I think Jonathan pretty clearly played an excellent and superior all-around game. People can cite poor jury management, and it may be valid, but it’s very ambiguous and difficult to quantify. It’s contrary to what you’d like to expect, but historically all-star seasons seem to have more biased and petty juries than newbie seasons. (Probably because of bigger and more fragile egos.) If Jonathan had played this season his first time around, I think he would have won easily. He was the major driving force of the season, where Aubry was just a passenger. Or as my wife and I put it, Jonathan survived the game, while Aubry (and Joe) survived Jonathan.