken to the finale form a goat also helps
Wtf is a magment you stupid fuck
Sandra did nothing but rely on the hatred of the Final 3 to carry her to victory. That's not jury management, it's being less hated by the jury.
Parvati had everyone against her DAY 1 for nothing regarding this season. Management is not an option. This alone proves the Jury was Bitter. They wanted Parvati gone from the get go but she made it despite the odds. She played a better game this season than Sandra ever could because everyone was gunning for her. You have to at least give Parvati some credit for that.
Russell played the best physical and manipulation game but a horrendous social game.
Mike Smith Sandra spent the whole game gunning to get rid of Russell but the heroes were stupid and got themselves picked off. Her opportunities to make strategic moves were stunted, forcing her to put her strategy in making new allies as the old ones were picked off. Thats why she “didn’t do anything”. She couldn’t get the opportunity. Yet despite that, she unashamedly and openly opposed Russell and allowed him to destroy her intended alliances, because she knew that her being proved right would get their votes. Them knowing that she was out to help them got her their votes. Rupert’s elimination is a perfect example of how brilliant her social game was; she didn’t need the idol, but she was able to make a show of it, prove to Rupert that he was wrong, and impress the jury, because that move showed that she wasn’t trying to take over, she was on the bottom of the pile, but Rupert was still the real target. Everyone saw then that Sandra was having to survive on her own, and was doing it well. She then profited from Russell’s obliviousness that he wanted her as a goat and slipped into the final 3, knowing she could score at least 4 jury votes and that only Parvati was her rival to win.
you can feel the tension in the room
detorie5 And Parv is just sitting there in the middle like I’m sick of these two
Playing a more social game proves you can go further despite what Russell thinks. To quote Russell 'I played just one game!', so did Amanda and both players got to finals both times and lost. In saying so we can argue Russell is too arrogant and Amanda too timid in their respective approaches to final tribal council, but in their 3rd attempts Amanda lasted a lot longer than Russell, due to their social games and reality of their perception on a reality tv show.
abacus912 what makes you think Russell had a bad social game? In Samoa he had a pretty good social game.
Vitauts and he got votes on Samoa.
Natalie White beat him in Survivor Samoa with an underappreciated strategy--she basically told the jury that aggressive women were being voted out (which they were), that her best bet was to play passively, ally with him and let him flame out with the jury. The jury rightly rewarded the strategy. You know it was a good strategy since Parvati tried to the same thing this season.
They actually switched to filming their seasons closer together starting with Samoa, Russell only had not even 2 weeks inbetween them. Rupert Amanda James don't compare to that, there was absolutely no time for his body and mind to recover
@@johnnycrash4892It doesn’t matter. Playing back to back you don’t know what flaws you had in your game at the time. You have no time to reflect on it
lucky fluke? she played the game! she did it twice! just because you don't understand that she actually does have a strategy that has lead her not only to the end but to WIN, TWICE, doesn't mean she didn't play a great game.
She played a good game but it wasn't better then the other 2 . so we call it a bitter jury.
@@allahnah If it wasn’t better than the other two then they should have won
She was masterful at staying out of harm's way and getting people to underestimate her. It's actually a legit way to play.
Billy BobThorton I love Sandra but Parv single handedly dominated the post merge and should’ve won
@@sideeswipe Parvati played a very flawed game. Sandra had a great social game and jury management.
The reason Russell is so popular with the public but hated by the jury is because he is great TV, not a great player. People love drama, but only on their TV screens. As soon as people are wrapped up in their own personal drama they hate it. The jury was living with Russell 24/7 and got fed up with him because he is drama they had to deal with personally. If any average american Russell fan was playing with him and living with him I'm sure their opinion of him would change. Great TV, yes. Great player, no.
Ethan Snider not a good player? He got 3 idles in soma and made it to the final 3 twice! The only reason he lost is because people were butt hurt and the reason we saw so much "drama" was because we saw the confessionals which are supposed to be dramatic. He says in his podcast that he had a good social game and he did!
What about his Samoa game
Agreed!
Russell still did better jury management than Sugar or Katie (Palau) lol. He's not the worst although bad
Russell is easily a great player. He's not the ultimate Survivor, but he's still a great player.
You make a great point about him being a great TV personality, but not the most loved in person. Still, you're just blind to his greatness.
People saying Russel should have won obviously do not study every aspect of the game.
Russell should have won.... S19 Samoa ;) Only lost to a bitter jury, that's part of the Survivor luck i guess... (Tony won S28 with almost the same game (broken idol aside), difference was jury xD).
S20 ? No way. It was simply him not understanding the social aspect of the game and blindly thinking past winners could not possibly be given another million in the F3, though he wouldn't have won against any remaining player from the F6 (even in a Colby/Rupert/Russell situation i doubt he would get any vote from the Villains). I think the moment he lost HvV for good was how the Danielle vote out was handled.
Just like Commenting Person. Studies only the logo and the slogan.
@@dirofreak I wouldn't be mad at all if Russ had won S19 but even there Natalie was playing him! yes, she was hugely riding his coattails, but she realised all the time that she had a very good shot to beat him - her win sure is controversial, but the way she bamboozled Russell is also pretty poetic imo :-)
Butthurt jury, season was robbed from him
@@labybirdhill6001 The Fall of Russell Hantz, part 2, start reading.
"I got player of the game, how did that happen? Didn't get one vote but I got player of the game."
Um... You got "America's Favorite Player", and judging by everyone who got AFP, it's not exactly based on who's done the best lol.
"I play to get to the end" okay then why do you complain about the "system" of survivor? Obviously YOU'RE the issue with you not winning, not the system.
Sam That game doesn't make sense at all. Your whole game depends on how people like you? That's not how it goes in the real life. If it would be good it would be about who is the strongest and most able to survive. Cock suckers won't survive a day.
@Sally Vee I love Russel, but this sums up exactly why he doesn't truly "get" the game
A legend in his own mind.
@@TeodorKubena survivor isn't real life, its a game.
Russell is so bitter 😂 yea he made good moves in the game, but none of that means anything when you are sitting at FTC with a jury full of people that despise you, you just can't do it.
That is plain simple logic.
Unless you’re Tony Vlachos...
@@TheDizzleHawke Tony wasn’t as unlikeable as Russell
Juries actually reward honorable play more than you might think--they respect it more than someone who simply lies and backstabs their way to the top.
despised him coz he outplayed them. sandra wasnt in control of the game. she was clueless half the time. she got lucky. so she was a lucky winner
That is silly logic. If the jury is bitter take that into account how you vote people out and how you treat them days 1-39. Russell had 39 days to make some kind of positive impression on people and he didn't. The door was open for him going up against 2 people who already got a million dollars but he is clueless about how to play the social aspect of the game which is the lifeblood of how the juries will eventually vote always.
Russell alas has a bit of anti-social personality disorder, at least when he is playing survivor. He is hyper-competitive and a bit of a sadist. When juries eventually realize this they frankly can't bring themselves to vote for him.
Amen. You are right about Russell, and he thinks that going with two winners to final tribal council will make him worthy in front of jury members and people will be voting for him 😂😂😂😂
Russell is super arrogant but he by far is the most strategic and entertaining player ever. We need more Russell's in survivor
Bob Smith This comment gave me aids.
+ElectrikkPaperClipxx anything Russell related has given aids.
Given YOU aids I mean.
+Bob Smith I don't think he's the most strategic and entertaining person ever. There are definitely a few people I like seeing more of lol
How would he do without idols is the question.
Sandra won 2 million wow!
probably only 1 million total after taxes. i don't think winner's of these shows should have to pay taxes or else they should at least pocket the 1 million and the producer's pay the taxes
Tony won 3 million.
@@TheDizzleHawke no he won 2 million if u count taxes
She put $1 million dollars in her bra lol
Marko Tanasijevic like her idol
She got a million dollar bra right there.
@@weirdestweeb-lf6of haha correct
This was actually a very good move--in past seasons people have found idols while rifling through other contestants' bags.
People give Sandra such a hard time but that’s because you can’t really show friendship building on tv. She made many great subtle moves. These include
Going to the heroes at the merge, knowing that it wouldn’t work out while simultaneously making them feel like they were given a chance. This makes it so when she’s up against all villains(as it would) at the final tribal, she gets the heroes votes. She was also pretty nice to them compared to the other heroes which made them think of her as the most heroic vote in a final 3 of villains. And with that theme, you know that heroes are gonna support that. Also, she got in fights with Russel and actively opposed him. This is ingenious because it makes her the anti Russel vote. So then, once all the heroes were gone, she just needed to flow with the votes because she knew she wasn’t getting jerris vote. And even then, if Parv left, she was voting Sandra which just shows the importance of friendships. Also the coach move was amazing and just enough to get her to the merge. She chose quality over quantity.
Also, I’m not against Parvati and Russel. Honestly, they all deserved votes. And personally, while Sandra deserved it in my opinion, I think it should’ve been closer than a 6-3 vote. I think that this would’ve been perfect if Amanda votes Parv and it was a 5-4 vote. That’d be such a cool ending
Russel really just has no jury awareness at all. He could be charismatic and nice but still make strategic moves like Boston Rob but instead he was extra ugly this season. In Samoa he was more respectful and would have won if he took Jaison or Shambo instead, underestimating Natalie’s relationship with others
Jerri was actually flipflopping between Sandra and Jerri as Sandra also has a great relationship with Jerri near the end of the game.
Russell is such a sore loser. the fact that he went out so early next time he played made me really happy. he only got that far because people hadn't seen his season and didn't know what an underhanded player he was.
Asiacheetah oh bullshit they can figure that out in 5 seconds
Because it was still in the editing stages. I'd imagine it taking a lot more than five seconds to figure out something like that.
Asiacheetah so being upset that the jury is butt hurt and because of that you lose almost a million dollars TWICE makes you a sore loser? I think anyone would be upset if they lost one million dollars! Also if your on an all stars season and on the VILLAINS team I think everyone knows that your a underhanded player. Without Russell I bet survivor would be dead, he changed the game.
@@vitauts3500 Wants to buy the title, then he says there's a flaw in the game, and he flat out dismisses the perfectly rational possibility that he is a socially retarded blowhard. Not a sore loser, indeed.
0:28
Jeff: "And Sandra is moving on."
Sandra: "I can't believe it."
Russels strategy at the end wasnt bad thinking about it. He chose two women to the end who had won before so he thought that the jury would vote him so someone doesn't win twice. Well he had a few flaws (caugh caugh) Jury management (caugh caugh) this is still in my opinion the best and my favorite season I have watched yet!!
the best player knows how to get to the end AND get the votes. Russell obviously don't know how to work the jury.
Valupatitta Yew the jury isn’t supposed to be bias
@@dom8759 the jury isn't supposed to be what you them to be
@@dom8759 the jury doesn’t have a “supposed to be,” they vote however they want
@@TheMurrmursonbottle yes looking back at this comment, it’s very dumb
@@dom8759 put yourself in the shoes of the jury members, you have a chance at winning the money and a few days before the last day you are out, depending on how the game was for you and the people you are playing the season, you certainly will be having someone in your mind award with your vote to win the game, you are obviously voting for that person or maybe you will be looking for a good player while attending the tribal council as Jury, but you, I and everyone else is not going to vote for someone who backstab you, who cheats and lie at your back just to reach the final. That's what it's often called "Jury management" and this is why it is important and Russell always ends losing
i hate it when people belittle Sandra. She studied the game. Unlike other people so full of themselves joining survivor w/out watching previous seasons. I hate it when they say that Parvati or Rob are better players than she, hey people! Think! Parvati was voted out on her first try. Rob is the worst survivor winner ever. He only learned how to play the game on his 4th try. Sandra deserved to win and she is a better player than Parvati. And she's not boring.. Im not saying she's the best, but we need to see more of other winners (only winners and dont argue that Cirie or Rob C. are great players.)
Agree. No matter what people said, SANDRA will always be the best player of survivor. He's the QUEEN. and PARVATI is the PRINCESS. They are the top 2. Give them that but ROB (urgghh) there are 30 winners of survivor already. He's hands down #30, that's the season made for him to win. (And that's the season that made people lost interest on survivor)
+mark john king rivera Parvati is a great plyer top 6 first time, inner second, runner- up third but it doesnt beat Sandra. Rob is wack and so over-rated. Couldnt make the jury twice and hes considred one of the best ever come on. The only reason he won his season is because he was with a bunch of idiots. If youre a returning player you should at least be on a season when at least half of the cast has already played otherwise its just unfair. Rob sucks
+mark john king rivera I definitely won't argue about Cirie not being a great player. Challenging the Survivor gods is the fast track to incurring their wrath (little hint: Danni and Natalie W did not).
+Maya Williams Agreed completely! 100% right.
AllRequired Danni challenging Steph and Natalie W challenging Russell was out of luck. Danni was dragged to the end by Stephenie and so was Natalie W.
Every time Sandra meets Russel, I'll wait to see a good drama.
Sandra did a lot! She maintained great relations with almost all the juries and that's saying a lot.
The lady did not win the title of Queen of Survivor by being a coat hanger. Love, love Sandra!
Not really but sure. lol
Parvati deserve to win
Russell Hantz is so sad. I can feel it
Lol damn the shade between Sandra and Russell
Sandra and Parvati are Survivor legends. Love them both.
Russell got robbed in Samoa and that was definitely a bitter jury because his play was never seen before. He was so abrasive and ruthless. People couldn't comprehend his strategy then.
Heroes v Villains he was stupid by destroying every person that was on the jury. All these people are returning players so yes they will admit a good strategic game BUT you also need to be likable somewhat. His 2 seasons definitely gave more precedence on jury management and highlighted the jury relationships.
Natalie made a play on the jury that I thought was underrated. Basically she said that aggressive women were being voted out and she conspired with Russell in order to make him her attack dog. The jury found it plausible and didn't like him, so I actually thought it was a pretty good play, repeated by Parvati this season. TV audiences like arch-villains, but generally juries seem more apt to reward cleaner play.
@@joncheskin Yeah, I admit that is a good defense but people back then and especially now want the finalists to be active. Natalie still got carried to the end. Samoa was way more about the absolute hate for Russell than rewarding Natalie's "strategy".
@@cjtrules1 I think you are correct that jury animosity was a factor, but whenever you play an overly treacherous game, you always run the risk of a backlash. Some people also were probably just rewarding the cleaner game--juries often feel that too much treachery cheapens the victory. In the end, the only thing that matters is who gets the most votes, and if you got fewer then you made a mistake somewhere.
@@joncheskin Oh there is definitely a backlash depending on how well you can explain yourself at Final Tribal Council. Back then Final Tribal Council was horribly structured so Russell was screwed anyways. Of course didn't help when he didn't apologize for anything he did.
Russell was the 2nd guy in Survivor history who played a very mean game, but should have won in the end because he was the best PLAYER strategy wise. Boston Rob was the 1st in All Stars. (Yes you could argue Rob C in Amazon). Remember this was back in Survivor when loyalty and honesty was a HUGE thing. Lying, breaking alliances, and other more nefarious things were not common. I don't think there was a president yet to reward the cleaner player, but with Russell it was more about the hatred towards him and the way he played. It got personal instead of strategic for those on the jury. Think Boston Rob betraying Lex in All Stars & Russell burning Jaison's socks in Samoa.
There is no question Russell didn't think it through when it came to jury votes and being ruthless to people past the merge. Jury management was 100% his downfall.
Danielle on ponderosa said she was genuinely afraid Russell would get physically aggressive with her, so judging by that-he was extremely unlikable and ruthless to the jury, they probably didn’t even consider voting for him
I love it how both times Sandra one she had a look on her face like I know I'm awesome
People are easily intimidated by Russell, and why not? He is very clever and a bit of a sadist. One of the reasons that Sandra and Parvati made it to the end was that neither were intimidated.
love Sandra and Parv ... Snap them up CBS!
I came here for Winners at War (watching from Singapore), because this coming Wednesday, someone will join Sandra in the ranks as the second-ever two-time Sole Survivor (and that $2M prize!!!)
Sandra deserved to win.
Sandra has no strength (last place every challenge) no social game (rode cotails) worst strategy (says weakness is strat)
@@suukithesamoan2327 Sorry due, but Sandra had mad friends in the jury, so I think she played a great social game. Sandra made it far by steering clear of rustling feathers and not being a threat. She was bad at challenges, so people didn't vote her out since she was no threat of winning immunity. I don't feel that she rode coattails ( it's cool if you think she did), she tried to align herself in the best way so she wouldn't get voted out. She mentioned early on that she would "Write anyone's name down as long as it wasn't [her]". She actively tried to get Russel and Parvati out of the game but was unsuccessful due to their good placings as well. Weakness has also been shown to be an effective strategy (Natalie White in Survivor Samoa). Sandra truly did deserve to win with the strategy of not being a threat.
Sandra is such a boring winner, she only won because she had friends on the jury, and she only got to the end because of Russell!
@Here's Tommy! I mean, that is how you win survivor. Making friends in the jury is the best way to win survivor. It might not be the best television, but it is surely effective
matthew calvet Yeah I know, but my point is that it’s a boring and unimpressive way of winning the game, especially compare to Russell and Parvati who ACTUALLY worked hard!
This is probably the strongest final 3 you'll ever see in a game like this.. I prefer either Russell or Parvati winning but I'm not mad that Sandra win. They were all likable
OJ Simpson had better jury management than Russell
Parv should have won!
Mohsen Almukhaizeem well she didn't you don't choose who wins so if the person you want to win doesn't win deal with it
Luka Jadrijev i have the right to say whatever i want too its my opinion deal with it!
brat is u
Mohsen Almukhaizeem Exactly it is your opinion.
Luka Jadrijev obvi -_-
I don't know, I really think that the jury is wrong. These people seemed to be self rightchous< Rupert pretty much told Russell that he should be ashamed that russell didn't play like him. Candice said that he crossed the line, if he had crossed the line he wouldnt be there, he didn't break the rules, if you assume he wouldnt do something cause you wouldnt then you are the stupid one, get over it and vote for the best player. I'm not a Rissell fan but he played the best
LOVE SANDRA--she's so sassy
the fact that the jury already made up their minds on who's winning sucks. Russell never had a chance of winning. Change the name of Survivor to "get by" because thats all you gotta do to win, just get by and hopefully you don't hurt anybody's feelings on the way
Villains are victorious.
Cmon man Parvati should have won.
Candice and Amanda were so catty and didn’t want to see Parvati win again.
@Leafs12Cowboys I doubt dominating the game means becoming any player's ticket to the million bucks, which Russell has eternally become. Sandra knew what the Heroes, who comprised of the jury's majority, wanted to hear, so she gave it to 'em and the votes came along.
Later Tony tied Sandra’s record.
People forget. The winner is not always determined by who dominated in challenges. It's also about social strategy and jury management. That's what Sandra did twice and it paid off for her. Also why playing in Game Changers and Winners at War, she wasn't the easy 1st boot.
It's not possible for the best SURVIVOR player to win the game, because if you are that good like Russell is, you can get rid of anybody you want any time you want and it's because of him that they are eliminated. Its like a fight, and Russell beats them up and gets them out, its obvious they are going to be bitter about it and not vote for him. When you think about it Russell could have gotten out anybody he wanted to including Sandra. I JUST DON'T LIKE BITTER JURY MEMBERS VOTING WHO WINS.
We need a survivor rivals season lol
@DrFrenchFry Course not. Sandra was amazing on both of her seasons.
Russel is Russel but despite the negatives....Wow. Obviously feelings come into play. And of course, there are many Survivors that the most deserving Didn't win
Somoa he deserved it >>> not hero's vs villains
Natalie deserved it
@@chickenchicken9072 Ha, funny I almost laughed
@JUKIO01 Exactly. If Russell had it his way, the winner would be decided solely by the Survivor editors.
Yes! People forget how much audience perception is dictated by the producers. No wonder people thought Russell should've won Samoa, based on the edit that he had 90% of and Natalie was just "that dumb blonde"
I LOVE SANDRA
@wycked40 Guess what? Sandra got 3/4 votes while Russell only had 1/9 votes. She's obviously the better player, especially when it comes to the ultimate challenge called "Get the Most Jury Votes."
In the grand scheme of things, Hidden Immunity Idols mean nothing .They only serve to prolong your game life rather than actually win it. And if someone gets benched by it, that person won't be very forgiving.
@wildfast88 Besides, Russel said himself that he plays to get to the end. He hasn't considered that winning means getting those votes needed to win. Tom Westman's description works: the game is 1 part strategy and social (and anyone who thinks the social part shouldn't matter needs to get on the show and see how far being a jerk will get them), 1 part physical, and 1 part luck. Whoever wins deserved to win. Sandra won, Russel and Parvati didn't, cry me a river. It's done now move on.
I mean Parvati kinda deserved to win, she just got screwed over by Russell burning her allies so she went up against Sandra instead of Danielle
Russell Hantz is still my personal Favorite cast-a-way, of all time!!
JULIE 😍😍😍
Sandra > Parvati > Russell
'>' means greater than, you mean '
Yeah no I'm pretty sure thats exactly what they meant
Queen stays Queen.
Adios
9 years later we got 2, 2 time winners now
i believe Parv is still the best. I dont like how Sandra played, but i liked Parvs gameplay. Still, i am glad Sandra won over russel, so not a whole disappointment.
@Phl3xable Sandra didn't do shit in the game but complain how she hated Russel and how she was going to vote him off, but she never did and then she goes in the finale and says she owned russel the whole game and how nobody liked him, yet he got fan favorite twice. Plus she has never won a challenge a challenge! Russel won challenges, worked his ass off and pulled sandra along with him the whole game! Russel's game was way better than sandra's game and nobody will remember sandra in the future.
Sandra is the best player ever in the games history, parv is whatever and Russell sucks 0 votes Lmaoo I'm surprised he didn't get negative one votes
Still my favorite season.
EXPECT THE UNEXPECTED
Sandra is a strong woman and straight class, a-fukn-mazing game!!!
Russell terrorized everyone else, but she was never scared of him.
It's so bizarre to see Julie hosting something related to _Survivor._ I can't imagine her hosting the show herself (nothing against Probst), but she's our Chenbot! Imagine if Probst and Julie changed shows for at least an episode; that'd be fun.
Ilove russellll😍😍😍😍😍😍😍💓💓💖💖💖💖
Russell's Point Is, If He Doesn't Play The Game The Way He Does. He'll Never Make It That Far.
Ngl Russel had TERRIBLE jury management, but his strategic gameplay was amazing. Nobody can argue with that. :)
Tony can. Dude played an amazing game in WaW.
@wildfast88 Really? She knows she isn't a physical person, so her not winning any challenges is used as strategy. Even though she tried to get Russell of alot of times, she played a good enough social game so that Russell didn't want her off.
As for as Russell winning fan favourite twice, you need to learn to read. I said it before.
I did not read your previous post, but in my opinion Russell is a good self-promoter and TV audiences simply tend to overrate the strategy game. Was that the gist of your thinking?
Russell went into SUrvivor like a tiger on fire; and he was forced to continue that in Heroes vs Villains.
He didn't know that his previous strategy wasn't going to work... he played back-to-back, which is why he was so polarizing. He gave so much.
But had he known going into Season 20 his mistakes, I'm sure he would've adjusted.
Russell's Point Was, If He Doesn't Play The Game That Way. He'll Never Make It That Far.
I don't like Sandra but what can I do!!!!!!!!!!!!
He knew when he played BOTH TIMES in that the winner is decided by the JURY. It's the way it's been done for the last 20 seasons. So for him to say, "that's not how I play" is just REALLY stupid.
@Bibleonian the goal of the camera man is to capture the most important parts of the game which include what they do around camp, what they do in the challenges, and what the person is thinking. We see more like 85% then 10%. I know some people call survivor the ultimate social experiment but as i see it the title of survivor is OUTWIT, OUTLAST, and OUTPLAY. not SIT ON YOUR ASS, WHINE AND BITCH AND MAKE A FRIEND. The jury always likes the social one not the one who REALLY tried to win.
yeap! puertorican girl, you are the best
Getting jury to vote for you is part of the social game, as important as getting contestants to vote out your intended target.
Para mi el mejor jugador Russell ❤❤ me encanta porque es muy estratégico y también es bueno socialmente.
@ZealandLeggs He should have won Samoa. The only reason he didn't is because the jury was full of bitter recruits.
@Phl3xable my point is that she really didn't do anything except a social game which any person can do and she wins for it! thats just bull shit, if not russel then parviti should have won. I'd say after that one time when Russel voted out tyson he pretty much proved what he could do & proved he is not a poor player. As for the fan favorite thing I dont see how being part of the game is any different to watching it on T.V.
@folktales the sad thing is he had used the exact same approach in the past.He should have learnt his lesson.He is still convinced that people are "hating" that's why he lost.
@starlinej
So true: Bob, JT, Courtney, Sandra (:
@JUKIO01 I've watched many of the episodes again and I developed a new opinion at first I felt the same way as you but then after watching episodes again it seemed others got just as much air time (mainly Parvati, Rob, and a few others) I just think many viewers are voting for the people who play strategicly and that Russell has such a big personality he sticks in peoples heads.
TV viewers have a secret wish to be clever and ruthless like Russell--they can't do it in real life and get away with it.
Parvati Should of Won. The Only Reason Russell Didn't Win Was Because He Wasn't A Likable Person And He Didn't Play A Sociable Game
JoJo Parvati had so many flaws in her game, I don’t believe she deserved this win. Now if she comes back for another season I’m sure she’d play a much better game like in FansvFavs. I’d love for Parv to be a two time winner I just didn’t like her gameplay this season
@jackface101 well said russell dominated the game and what ever he wanted to happen, happened sandra just laid on the beach for 40 days and got a tan thats all she did parvati deserved the money before she did.
If you lie on the beach and get a tan, and then get the votes, you are still the winner. You have the same misapprehension as Russell.
I love survivor ... it's a good reality show, this season I liked a lot because very dear participants came back ... and even though I always support JT besides feeling unfair about their elimination, I have to admit that the villains did it well . My point to debate is that always wait for sandra to be eliminated ... and that is that I never win a challenge, I was always the first to lose or to leave and even then they did not take it out. that at a certain point was unfair, sandra is useless and although I was not a big fan of rusell or parvati ... I would have loved more this season if parvati had won ... she played very well and deserved to win ... not like sandra she was only good with her companions. PS: #teamJT
What is really funny is that julie chen the host of BB talk to the winner of SURVIVOR! I lfind it so fun!
@sashaqueenie she didn't maintain good relationships with anyone. Everyone just hated Russell so much and then put Parvati as his sidekick so people voted for sandra out of hatred for the other two. Of course she rides coattails she doesn't do any strategic moves and votes with anyone so that she doesn't go home
Russel deserved the win
The jury was bitter
@jonhaueter Playing the best means playing in such a way that it'll gain you support from the people you've taken out. Furthermore, the jury can vote ANY WAY THEY WANT. If they want to reward the alternate to the objectionable choices, then that's their prerogative.
And you have to manipulate that. The jury watches all of the tribal councils.
yeh sandra is the socially talented one but the weaknesses amongst all the challengers
If you have these finalists with any jury post 2015 Russell wins 100% of the time.
You mean "loses." Juries don't vote for fucktards.
I think Russell should have won or at least Parvati but I am not for America voting for the winner. The jury is part of the game even if most of the time it is consisted of people who are bitter. I also Don't think that to be considered as one of the best you don't have to win. It's hard for someone who backstabbs to win.
@Phl3xable yet he beat everybody, and made it to the end two times in a row and won the fan vote twice
I watched this season on Netflix and it was great however, I don't agree with who won this season because Russell Hantz should have won. He played the game how it was supposed to be played. People come here and expect honesty, integrity and all that stuff but it doesn't get you far. Like the game is called "survivor" for a reason. It's about manipulation, outwitting, strategy. Russell Hantz was awesome in all aspect. If he only had someone like Spencer speak up for him the way Spencer spoke up for Tony Vlachos in season 28. The jury has just bitter towards Russell because he outsmarted them. This situation was similar to survivor: cagayan (season 28). I mean think about it Russell Hantz and Tony Vlachos literally played the same way. They manipulated, outwitted, strategize and blindsided people!! Difference in the outcome was that Jury was bitter towards Russell while Jury considered how the game was truly played in the case of Tony. Because if u say the game is about honesty and loyalty and all that Woo should have over Tony. Like I haven't seen anyone loyal and honest to the core like Woo but even Woo's integrity he still lost.
Even Russell himself Knows now why he didn’t win. Tony won because his Jury was different, and Tony always weathered the storm after tribal council with the help of his social shields. Russell made the mistake to keep Sandra instead of Jerri, but even then Parv would have won, she was the most resent winner of the Villans tribe and had to play hard in the minority alliance on the villains tribe and she won more individual immunities.To this day after 40 seasons the meat shield strategy is one of the most effective ones in survivor. Since Amber won over Bosten Rob. But maybe you should watch more than 2 seasons to understand survivor.
I've Been Saying This For Years!!! If Russell Doesn't Play The Way He Played. He'll Never Make It That Far.
PARVATI should have won. period
Team Pav she's gonna win again
They always vote for the people they hate like what it's a game I will always vote for the person who actually plays the game and people don't respect that
I want to see a survivor cast and a big brother cast to switch and the cast who played big brother plays survivor and vis versa. I think it will be interesting to watch and to see what they are like in a house rather then a island and vis versa. (Sorry if that didn’t make any sense lol)
I stil love russel
Love to hear him cry over loosing
why does everyone have to fight on here all the time? It doesn't make a difference. Russell lost. Parvati lost. Sandra won, payed her taxes, and you can't change that. And no matter how you did it, if you won Survivor, you deserved it.
we need more you's in this world to argue for all the winners out there.
finally, a comment made by someone with a brain.