dolphinboy

Why do you never throw Tom in there with the people you claim are blinded by hate?

The only way that you would be happy is a) if they stripped Sandra of her title and gave it to Russell, but you could live with Parvati getting it or if they b) allowed you and Russell to hand-select a group of fellow Russell-loving fans who watched a highly edited show and didn't play the game to be the new jury and have a re-vote.

dolphinboy

If you look back at what I written over and over again, it's nothing about claiming Russell sucked at the game.

It's merely that if you have NO social game whatsoever, you aren't going to win and you probably don't belong in the discussion of best ever. Granted Russell had a quick turn-around, but he learned nothing from his first experience.

Again, that's nothing new to the game, so I'm not sure why everyone is so bent out of shape. I believe Sandra is a worthy winner, but she's not even who I would have voted for.

Yet, just to keep things going, the Russell lovers will call me a Russell hater. Last season I probably did hate him. This season, I just hoped he wouldn't win, but if he had, I wouldn't be on this board whining about how could a guy with no social game-play win the game and how unfair the results were and that the jury was stupid.

tr0n

You could definitely make an argument that the show downplayed Russell and bolstered Sandra's gameplay. There was a secret scene that showed Coach plotting against Russell with Courtney after Boston Rob had been voted off. That goes against the show portraying that Sandra came up with a lie and fooled Russell.

Also, when Randy was voted off they had a secret scene where everyone was certain that he was the one who hid the machete. It is interesting what CBS decides to air in regard to strategy and how they craft it for their story. Especially since they tried to give Sandra more credit than she deserved.

Personally, it annoys me when the coattail riding types win because it discourages the bold gameplay that Russell and Parvati employed and what made the season so entertaining for me.

the big train

I never really believed Sandra was all that instrumental in Coach's ouster. It was just too weird how that episode tried to show how that went down.

stingermck

I really hope the last 2 seasons are released on DVD. I know they haven't released any in awhile, but I would love to re watch these, marathon style.

dolphinboy

I think you make some valid points, but the show downplayed Russell? The show was practically Russell and 19 people we'll show you from time to time so you know that they're there.

Also, you missed my point and still actually made it for me. The fact that all these things happened that were cut out, that show the game being played in a totally different way than how it's edited, is exactly when America should never have anything to do with voting for a winner.

I don't see Sandra as a coattail rider at all. Others have been, but I just don't see her that way. She hustles and works really hard to keep herself in the game when she doesn't have power and, sure, she has some luck too. What gets lost in the debate because of who seems to like a certain player is that about 2/3 in (maybe sooner) players who wanted Russell out started seeing the end of the game and how poorly he was dealing with the social part of the game and they really wanted to be sitting next to him in the finals. That certainly worked to his advantage as well.

Also, he talks about keeping Parvati in the game at first, but at the same time, he lucked into having a partner who is one of the very best players in the game and easily one of the best players even during an all-star season. That helped him too and had he listened to her about keeping Jerri, Parvati would be a million dollars richer today, imo, and Russell would be a little less bitter.

tr0n

I wasn't arguing that point. I agree that America should have nothing to do with the game.

What evidence do you have that she did all these things? When asked in interviews she seems to have no answer for any specific moves she made. All I can go by is what I saw during the season and all the deleted scenes and it seems like she was a non-factor the entire game. Since it wouldn't be in the show's best interest to downplay her strategy, it seems like we saw most of her impact, or lack thereof.

arminius

Sandra had no game, just anybody but me. She was not good to look at, not interesting to listen to, was hopeless in challenges and won not by getting votes for her but by people voting against Russell. She wasn't liked by the others but she wasn't hated either. She was just there. Out of the final 3 pav should have won, then Russell. However, if Russell actually toned down his ego a bit he would have realized that Sandra being the cypher she was made her a threat. As mentioned numerous times alot of the jurors are bitter and vote against anybody that put real effort into playing without sucking up to the losers. She did not have to suck up to the losers as she was one herself. She brought absolutely nothing it terms of watchability to the show other than saying pffft to Russell. So without him she would not have even that.

Also I think James was the reason the villains won. His complete negativity and overbearing outbursts resulted in too many strong heroes being voted off too early. He was the big problem not Stef or Tom. Like Jeff said in the reunion, he was just off in this season and seemed vey irate.

funstan

Russell was convinced nobody would vote for Sandra, she won her first season 6-1, Parvati, Jerri, Colby, Rupert never said hey dumb ass, she got votes the first time what makes you think she will not get them again. Russell, the Russell lovers, Parvati everyone can knock her "Anybody but me" strategy but it is effective she has $2,000,000 million dollars to show that it works, Russell has $300,000 + whatever the 3rd place money is this season to show his strategy works, but it will not get him the Sole Survivor title he craves.

I would say that James, JT, Amanda, and Rupert cost the heroes any chance of winning. It was an alliance between the people who tie their identity to Survivor and they went after Colby, Tom, and Steph the people who do not tie their identity to Survivor. Sugar was a non-factor, both sides wanted Cirie gone, and Candice was kept around because she could be controlled.

funstan

I have no problem with Sandra winning. If you do not view someone who brought it home once as a threat that is your problem.

freshticles

Russell has fan favorite twice and that's good enough for me.

TwineTime

That's just downright disgusting. I can't imagine there's anyone other than Melanie who wants a piece of that.

As for me defending anyone because I hate Russell, well...I'll explain. I joined DVDTalk during the airing of Pearl Islands because people here weren't respecting Sandra's gameplay. She was not only my favorite Survivor contestant that season, but my favorite in all 7 seasons and I was rooting for her. I never expected her to win but I defended her all season long.

I've known Sandra was the winner of Heroes vs Villains since Samoa was airing, so any attempt to combat people defending Russell had way more to do with Sandra than anything else. After the finale, when he bitched about Natalie during the reunion and in the weeks after, I knew Sandra would get the same treatment and it angered me to no end that she'd have to endure the same bullshit from people who, yes, DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THE GAME WORKS.

So if you want to associate me with anyone, call me Sandra's #1 fan. At the end of the day, I think Russell and people who think he's the greatest of all time are more sad and deluded than anything. I probably wouldn't spend much time thinking about them if Sandra weren't involved.

waynekerr

I thought Hatch just guessed a number closer to the one Greg had in mind than Kelly.

dolphinboy

I never liked Greg for doing that. Back in those days, this show was the biggest deal on television and for him to even act like he'd give the million to someone in such a random way was damaging to the finale.

However, I do believe that he admitted early on that he just said that for show and that he would have voted for Hatch no matter what.

Now, had Richard acted like a complete tyrant and not get to know Greg on a personal level (which he didn't need to do), I think it's safe to say Greg votes the same as Colleen and Kelly wins 5-4.

Many consider him one of the best and he barely beat Kelly. A combination of her winning a bunch of challenges when she had to and Hatch having some social skills, even while on a power trip, that Russell should have learned from before he even played the first time.

mwbmis

Some people might argue that Hatch would have been better off trying to make an alliance with Greg where he promised him a bunch of things that he had no intention of keeping just in case then burning Greg when he knew all along that he was voting Greg out. He could brag to the camera that he was in charge and let Greg know that no matter what he is running the game and that Greg is just another victim, not really even a person that matters.

Of course, then again, he might not get Greg's vote to give him a million dollars in that scenario, but it would be cool b/c he would be running the game, and if he didn't win it would be entirely b/c Greg was just bitter. He could even set up his own website where he complained about being screwed.

Poor non-sensible Hatch treated Greg with respect and just voted him out when he needed to. Hatch also got Sean's vote entirely b/c of how he treated him. They were buddies.

Eric D.

Okay, this thread has turned into a mess. All I'll say is that the people bitching about those who attack Russell are doing the same exact thing by constantly defending him. It's funny to sit back and see all the hypocrisy at play.

Anyway, I for one can't wait for next season with all new people so the endless Russell debate can finally end.

Double_Oh_7

TwineTime, I may have missed it, but are you connected in any way to Sandra Diaz-Twine ? It may explain your passionate, if somewhat misguided, defense of her. Or did you choose your ID because of her, in which case WTF?

SunMonkey

I think we've been bamboozled by TwineTime.

neilo13

I didn't like Sandra the first time and I don't like her now. However I do give her respect for winning 2 out of 2 games. She is terrible at the physical game, and her mouth seems to make her bad at the social game. Looking back though, I can't remember her getting into verbal arguments with anyone but Russell, seeing as how he is in the finals she didn't need him to vote for her anyway.

A huge part of the game is the other players factor. You have to be aware of how they will base their votes and you need to be able to woo the jury. If we all played a game of dvdtalk survivor I think that a lot of us would base our votes gameplay, so someone like Russell would easily win. However, if the majority of players can't bring themselves to vote for someone who in their eyes crossed a line or was a complete jerk, then guess who wins? That's right, the player who didn't piss you off. As a viewer, it sucks to see a strong physical/strategical game lose, but out on the island it makes perfect sense.

BDLOU

This is one thing I don't understand. How can you say he has no social game when he is able to come into 2 seasons (one being an Allstars game) and make alliances and maneuvers to keep himself there until the final. Not only that, most decisions run thru him. The entire game is based on social interaction, not just the end. I understand his type of social game is what hurts him in the end but he very much has a good one during the game. It's based a lot on bullying but thats a social game. Someone like Randy has no social game.

And TwineTime, I very much understand the game. I understand why Russell and Parvati lost. Many before them have lost the same way. I just don't agree with how the jury votes. I hate when they get on a soapbox and vilify the finalists for playing a game. Many times the people crying about game play are jury members that didn't even get far enough in the game where they had to make hard decisions and break alliances. Or how the game played out, they never had to break an alliance. Or them not making a "dirty" move is why they are on the jury. Or they have the physical ability to win immunity and don't need to make any questionable moves.

Timber

They wanted Russell at the end because they knew that no one was going to vote for him. The same reason he brought Sandra to the finals was the reason Parvarti stuck with him until the finals.

BDLOU

In that scenario, his non vote for Hatch would have been 100% based on being bitter which is what most of us are trying to say. For me, I'd rather someone say they just played me rather than try to strike up a fake friendship. Don't play me for a fool that you actually care about me when there is a million dollars on the line.

0073735963

General Survivor note: the show is moving to Wednesdays at 8 Eastern/7 Central...

Goat3001

I think this was really understated during the season. Not once towards the end did anyone bring up voting out Russell. Say what you want about Russell running the game, the other Survivors aren't stupid... if they felt Russell would win the season, they would have at least tried to vote him out toward the final 4. I'm guessing a lot more people wanted Russell in the final TC than the show made it seem.

SunMonkey

Which would make Sandra's single-minded goal of getting him voted out all the more telling of her poor strategic game.