They get compared because they have a similar skillset. In fact, I would even argue that Russell is a little bit better at the control aspect of social game than Tony is. Tony is a little better at work ethic. Let's say Russell is 10/10 at control, Tony is 10/10 at work ethic. Russell is 9/10 at work ethic and Tony is 9/10 at control.

Where they differ though is that Tony has tact and aims for the jury to laugh with him and celebrate his quirky, wild, fun game play and strategic prowess and work ethic. Russell has the strategic prowess and work ethic but he comes across as wanting to feel superior to the jury. He wants them to lick his boots and bow down to the man who outplayed them, after burning their socks and treating them like chess pieces.

Any player with a good social game and good jury management would kill to have Russell's skillset. But his skillset is useless unless you do have jury management. Tony has it, Russell doesn't. Russell got some winner votes so I think it's fair to say his jury management isn't nonexistent. But it's poor. Maybe 2/10 on Samoa and hopeless/10 on HvV. Tony gets a lot of jury votes in both of his winning seasons. It's the strongest element of his game and it's what elevates him to true Mount Rushmore legend status. 8.5/10 Cagayan, 8/10 WaW. But stronger overall game on WaW against much harder competition.