Russell Hantz if you like him, he is a great player, if you don't like him he is one of the worst.
not really, even looking at him neutrally you should be able to tell he is very bad at the game. I feel like people just buy the hype of players Probst and co. back up like Russell, Rob, and Parvati. I definitely wouldn't put Rob or Parv as some of the worst though
Neutrally how is someone who made it to two finals one of the worst player ever? That's what bothers me
Russell Hantz if you like him, he is a great player, if you don't like him he is one of the worst.
not really, even looking at him neutrally you should be able to tell he is very bad at the game. I feel like people just buy the hype of players Probst and co. back up like Russell, Rob, and Parvati. I definitely wouldn't put Rob or Parv as some of the worst though
Neutrally how is someone who made it to two finals one of the worst player ever? That's what bothers me
A lot of bad player make it deep into the game, in facts let's look at the last few seasons:Cagayan: Kass, a godawful social game and ****** off any and everybody, also Woo had no strategic game and apparently only talked to Tony/Trish (both made f3)BvW: Gervase, arrogant and rude and defintiely ruffled feathers with Aras, Vytas, Caleb, and Hayden and Monica, who played a very abd social game and was generally disliked (both made f3)Caramoan: Sherri, hated for her personality, how she played, etc. (made f3)Philippines: Lisa, disliked for how she was wishy-washy in wanting to play the game and Skupin, disliked for his rud behavior/antics (both made f3)Even further down the line: Sugar, Lil, Kelly W, Matt (AMAZON), Caryn (Palau), Stephanie (Guatemala), etc. Making it far doesn't equate being good at the game and imo mkaing the finals TWICE and losing is even worse sicne you had a legit shot to win and plead your case and were shut down.
Russell Hantz if you like him, he is a great player, if you don't like him he is one of the worst.
not really, even looking at him neutrally you should be able to tell he is very bad at the game. I feel like people just buy the hype of players Probst and co. back up like Russell, Rob, and Parvati. I definitely wouldn't put Rob or Parv as some of the worst though
Neutrally how is someone who made it to two finals one of the worst player ever? That's what bothers me
A lot of bad player make it deep into the game, in facts let's look at the last few seasons:Cagayan: Kass, a godawful social game and ****** off any and everybody, also Woo had no strategic game and apparently only talked to Tony/Trish (both made f3)BvW: Gervase, arrogant and rude and defintiely ruffled feathers with Aras, Vytas, Caleb, and Hayden and Monica, who played a very abd social game and was generally disliked (both made f3)Caramoan: Sherri, hated for her personality, how she played, etc. (made f3)Philippines: Lisa, disliked for how she was wishy-washy in wanting to play the game and Skupin, disliked for his rud behavior/antics (both made f3)Even further down the line: Sugar, Lil, Kelly W, Matt (AMAZON), Caryn (Palau), Stephanie (Guatemala), etc. Making it far doesn't equate being good at the game and imo mkaing the finals TWICE and losing is even worse sicne you had a legit shot to win and plead your case and were shut down.
Russell is still one of the best players to play. He faced a bitter jury on Samoa. Natalie deserved her win though. And Parvati is the more likable between Russell and her. At F6, it was 6-3-0 regardless of who was in the end with the 2 of them. That's in hindsight, of course, but they played good games to make it to the end, if you take it vote by vote but neither managed the jury well.
And yes, at least one goat will always make it deep. Nicaragua could have one of the best F3... but then the Sash situation had to happen. And obviously there's an abundant amount of good F2.
Russell Hantz if you like him, he is a great player, if you don't like him he is one of the worst.
not really, even looking at him neutrally you should be able to tell he is very bad at the game. I feel like people just buy the hype of players Probst and co. back up like Russell, Rob, and Parvati. I definitely wouldn't put Rob or Parv as some of the worst though
Neutrally how is someone who made it to two finals one of the worst player ever? That's what bothers me
A lot of bad player make it deep into the game, in facts let's look at the last few seasons:Cagayan: Kass, a godawful social game and ****** off any and everybody, also Woo had no strategic game and apparently only talked to Tony/Trish (both made f3)BvW: Gervase, arrogant and rude and defintiely ruffled feathers with Aras, Vytas, Caleb, and Hayden and Monica, who played a very abd social game and was generally disliked (both made f3)Caramoan: Sherri, hated for her personality, how she played, etc. (made f3)Philippines: Lisa, disliked for how she was wishy-washy in wanting to play the game and Skupin, disliked for his rud behavior/antics (both made f3)Even further down the line: Sugar, Lil, Kelly W, Matt (AMAZON), Caryn (Palau), Stephanie (Guatemala), etc. Making it far doesn't equate being good at the game and imo mkaing the finals TWICE and losing is even worse sicne you had a legit shot to win and plead your case and were shut down.
Russell is still one of the best players to play. He faced a bitter jury on Samoa. Natalie deserved her win though. And Parvati is the more likable between Russell and her. At F6, it was 6-3-0 regardless of who was in the end with the 2 of them. That's in hindsight, of course, but they played good games to make it to the end, if you take it vote by vote but neither managed the jury well.
And yes, at least one goat will always make it deep. Nicaragua could have one of the best F3... but then the Sash situation had to happen. And obviously there's an abundant amount of good F2.
Right? The goal of Survivor is to put yourself in a poasition to get the jury votes and win. Playing to make ftc doesn't get you points because the point isn't to make the end, but WIN. Like that's not even arguable, he has one of the worst social games and I hate the excuse that the jury was bitter, uh what? Every jury is bitter because they just lost a million dollars, how bitter they are towards you all comes down to you and how you handle them in the game and FTC. He wasn't even in contention to win Samoa and yeah I pointed out those players to show how making it far doesn't equate to good gameplay.
Russell Hantz if you like him, he is a great player, if you don't like him he is one of the worst.
not really, even looking at him neutrally you should be able to tell he is very bad at the game. I feel like people just buy the hype of players Probst and co. back up like Russell, Rob, and Parvati. I definitely wouldn't put Rob or Parv as some of the worst though
Neutrally how is someone who made it to two finals one of the worst player ever? That's what bothers me
A lot of bad player make it deep into the game, in facts let's look at the last few seasons:Cagayan: Kass, a godawful social game and ****** off any and everybody, also Woo had no strategic game and apparently only talked to Tony/Trish (both made f3)BvW: Gervase, arrogant and rude and defintiely ruffled feathers with Aras, Vytas, Caleb, and Hayden and Monica, who played a very abd social game and was generally disliked (both made f3)Caramoan: Sherri, hated for her personality, how she played, etc. (made f3)Philippines: Lisa, disliked for how she was wishy-washy in wanting to play the game and Skupin, disliked for his rud behavior/antics (both made f3)Even further down the line: Sugar, Lil, Kelly W, Matt (AMAZON), Caryn (Palau), Stephanie (Guatemala), etc. Making it far doesn't equate being good at the game and imo mkaing the finals TWICE and losing is even worse sicne you had a legit shot to win and plead your case and were shut down.
Russell is still one of the best players to play. He faced a bitter jury on Samoa. Natalie deserved her win though. And Parvati is the more likable between Russell and her. At F6, it was 6-3-0 regardless of who was in the end with the 2 of them. That's in hindsight, of course, but they played good games to make it to the end, if you take it vote by vote but neither managed the jury well.
And yes, at least one goat will always make it deep. Nicaragua could have one of the best F3... but then the Sash situation had to happen. And obviously there's an abundant amount of good F2.
What? Are you serious?
Considering there has been over 400 people who have played....
Russel would easily be in the 93-94th percentile for me of people who have played the game.
That would definitely make him one of the best, in my opinion of course.
Men lie, women lie, numbers don't tho. You'd have to be a fool to think he's not in the top 10%. He made it to the end twice (once in quite unfavorable circumstances), found idols without clues (herp derp first person with a brain to actually LOOK) and overall plays the game aggressive to get where he wants to be.
Right? The goal of Survivor is to put yourself in a poasition to get the jury votes and win. Playing to make ftc doesn't get you points because the point isn't to make the end, but WIN. Like that's not even arguable, he has one of the worst social games and I hate the excuse that the jury was bitter, uh what? Every jury is bitter because they just lost a million dollars, how bitter they are towards you all comes down to you and how you handle them in the game and FTC. He wasn't even in contention to win Samoa and yeah I pointed out those players to show how making it far doesn't equate to good gameplay.
I that regard everyone who has never been to FTC or lost a FTC is not a good player. Again, Russell may not been one of the best players, but to think that he's one of the worst is imo false and basically just looking at Survivor as:" Only the winner is a good player". That would actually means that Sandra is the best Survivor player ever!! Everybody that was considered a jury threat and got voted out befor the final, played not a good game, because they played way too good for the others so that became a bad game. (which means people like Cirie or Rob C are not good players or Boston Rob in 3/4 of his tries). Russell made enough moves that would qualify him as a good player.
I think Russell was the first person that showed people that there's however different types of bitter jury. One bitter jury that knows that the person who acted and played aggresively knew that they are playing a game (kind of like Tony) or a jury that is just is an anti-xxx jury. Everbody, but XXX. That happened to Russell Hantz. Twice.
Right? The goal of Survivor is to put yourself in a poasition to get the jury votes and win. Playing to make ftc doesn't get you points because the point isn't to make the end, but WIN. Like that's not even arguable, he has one of the worst social games and I hate the excuse that the jury was bitter, uh what? Every jury is bitter because they just lost a million dollars, how bitter they are towards you all comes down to you and how you handle them in the game and FTC. He wasn't even in contention to win Samoa and yeah I pointed out those players to show how making it far doesn't equate to good gameplay.
"has one of the worst social games" but he made it to the end on HvV with a good cast. He was easily disposable lol. And Russell has won, what?, over $300,000 on Survivor (pre-tax), that's more than most non-winners.
"wasn't even in contention in Samoa" but somehow was eligible to receive votes at the FTC and somehow landed 3?
And not every jury is bitter enough to cast a vote against someone as opposed to wanting to vote for someone else.
I don't even like Russell, can't believe I'm defending his gameplay and caliber of player ****.
I would love to play with Russell, let him play his dreadful social game and hopefully be in the end with him and guaranteed win. He's one of the few ppl who almost never wins no matter who he is against. I love how him and Parvati openly laughed at JTs letter in front of the heroes. Such weird horrible gameplay.
I would love to play with Russell, let him play his dreadful social game and hopefully be in the end with him and guaranteed win. He's one of the few ppl who almost never wins no matter who he is against. I love how him and Parvati openly laughed at JTs letter in front of the heroes. Such weird horrible gameplay.
I can see him playing a more down-to-earth play if he plays again. It just seems to me that he's not that lunatic anymore and you had to make something and not just rode his cocktails till the end.
Well riding his coattails would definitely be bad, you wouldn't want his stench on you.
Idk he seems to be of the mind that you have to make constant big moves to win, which is ridiculous and creates more problems than is needed. Didn't he think there was only one way to win.
If he's cast though, I would definitely go into it with an open mind and see if he could be a changed player.
One is newbies. 18 players. 3 tribes. Romantic compatibility theme. The other...
...is Blood vs Water 3. With a major reconstruction...
Rivals. 5 pairs of Survivor enemies and their loved ones. Players are on a tribe with their Rival's loved one.
Something about a $2,000,000 prize.
Koh Rong, Cambodia is 100% confirmed.
I want to know how the romantic compatibility works for three tribes.
There's now talk it could be more akin to Single vs Married vs Divorced or something stupid like that. Relationships factor in somehow.
Side note: are you doing the Vevmo Survivor game or nah?
It could not be stupid , this seasons theme sounded stupid when it was first spoiled IMO.
Nah, I only go on here on my phone and the whole instant message thing is annoying on it. Plus I got a lot of stuff going on right now that I won't bore you guys with lol
It could not be stupid , this seasons theme sounded stupid when it was first spoiled IMO.
Nah, I only go on here on my phone and the whole instant message thing is annoying on it. Plus I got a lot of stuff going on right now that I won't bore you guys with lol
Right? The goal of Survivor is to put yourself in a poasition to get the jury votes and win. Playing to make ftc doesn't get you points because the point isn't to make the end, but WIN. Like that's not even arguable, he has one of the worst social games and I hate the excuse that the jury was bitter, uh what? Every jury is bitter because they just lost a million dollars, how bitter they are towards you all comes down to you and how you handle them in the game and FTC. He wasn't even in contention to win Samoa and yeah I pointed out those players to show how making it far doesn't equate to good gameplay.
I that regard everyone who has never been to FTC or lost a FTC is not a good player. Again, Russell may not been one of the best players, but to think that he's one of the worst is imo false and basically just looking at Survivor as:" Only the winner is a good player". That would actually means that Sandra is the best Survivor player ever!! Everybody that was considered a jury threat and got voted out befor the final, played not a good game, because they played way too good for the others so that became a bad game. (which means people like Cirie or Rob C are not good players or Boston Rob in 3/4 of his tries). Russell made enough moves that would qualify him as a good player.
I think Russell was the first person that showed people that there's however different types of bitter jury. One bitter jury that knows that the person who acted and played aggresively knew that they are playing a game (kind of like Tony) or a jury that is just is an anti-xxx jury. Everbody, but XXX. That happened to Russell Hantz. Twice.
No, where did I say only winners are good players? Cirie, Rob C, Fairplay, Malcolm, Brett, Stephen, Ciera, Trish are all good to great players who have not won. Sandra is definitely up there, but I wouldn't have her as my #1. Yeah the jury was bitter towards Tony but still voted for him and know why? He didn't treat people who were voting for the winner like shit, **** the reason Tasha voted against him was because they butted heads and Tony even owns up that he was rude to her. That's people buying the edit, because Tony himself even says he spent a majority of the time socializing and they just showed his strategic aspect. Comparing Tony to Russell is an insult to Tony and his great game.
Right? The goal of Survivor is to put yourself in a poasition to get the jury votes and win. Playing to make ftc doesn't get you points because the point isn't to make the end, but WIN. Like that's not even arguable, he has one of the worst social games and I hate the excuse that the jury was bitter, uh what? Every jury is bitter because they just lost a million dollars, how bitter they are towards you all comes down to you and how you handle them in the game and FTC. He wasn't even in contention to win Samoa and yeah I pointed out those players to show how making it far doesn't equate to good gameplay.
"has one of the worst social games" but he made it to the end on HvV with a good cast. He was easily disposable lol. And Russell has won, what?, over $300,000 on Survivor (pre-tax), that's more than most non-winners.
"wasn't even in contention in Samoa" but somehow was eligible to receive votes at the FTC and somehow landed 3?
And not every jury is bitter enough to cast a vote against someone as opposed to wanting to vote for someone else.
I don't even like Russell, can't believe I'm defending his gameplay and caliber of player ****.
And??? Making it far does not mean you have a good social game and goes out at f15 had Tyson not been overthinking. Even then HvV saw a lot of people blowing up their games and not playing well like Parvati, Danielle, Candice, Coach, Rob, Tyson, JT, etc.
Yeah Shambo and John were always voting him but the other 7 were going to Mickie or Natalie and thus he had no shot to win.
Yeah its typical, Sue VOTED against Kelly more than for Rich, Tasha voted against Tony more than for Woo and then even idk why that's even a relevant point since if a jury is voting against you, you did something wrong. This is to also say Natalie and Sandra were extremely well liked by the jury and it's weird to think the jury just voted against Russell, as if that's the only reason those girls won.
Yeah, defending Russell's gameplay is a pretty big no no. He absolutely sucks imo and it's perfectly shown in HvV
Right? The goal of Survivor is to put yourself in a poasition to get the jury votes and win. Playing to make ftc doesn't get you points because the point isn't to make the end, but WIN. Like that's not even arguable, he has one of the worst social games and I hate the excuse that the jury was bitter, uh what? Every jury is bitter because they just lost a million dollars, how bitter they are towards you all comes down to you and how you handle them in the game and FTC. He wasn't even in contention to win Samoa and yeah I pointed out those players to show how making it far doesn't equate to good gameplay.
"has one of the worst social games" but he made it to the end on HvV with a good cast. He was easily disposable lol. And Russell has won, what?, over $300,000 on Survivor (pre-tax), that's more than most non-winners. "wasn't even in contention in Samoa" but somehow was eligible to receive votes at the FTC and somehow landed 3? And not every jury is bitter enough to cast a vote against someone as opposed to wanting to vote for someone else. I don't even like Russell, can't believe I'm defending his gameplay and caliber of player ****.
And??? Making it far does not mean you have a good social game and goes out at f15 had Tyson not been overthinking. Even then HvV saw a lot of people blowing up their games and not playing well like Parvati, Danielle, Candice, Coach, Rob, Tyson, JT, etc. Yeah Shambo and John were always voting him but the other 7 were going to Mickie or Natalie and thus he had no shot to win. Yeah its typical, Sue VOTED against Kelly more than for Rich, Tasha voted against Tony more than for Woo and then even idk why that's even a relevant point since if a jury is voting against you, you did something wrong. This is to also say Natalie and Sandra were extremely well liked by the jury and it's weird to think the jury just voted against Russell, as if that's the only reason those girls won. Yeah, defending Russell's gameplay is a pretty big no no. He absolutely sucks imo and it's perfectly shown in HvV
Yes, but Russell was the leader in Samoa. He had to do something for people to follow him like robots and to convince people to vote with them.
Their games blew up because HvV had one of the strongest casts ever. It's easy to play the game when you're one of the diamonds in the rough. But when you're with a bunch of other diamonds it takes more a considerable amount more effort than non-returnee seasons.
What's right and wrong is subjective. And you don't even have to do anything 'wrong' to lose Survivor. Sandra earned the HvV win, as I noted, it was going to be 6-3-0 (or worse) regardless. The other 4 people in the F6 would've won against Russell or Parvati lol.
The jury voted against Russell in Samoa. You know it's rough when losers are accusing production of helping Russell, when it was no longer necessary lol.
He "absolutely sucks" but he's done far better than an overwhelming majorityof the people cast on Survivor, on his own merit lol.
Follow him? Lol sounds like you believe the Samoa edit because not everything was a Russell move. People didn't like Marissa as she was overstrategizing, Betsy was seen as a weak link with little social skills, Liz was duped for not being likable. Of course everything seems like Russell called the shots when EVERYTHING SCENE IS ONLY GIVING WHAT RUSSELL THINKS. Like I don't get how people just blindly buy the Samoa edit. They brought Russell back for HvV and decided to screw making Samoa a decent season with a proper edit, but instead let's just make it the Russell show.
Not really, in fact a lot of luck and situations where people have no control is frequent in returnees seasons. Even then, 99/100 Russell goes home at f15 and lucked out with the Tyson move. But even so he did so much wrong like looking for the idol, breaking his early, not shown alliance with Rob, putting himself in the minority, booting/making his ally in Danielle at f7 break down IN FRONT OF THE JURY, making false promises, wanting Sandra in f3, like HvV Russell is a textbook way on how NOT to play.
Yeah just about everyone who has lost the game has done something wrong except for a case of Fairplay, Cirie, or Ozzy where format changes or an unlikely person winning immunity screws them. Yeah they would have which is just a testament to how bad they played, thanks for proving my point that Russell sucks at survivor even more (really though by merge he had no shot to win the game while Parv could have won in a Parv/Danielle/Russell f3).
And like I said just goes to show how awful Russell is, but I do think you're underestimating how much Natalie was liked. Apparently her unaired answer to Laura M moved the jury to tears (listing info about their family, complimenting them, showing how much she really got to know them).
Better as in placement? Yes, better as a player? Absolutely not. There are an overwhelming amount of players better.
Right? The goal of Survivor is to put yourself in a poasition to get the jury votes and win. Playing to make ftc doesn't get you points because the point isn't to make the end, but WIN. Like that's not even arguable, he has one of the worst social games and I hate the excuse that the jury was bitter, uh what? Every jury is bitter because they just lost a million dollars, how bitter they are towards you all comes down to you and how you handle them in the game and FTC. He wasn't even in contention to win Samoa and yeah I pointed out those players to show how making it far doesn't equate to good gameplay.
I that regard everyone who has never been to FTC or lost a FTC is not a good player. Again, Russell may not been one of the best players, but to think that he's one of the worst is imo false and basically just looking at Survivor as:" Only the winner is a good player". That would actually means that Sandra is the best Survivor player ever!! Everybody that was considered a jury threat and got voted out befor the final, played not a good game, because they played way too good for the others so that became a bad game. (which means people like Cirie or Rob C are not good players or Boston Rob in 3/4 of his tries). Russell made enough moves that would qualify him as a good player.
I think Russell was the first person that showed people that there's however different types of bitter jury. One bitter jury that knows that the person who acted and played aggresively knew that they are playing a game (kind of like Tony) or a jury that is just is an anti-xxx jury. Everbody, but XXX. That happened to Russell Hantz. Twice.
No, where did I say only winners are good players? Cirie, Rob C, Fairplay, Malcolm, Brett, Stephen, Ciera, Trish are all good to great players who have not won. Sandra is definitely up there, but I wouldn't have her as my #1. Yeah the jury was bitter towards Tony but still voted for him and know why? He didn't treat people who were voting for the winner like shit, **** the reason Tasha voted against him was because they butted heads and Tony even owns up that he was rude to her. That's people buying the edit, because Tony himself even says he spent a majority of the time socializing and they just showed his strategic aspect. Comparing Tony to Russell is an insult to Tony and his great game.
Whoever doesn't get to the goal line and win, pretty much failed thus didn't played good/ others played better/adapted to a situation better. To me that means only winners are good players or better players than all of his fellow contestants.
In both seasons, it was almost everbody against Russell and his solid small alliance and he still made it to the end. Two times. They could've voted him out on numerious occasions, but he didn't let it happen whether it was him or his alliance doing it for him. Again, I'm definitely not thinking that Russell Hantz is one of the best, but to think that he's one of the worst it's just that you're either don't like his person in general (only a few), are based of the interviews where everybody pretty much bashed Russell after the game and didn't give a neutral opinion on him, because he played them/screwed them to get further or retrospective looking at his game play. To me, you forget that he made some good moves that bad players wouldn't be able to pull off. Especially him finding multiple HII without clues and use them as a tool for you/your alliance to get further. In that regard, he changed the game.
I absolutely hate seasons though where everybody is a returnee, because then Survivor just become even more a popularity contest and it isn't that much about game anymore imo. Alliances are formed preshow and it takes people like Russell/Parvati/Malcolm/Ozzy/Cirie to make the season a bit unpredictable. People can deny it, but I think that's the way it is when most/half the cast is a returnee (you can see that with Sandra and Rupert where you knew how this will end in the jury) and why CBS/Jeff Probst/Mark Burnett are not that much of fans to do a full returnee season.
Follow him? Lol sounds like you believe the Samoa edit because not everything was a Russell move. People didn't like Marissa as she was overstrategizing, Betsy was seen as a weak link with little social skills, Liz was duped for not being likable. Of course everything seems like Russell called the shots when EVERYTHING SCENE IS ONLY GIVING WHAT RUSSELL THINKS. Like I don't get how people just blindly buy the Samoa edit. They brought Russell back for HvV and decided to screw making Samoa a decent season with a proper edit, but instead let's just make it the Russell show. Not really, in fact a lot of luck and situations where people have no control is frequent in returnees seasons. Even then, 99/100 Russell goes home at f15 and lucked out with the Tyson move. But even so he did so much wrong like looking for the idol, breaking his early, not shown alliance with Rob, putting himself in the minority, booting/making his ally in Danielle at f7 break down IN FRONT OF THE JURY, making false promises, wanting Sandra in f3, like HvV Russell is a textbook way on how NOT to play. Yeah just about everyone who has lost the game has done something wrong except for a case of Fairplay, Cirie, or Ozzy where format changes or an unlikely person winning immunity screws them. Yeah they would have which is just a testament to how bad they played, thanks for proving my point that Russell sucks at survivor even more (really though by merge he had no shot to win the game while Parv could have won in a Parv/Danielle/Russell f3). And like I said just goes to show how awful Russell is, but I do think you're underestimating how much Natalie was liked. Apparently her unaired answer to Laura M moved the jury to tears (listing info about their family, complimenting them, showing how much she really got to know them). Better as in placement? Yes, better as a player? Absolutely not. There are an overwhelming amount of players better.
Kicking knowledge as if I don't already know anything that you've said, lol. But I'll just drop it.
Your hate for Russell is comparable to the people who hate Kanye West. It's laughable.
Follow him? Lol sounds like you believe the Samoa edit because not everything was a Russell move. People didn't like Marissa as she was overstrategizing, Betsy was seen as a weak link with little social skills, Liz was duped for not being likable. Of course everything seems like Russell called the shots when EVERYTHING SCENE IS ONLY GIVING WHAT RUSSELL THINKS. Like I don't get how people just blindly buy the Samoa edit. They brought Russell back for HvV and decided to screw making Samoa a decent season with a proper edit, but instead let's just make it the Russell show. Not really, in fact a lot of luck and situations where people have no control is frequent in returnees seasons. Even then, 99/100 Russell goes home at f15 and lucked out with the Tyson move. But even so he did so much wrong like looking for the idol, breaking his early, not shown alliance with Rob, putting himself in the minority, booting/making his ally in Danielle at f7 break down IN FRONT OF THE JURY, making false promises, wanting Sandra in f3, like HvV Russell is a textbook way on how NOT to play. Yeah just about everyone who has lost the game has done something wrong except for a case of Fairplay, Cirie, or Ozzy where format changes or an unlikely person winning immunity screws them. Yeah they would have which is just a testament to how bad they played, thanks for proving my point that Russell sucks at survivor even more (really though by merge he had no shot to win the game while Parv could have won in a Parv/Danielle/Russell f3). And like I said just goes to show how awful Russell is, but I do think you're underestimating how much Natalie was liked. Apparently her unaired answer to Laura M moved the jury to tears (listing info about their family, complimenting them, showing how much she really got to know them). Better as in placement? Yes, better as a player? Absolutely not. There are an overwhelming amount of players better.
Kicking knowledge as if I don't already know anything that you've said, lol. But I'll just drop it.
Your hate for Russell is comparable to the people who hate Kanye West. It's laughable.
I don't think he hates Russell Hantz, he just see him as one of the worst player ever and in that I don't agree with him.
It could not be stupid , this seasons theme sounded stupid when it was first spoiled IMO.
Nah, I only go on here on my phone and the whole instant message thing is annoying on it. Plus I got a lot of stuff going on right now that I won't bore you guys with lol
Very true, we'll see how it plays out.
And no worries!
One thing I don't like about it tho is unlike cagyayan and worlds apart, it does limit casting because what about people who are just dating?
With the other themes you can't be limited because you can fit those no matter what especially for worlds apart.
One thing I don't like about it tho is unlike cagyayan and worlds apart, it does limit casting because what about people who are just dating?
With the other themes you can't be limited because you can fit those no matter what especially for worlds apart.
With Cagayan & Worlds Apart, the theme was decided after the cast was assembled and they realized there was a division. They same thing could have happened here, the Cambodia cast is very likely in the final stages of casting, with the core cast and alternates already being determined. Filming starts this time next month.
I'm not a fan of people playing 3 or 4 times, particularly the latter. Is there anyone you guys wouldn't mind seeing for the 3rd or 4th time? 3rd - Corinne & Rob C 4th - Maneater Manthey
Neutrally how is someone who made it to two finals one of the worst player ever? That's what bothers me
I'm not liking this speculated theme for season 32. I just want an all star season of the people from season 20- now.
From what I hear they definitely want old schoolers back and I'll be shocked if Hatch isn't on season 32 if we do get returnees.
Yeah. He was one person I REALLY wanted to see back on the show. I think he would've been perfect for that season.
I want both Shane and Terry. They both should have been on another season already.
Russell is still one of the best players to play. He faced a bitter jury on Samoa. Natalie deserved her win though. And Parvati is the more likable between Russell and her. At F6, it was 6-3-0 regardless of who was in the end with the 2 of them. That's in hindsight, of course, but they played good games to make it to the end, if you take it vote by vote but neither managed the jury well.
And yes, at least one goat will always make it deep. Nicaragua could have one of the best F3... but then the Sash situation had to happen. And obviously there's an abundant amount of good F2.
What? Are you serious?
Right? The goal of Survivor is to put yourself in a poasition to get the jury votes and win. Playing to make ftc doesn't get you points because the point isn't to make the end, but WIN. Like that's not even arguable, he has one of the worst social games and I hate the excuse that the jury was bitter, uh what? Every jury is bitter because they just lost a million dollars, how bitter they are towards you all comes down to you and how you handle them in the game and FTC. He wasn't even in contention to win Samoa and yeah I pointed out those players to show how making it far doesn't equate to good gameplay.
Considering there has been over 400 people who have played....
Russel would easily be in the 93-94th percentile for me of people who have played the game.
That would definitely make him one of the best, in my opinion of course.
Men lie, women lie, numbers don't tho. You'd have to be a fool to think he's not in the top 10%. He made it to the end twice (once in quite unfavorable circumstances), found idols without clues (herp derp first person with a brain to actually LOOK) and overall plays the game aggressive to get where he wants to be.
I that regard everyone who has never been to FTC or lost a FTC is not a good player.
Again, Russell may not been one of the best players, but to think that he's one of the worst is imo false and basically just looking at Survivor as:" Only the winner is a good player". That would actually means that Sandra is the best Survivor player ever!! Everybody that was considered a jury threat and got voted out befor the final, played not a good game, because they played way too good for the others so that became a bad game. (which means people like Cirie or Rob C are not good players or Boston Rob in 3/4 of his tries).
Russell made enough moves that would qualify him as a good player.
I think Russell was the first person that showed people that there's however different types of bitter jury. One bitter jury that knows that the person who acted and played aggresively knew that they are playing a game (kind of like Tony) or a jury that is just is an anti-xxx jury. Everbody, but XXX. That happened to Russell Hantz. Twice.
"has one of the worst social games" but he made it to the end on HvV with a good cast. He was easily disposable lol. And Russell has won, what?, over $300,000 on Survivor (pre-tax), that's more than most non-winners.
"wasn't even in contention in Samoa" but somehow was eligible to receive votes at the FTC and somehow landed 3?
And not every jury is bitter enough to cast a vote against someone as opposed to wanting to vote for someone else.
I don't even like Russell, can't believe I'm defending his gameplay and caliber of player ****.
I would love to play with Russell, let him play his dreadful social game and hopefully be in the end with him and guaranteed win. He's one of the few ppl who almost never wins no matter who he is against. I love how him and Parvati openly laughed at JTs letter in front of the heroes. Such weird horrible gameplay.
I can see him playing a more down-to-earth play if he plays again. It just seems to me that he's not that lunatic anymore and you had to make something and not just rode his cocktails till the end.
Well riding his coattails would definitely be bad, you wouldn't want his stench on you.
Idk he seems to be of the mind that you have to make constant big moves to win, which is ridiculous and creates more problems than is needed. Didn't he think there was only one way to win.
If he's cast though, I would definitely go into it with an open mind and see if he could be a changed player.
I want to know how the romantic compatibility works for three tribes.
There's now talk it could be more akin to Single vs Married vs Divorced or something stupid like that. Relationships factor in somehow.
Side note: are you doing the Vevmo Survivor game or nah?
It could not be stupid , this seasons theme sounded stupid when it was first spoiled IMO.
Nah, I only go on here on my phone and the whole instant message thing is annoying on it. Plus I got a lot of stuff going on right now that I won't bore you guys with lol
Very true, we'll see how it plays out.
And no worries!
No, where did I say only winners are good players? Cirie, Rob C, Fairplay, Malcolm, Brett, Stephen, Ciera, Trish are all good to great players who have not won. Sandra is definitely up there, but I wouldn't have her as my #1. Yeah the jury was bitter towards Tony but still voted for him and know why? He didn't treat people who were voting for the winner like shit, **** the reason Tasha voted against him was because they butted heads and Tony even owns up that he was rude to her. That's people buying the edit, because Tony himself even says he spent a majority of the time socializing and they just showed his strategic aspect. Comparing Tony to Russell is an insult to Tony and his great game.
And??? Making it far does not mean you have a good social game and goes out at f15 had Tyson not been overthinking. Even then HvV saw a lot of people blowing up their games and not playing well like Parvati, Danielle, Candice, Coach, Rob, Tyson, JT, etc.
Yeah Shambo and John were always voting him but the other 7 were going to Mickie or Natalie and thus he had no shot to win.
Yeah its typical, Sue VOTED against Kelly more than for Rich, Tasha voted against Tony more than for Woo and then even idk why that's even a relevant point since if a jury is voting against you, you did something wrong. This is to also say Natalie and Sandra were extremely well liked by the jury and it's weird to think the jury just voted against Russell, as if that's the only reason those girls won.
Yeah, defending Russell's gameplay is a pretty big no no. He absolutely sucks imo and it's perfectly shown in HvV
Yes, but Russell was the leader in Samoa. He had to do something for people to follow him like robots and to convince people to vote with them.
Their games blew up because HvV had one of the strongest casts ever. It's easy to play the game when you're one of the diamonds in the rough. But when you're with a bunch of other diamonds it takes more a considerable amount more effort than non-returnee seasons.
What's right and wrong is subjective. And you don't even have to do anything 'wrong' to lose Survivor. Sandra earned the HvV win, as I noted, it was going to be 6-3-0 (or worse) regardless. The other 4 people in the F6 would've won against Russell or Parvati lol.
The jury voted against Russell in Samoa. You know it's rough when losers are accusing production of helping Russell, when it was no longer necessary lol.
He "absolutely sucks" but he's done far better than an overwhelming majorityof the people cast on Survivor, on his own merit lol.
Follow him? Lol sounds like you believe the Samoa edit because not everything was a Russell move. People didn't like Marissa as she was overstrategizing, Betsy was seen as a weak link with little social skills, Liz was duped for not being likable. Of course everything seems like Russell called the shots when EVERYTHING SCENE IS ONLY GIVING WHAT RUSSELL THINKS. Like I don't get how people just blindly buy the Samoa edit. They brought Russell back for HvV and decided to screw making Samoa a decent season with a proper edit, but instead let's just make it the Russell show.
Not really, in fact a lot of luck and situations where people have no control is frequent in returnees seasons. Even then, 99/100 Russell goes home at f15 and lucked out with the Tyson move. But even so he did so much wrong like looking for the idol, breaking his early, not shown alliance with Rob, putting himself in the minority, booting/making his ally in Danielle at f7 break down IN FRONT OF THE JURY, making false promises, wanting Sandra in f3, like HvV Russell is a textbook way on how NOT to play.
Yeah just about everyone who has lost the game has done something wrong except for a case of Fairplay, Cirie, or Ozzy where format changes or an unlikely person winning immunity screws them. Yeah they would have which is just a testament to how bad they played, thanks for proving my point that Russell sucks at survivor even more (really though by merge he had no shot to win the game while Parv could have won in a Parv/Danielle/Russell f3).
And like I said just goes to show how awful Russell is, but I do think you're underestimating how much Natalie was liked. Apparently her unaired answer to Laura M moved the jury to tears (listing info about their family, complimenting them, showing how much she really got to know them).
Better as in placement? Yes, better as a player? Absolutely not. There are an overwhelming amount of players better.
Whoever doesn't get to the goal line and win, pretty much failed thus didn't played good/ others played better/adapted to a situation better. To me that means only winners are good players or better players than all of his fellow contestants.
In both seasons, it was almost everbody against Russell and his solid small alliance and he still made it to the end. Two times. They could've voted him out on numerious occasions, but he didn't let it happen whether it was him or his alliance doing it for him. Again, I'm definitely not thinking that Russell Hantz is one of the best, but to think that he's one of the worst it's just that you're either don't like his person in general (only a few), are based of the interviews where everybody pretty much bashed Russell after the game and didn't give a neutral opinion on him, because he played them/screwed them to get further or retrospective looking at his game play. To me, you forget that he made some good moves that bad players wouldn't be able to pull off. Especially him finding multiple HII without clues and use them as a tool for you/your alliance to get further. In that regard, he changed the game.
I absolutely hate seasons though where everybody is a returnee, because then Survivor just become even more a popularity contest and it isn't that much about game anymore imo. Alliances are formed preshow and it takes people like Russell/Parvati/Malcolm/Ozzy/Cirie to make the season a bit unpredictable. People can deny it, but I think that's the way it is when most/half the cast is a returnee (you can see that with Sandra and Rupert where you knew how this will end in the jury) and why CBS/Jeff Probst/Mark Burnett are not that much of fans to do a full returnee season.
Kicking knowledge as if I don't already know anything that you've said, lol. But I'll just drop it.
Your hate for Russell is comparable to the people who hate Kanye West. It's laughable.
I don't think he hates Russell Hantz, he just see him as one of the worst player ever and in that I don't agree with him.
One thing I don't like about it tho is unlike cagyayan and worlds apart, it does limit casting because what about people who are just dating?
With the other themes you can't be limited because you can fit those no matter what especially for worlds apart.
I'm not a fan of people playing 3 or 4 times, particularly the latter. Is there anyone you guys wouldn't mind seeing for the 3rd or 4th time?
3rd - Corinne & Rob C
4th - Maneater Manthey
With Cagayan & Worlds Apart, the theme was decided after the cast was assembled and they realized there was a division. They same thing could have happened here, the Cambodia cast is very likely in the final stages of casting, with the core cast and alternates already being determined. Filming starts this time next month.
3rd: Corinne, Andrea, Richard, Sandra and Rob C
4th: Penner and Cirie
Pages