Why, because of the entertainment value. Kinda defeats the purpose of the game, to be named Sole Survivor by your peers. Those on the jury, while the game is on aren't watching on TV with popcorn to be entertained.

I agree he is entertaining, but what criteria are you using for your choice? A strategy you like? Or? Cause if you boil it down to a popularity contest, strategic moves have no bearing.

he is probably the best strategist in survivor history, if he could pretend to give a **** about everyone he'd be a lock for the mil

I didn't say people don't care about it, I'm saying they shouldn't. It shouldn't be a popularity contest; the winner should be the player who played the best game. If Russell can be so hated and yet convince everyone else to do what he wants to get himself to the end, how is he not the most deserving player...because you don't like him? What sense does that make?

If his social game was actually bad, he would be the first person voted out (ex. Randy). Russell's social game isn't bad, I think most people just consider "social game" to be the same as "being likable" when they're not the same at all.

Who deserves it? You have watched every season and know how it works. Russel plays a wildly entertaining game, and I liked his move vs Danielle this week.

He can't win with hoe he plays. It really is that simple.

He cannot win. Ever.

Thus, when he finishes 2nd-6th again he will get exactly what he deserved. Praise for being a fun player to watch, and a guy who plays the game is a very determined way.

Also a guy that has no strategy that actually wins the game.

If he makes final 3 and gets 2 votes that will be impressive. Odds are both will not happen.

I like watching Russel, I just wish he added a part to his game that would create a way for him to win.

Until then all he is is a great player. Not a winning player.

You're missing my point. I never said he CAN win, I said he SHOULD win. If I was a juror, I would vote for him every time because he deserves it. Other people won't because they vote based on likability, honesty, bitterness, etc.

I like Russell and he has a really good survivor strategy mind. His post merge social game is probably the worst ever though.

Tonight's vote out was pretty dumb. He has Jerri and could have easily pulled in Rupert or Colby come final 5. Correct strategy was to blindside Sandra(Rupert and Colby obviously don't have the idols so they should be able to deduce that Sandra has the idol) or at least get rid of Parv over Danielle. Danielle would've been way more likely to fall back into his wings than Parv will. Russell's problem is he's so clueless on jury votes that he thinks Sandra is actually someone that stands no chance at a final tribal.

Kos, again you are getting all emo about your boy. You claim because you LOVE him he should win. That his strategy works, even though it doesn't, and all the players just don't understand.

So he uses a strategy that can't win. Not including last season, he had seen all there was to see about Survivor, claimed to be the number 1 fan IIRC. His strategy was founded on a flawed foundation, yet you choose to not see that. Now who is basing his decisions on popularity rather than strategic.

Admit his strategy sucks, but you like the entertainment aspect, and enjoy the show. But you must be as delusional as Russel if you insist he is making optimal decisions wrt the goal of every player, SOLE SURVIVOR.

That's not Survivor and it never has been. The entire premise is that the finalists will be judged by the people whom they had a hand in eliminating, and that therefore they need to appease them in some way if they want to win.

If the voting were done on a strictly strategic basis, the game would have been completely different. Russell might not even be the best at such a game. We can't say, because the players have taken the social game into account.

Russell is indeed a great strategist. But one reason nobody else pulls the **** that he does is because they wouldn't sacrifice their social games to make such moves.

Jerri is with Russell. Listen to her speech before her vote.

Jerri Russell Colby and Rupert will try and knock off parv and Sandra. Sandra will probably end up in the final 3 though because she has the idol.

She SHOULDN'T stand a chance, and it's really starting to worry me how much people are pimping Sandra. She hasn't done jack **** this entire game, and people are proclaiming her to be the second coming of Richard Hatch. It's ridiculous.

What are you even arguing? You're basically saying strategy isn't the only important thing, which is true, but what's the other part? "Social game" does not mean what you think it means; it is not synonymous with likability. If Russell changed his social game, he would not get to the end because his social game involves intimidation, being a dick, etc to get allies and force showdowns with powerful players...and it works! The key for him is to be more likable, which might not be possible. To me, as a juror, it wouldn't matter. He's the best player. I'm really trying to understand the views of people like you, but all it really boils down to is "I wouldn't vote for Russell because he's arrogant." That's a stupid reason to not vote for someone imo.

Please just address this specific point: if Russell is so inept socially, how did he convince Jerri to side with him over Parv, who is probably the best "social player" of all time? Keep in mind this is Jerri, the woman Parv saved just a week earlier!

If this happens who do you think Russel has a better chance of winning against?

pics plz or it didnt happen

Yeah, pretty much what I got from the episode.

THEY ALL HAD PITHAIR

seems unnecessary

We didn't see enough from Jerri to know why she voted as she did, but I suppose that she thought it was her best strategic move. And it was probably a good one, although that's debatable.

Keep in mind that Jerri's play is based on the assumption that everyone hates Russell and therefore he's a good person to align with. I imagine that's how all of Russell's allies have viewed him.

My tribute to Horsielle's legacy

Keep your sh*t together girl, you're a seasoned veteran for god's sake

what was up with the note in sandra HII? is there always one there?

kos. did u watch the winter olympics? if so, please share your opinion on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadruple_jump_controversy

thank you in advance!

meh, you're viewing the world through Russell-tinted glasses. Fighting against nature, starvation etc, you don't want some little troll making your life that much harder. It makes the voting process emotional and when emotion factors in, he can't win. That means he shouldn't win, because it's very much a part of the game.

I didn't watch any of the olympics, and I'm really lazy. If you could summarize that giant Wiki article for me, I'll let you know my opinion on it.

I've felt this way for much longer than we've known Russell Hantz. I still really don't even understand your point. If he makes my life harder strategically, that means he's playing well. If he makes my life harder around camp, it's a combination of 1) that's part of his strategy, and 2) I don't really care. 95% (or more) of voters do not think like me, but that doesn't make them right and me wrong. To me, emotion wouldn't factor into the decision. I can't say it any clearer than: I do not respect people who vote emotionally.

OMGIrony

My contribution to this thread

I think Russell screwed himself with that move.

Sadly I am off the Russell bandwagon, but I 100% agree with this. I actually went back and watched part of Pearl Islands to see if I was missing something.

I wish someone would explain in bullet points what Sandra has ever done in any of her seasons other than coast.

-she has never been the force in voting someone out

-she has never been the leader of even near the top of any alliance

-she has won one IC ever

-she has never made a single strategic move that worked

Her SOLE good move in two seasons was owning her FTC on Pearl Islands.

I am asking honestly, someone please explain how people can be mentioning her name as a possible GOAT.

I honestly dont understand what I am missing.