This is actually pretty interesting and in my opinion a very valid reason to make the case that Wendell is the proper winner. While each juror's vote counts the same, I would suggest that those who have been living the game longer have more strength to their vote than a person like Suavee who was on the jury for nearly a month.

The amount of additional days played among the Wendell voters (even if we ignore Laurel at the end) would probably be in the 100ish range, and that is pretty significant in terms of who played the better social game.

As to the guy who cannot understand how this show lasted more than 2 seasons because he was bored by it- I suppose the only suggestion for him would be to not do any work which requires you to understand how people other than you think about a product or service. The Survivor show demonstrates that a lot of people lack any real insight in others past their own skin, and that is part of the fun of watching the show.

As well, those still upset about the jury from the first Russell season should get over it. He would have lost to literally any other player in the game from any season based on stories of how he behaved out there, regardless of whether the jury lived in Ponderosa or not. Jury management is a valid part of the game, nothing really broken with it.

Managing the jury is what keeps the game interesting. There's no way to "fix this" because it isn't broken. I don't think any recent winner has been the victim of a butthurt jury at all. Maybe not since S20.

There are few ways to lessen the jury, although none of them are perfect. For example, each II won could grant an extra vote (let's say Dom won 3 challenges, Wendell 2 -> Dom would start the jury vote with 1 vote advantage.). Another potential way would be to give some negative points for votes against the player during the game or give extra vote if you never played your HII.

Managing the jury is pretty stupid, see Seabass. Gets his game completely wrecked by ANGELA and takes it out on Dom who made him look like a fool! Too high % of jury members are completely irrational and not "manageable" makes the end game less pure. I still love the game but I see it as a slight flaw.

Dom will go down as one of the best to never win (he won't win on a return) along with Cirie, Fairplay, Rob and Malcolm.

I was rooting for him, legit had tight control over the game from the merge onwards. I think he only received 1 vote also and barely lost to an incredibly likable final tribal opponent.

Wendell is unobjectionable. Clearly a good player who was thinking independently strategically but I think Dom was better

Wendell wins because people like him more. that is what 75% of votes come down to.

the "better player" winning is such a myth.

without putting a lot of thought into it, I think the final 6 bluff is a move that clearly separates Domenick. having Angela tell him about Sebastian's advantage is under-the-radar great gameplay

I think it's a good note for Wendell's game that Dom was on the block early in the first two votes, but they never lost a challenge.

Wendell is a good/great winner though

I love these shows but I dont think Ive ever been lower on the Survivor brand

Yeah it was an exciting end to a lifeless season. Last few seasons have been horrible. I still would say Game Changers was worse than this only because my hopes were high and they were crushed having to see literally everyone I wanted to see back taken out for past performances and successes by players I could barely remember.

I still think One World was the WOAT though

This season is a tricky one to evaluate, as it had a very unique/solid ending, but much of the season was unmemorable. I did not remember the names of a chunk of the people on the jury. While they had some different personalities, they all fell in a relatively narrow age range, and that kind of made it dull. Ironically, the 18 year old stood out quite a bit (and he is 100% returning) amid the sea of interchangeable 24-35 year olds.

the fire-making is so dumb.
The final jury questioning is terrible. It just gives jeff more chances to inject his moronic commentary

the most curious vote is Donathan's. Considering he said during the game that if they got to the end together, he'd vote for Domenick.

I like it when people use their vote as currency in the game and then cash in on their promise.

Even when someone like Vytas is the only person who didnt reward Tyson

Highest rated show in their Wednesday night time slot. Got me who watches it.

Watching now. Dom line "a snap call most often represents a bluff"

Lolololol

Russell is also on that list IMO.

That's not why Russell would never win.

This result doesn't bother me so much because Wendell also played a good game. However it does seem like the show has devolved into, "who can make the jury like them more"? It makes being a likeable person the paramount skill in the game, unfairly penalizing great players who are not naturally likeable people. Strategy, leadership, skill in challenges, ability to bluff/deceive, etc., are all skills that get far too little weight imo.

Yeah I'm in the Russell isn't that great. He's too obnoxious and arrogant and I think he lacks self-awareness. He certainly has a talent for convincing people to do moronic things but I just don't think he could be expected to win a season as much as you can expect people like Dom, Cirie, Malcolm and Rob can win if they are unknown quantities.

I think Russell can position himself to get to the end and can humiliate and just decimate opponents in ridiculous ways but I don't think he's got that talent or the humility to expect a jury to vote for him.

I feel like Tony was Russell with the harsher edges rubbed out and Russell realised as a full player.

They were both likeable, but they appealed to different personality types, and it was close, because they played near identical games as a partnership - which was pretty much the only lasting impression of this season. Maybe Earl and Yau Man is the closest I can think of that kind of matched their dynamic, and even that is not a perfect fit.

The whole Russell thing is a non starter. he was the biggest proper game changer ever, but he lost his first season due to the repulsive behavior he demonstrated to the other players, and that is a proper reason to lose. He would have lost to Shambo. He would have lost if the finals was only him. He lost properly that season, and the winner this year won properly, albeit many (including myself) would have been quite fine with Dom winning as well.

The final fire challenge I certainly did not like year due to it being a questionable twist that at the time looked like it was put in to help a specific player, but I can see the merit in it, and I am now more of a believer that it was put in as they said (in advance) and the optics of the prior season made it look quite awkward as a coincidence.

You don't make fire in the military. It's so easily seen...and smelled. Get a red flash light and a blanket to keep you warm.

Its pretty stupid that to win these seasons you need to 1. have a major sob story, or 2. be more likable than the people you drag to the end.

Overall a pretty fun season filled with really dumb people.

I must have missed it. What was Wendell's sob story?

I think it was a good, at least normal cast. we just lost every smart person early. which isnt that uncommon.

Sebastian, Angela, Jenna, Libby, Chelsea and CHris all making the jury is just ew

Michael comes off as a mensa member just because he's not a ******

Watching Survivor South Africa and they have a hidden immunity idol at tribal council, has this happened before? I cant remember it but i've only seen the past ~10 seasons

No. not in US survivor.