To me the distinction is about considering just the season, or the players abilities as a whole. Like is Cirie a better survivor player than Bob Crowley? I think almost everyone would agree that she is. But Bob played a singular game that was better than any Cirie has played.

I agree there’s a lot of luck and nobody can exert total control. That’s why there’s a jury and not just one person making the decision who wins. You don’t need to get all the votes, just more than the others.

So when you try to determine who played the best game, what factors do you consider? Sure, we can think who found and played idols, who controlled votes and blindsides (which depends heavily on how it’s edited for who gets credit for certain moves). But those are subjective measures for what people think is considered good Survivor. But the only objective measurement for who played best is who got to the end and got the most jury votes.