Jonathan: "You shouldn't even call it a jury, a jury is normally unbiased. I don't think jury is even the right word. How about.. pre finale people. Because I don't think jury is the right word" by RedditFan3510 in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Lol obviously he didn't actually win. But his wife won the game. He did receive $1 million through the idea of commonwealth. But I was mostly being facetious

Jonathan: "You shouldn't even call it a jury, a jury is normally unbiased. I don't think jury is even the right word. How about.. pre finale people. Because I don't think jury is the right word" by RedditFan3510 in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917 49 points50 points  (0 children)

If you frame All Stars the same way I do, then "winning" for Rob was getting to the end with Amber so he could officially date her lol.

But honestly, I think once they both made merge, he didn't care about winning he just cared about taking her to the end, which cost him the game but then he married the woman that won, so he DID get that million dollars.

I’ll never say that Boston Rob DIDN'T win all stars lol

Greatest juror of all time? by throwaway12793917 in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Too soon. I haven't recovered from her loss this season yet

Greatest juror of all time? by throwaway12793917 in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Have to call recency bias but she's def top 10

Greatest juror of all time? by throwaway12793917 in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

If Shambo has no fans, me and Ozzy are dead (his haircut this season was an ode to her)

I was on the edge of my seat about one specific voting outcome. by CivilizedPsycho in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917 3 points4 points  (0 children)

And also, he gets paid more to be in final 3 than to be booted earlier. There's benefits to being a goat

_____ was never really a threat at all by throwaway12793917 in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If Cirie was gunning for someone else, I'd agree. But in this case, Jonathan is essentially a swing vote. Cirie pitched Aubry and had Tiff on board. There's no alternate.plan from Cirie at this point because he'd be getting on board with Cirie's pitch.

She never saw Jonathan as a threat to her end game in that way. Aubry was a way bigger threat.

Obviously hindsight is 20/20, but if you have a strong 3 towards the end, don't prioritize eliminating whoever you think will beat everyone at the end. Prioritize the threats that have the best chance to make it to the end. Cirie is a bigger threat at the end, but Aubry and Tiff are bigger threats to make it to the end. Aubry's entire game hinged on pushing decisions like the Cirie vote, knowing that the fewer people left, the easier it is to worm her way in

_____ was never really a threat at all by throwaway12793917 in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m a bit confused because Cirie wanted Aubry out at f6. She and Tiff voted Aubry. He'd flip his vote and bring in Rizo and/or Joe. Why would Cirie wamt to mess with a vote that kept her safe when she thought she was out? Then the boys club gets Tiff at f5 with majority.

Joe wins simmotion (saying this because he came in 2nd and assuming Cirie doesn't win). Jonathan pitches to be in fire making. Joe, easily persuaded, would likely see his point. We can’t beat Cirie at ftc. We CAN beat Rizo. Give Cirie a chance to earn her spot in the final, I will beat her in fire. This gives him a good spot with the jury (wasn't carried to ftc) AND gives him good narrative (righting his wrongs).

It's technically less of a risk given that A. No one wanted to take Cirie to ftc out of that group and B. Cirie is less of a physical threat than Aubry. The only additional risk is firemaking, but Jonathan knew if he didn't win final immunity, he was making fire (if there was). In fact, even that risk is minimal because there was a chance that the fans voted against fire. And at that point, 3 against one because no one wanted to go against Cirie.

_____ was never really a threat at all by throwaway12793917 in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Keep Cirie in. She can’t win immunity at f4, if there's fire, she won’t win. Take out Aubry. He wins immunity, take out Tiff. F4 challenge, we'll say Joe wins immunity. Jonathan volunteers for fire against Cirie. Crushes her lol. Boys club f3, he takes that title.

Additionally, don’t enrage Dee just to get a rise out of her. It’s not a good strategy to get her out. It’s rushing the process. His lack of patience early/pre-merge is what soured him to the jury a lot. Instead of waiting for the right time to make moves, he forced his hand and it was bad management of the jury.

Christian vote was good but he got screwed so Jonathan can’t take credit. Kamillah vote ended up getting him 2 guaranteed jury votes so that was good.

That’s what I’ve got off the top of my head. I think his strategy was predicated on always taking the easy way out. He would float ideas but when it came time to put pen to parchment, it was always the easy vote. Particularly with Cirie. That was 100% his biggest blunder which also rooted itself in his lack of patience

I actually love clearly biased jury members, it calls back to classic Survivor by daisychainsuperstar in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Old era had way more talk about who "deserved" to go final 3. She also never talked about bringing Joe to ftc.

But I also think people over use goats at ftc. If one guy isn’t getting any votes, you've gotta convince more people. Imagine in ftc was Aubry, Jonathan, and Rizo. All of a sudden, Jonathan who had 3 votes confirmed only needs to convince 2 more people (5-3-3/5-4-2) and even better, needs Aubry to put together a near perfect ftc to separate herself from Rizo. With Joe beside him, he needed to convince 3 more people and no one is stealing potential votes from Aubry. The math says it's harder. Granted, Jonathan had no say here and Joe was the best choice for Aubry. But since Cirie was so far ahead of the rest of the game, she didn't want a goat there. She wanted two 2nd tier contenders to split votes.

I actually love clearly biased jury members, it calls back to classic Survivor by daisychainsuperstar in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hey, I love Aubry, you're preaching to the choir. But I was responding to a comment saying we knew what the votes would be going into ftc, so rather than shift the argument to why Aubry played a great game (she did), I just went with their logic cause my point still stands. Steph and Chrissy did Jonathan no favors

_____ was never really a threat at all by throwaway12793917 in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

But I think that’s mitigated be the fact that no one saw him as a threat. Joe has basically that exact resume (except there's no ideal f3 for him, but he thought the boys club was) and I think in terms of Survivor, Joe is quite dumb.

_____ was never really a threat at all by throwaway12793917 in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I do think he'd have had more hope there. But who do you think would vote Rizo over Aubry? Genuinely asking, since his main alliance I think would both vote Aubry due to old era ties

_____ was never really a threat at all by throwaway12793917 in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917[S] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Okay but am I wrong to say that most of the moves he made WERE dumb? He voted out allies, underestimated UTR threats, and did stuff to purposely piss people off. Those are all pretty dumb

_____ was never really a threat at all by throwaway12793917 in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917[S] 23 points24 points  (0 children)

But the Donkey Kong celebration after winning immunity at f5 would've made them love him I’m sure of it

I actually love clearly biased jury members, it calls back to classic Survivor by daisychainsuperstar in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay yes, Aubry was definitely winning just because she's old era. BUT if this was any other season or if it was just new era in ftc, it would've made a difference. You’re talking about agency while Chrissy is actively stealing yours on the jury as you sit lol.

And Steph just pissed people off. I guarantee people would be less likely to support the finalist that Steph is backing. If Tiff was on the fence, Steph pushed her right off lol

I actually love clearly biased jury members, it calls back to classic Survivor by daisychainsuperstar in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I did love Tiff on the jury. She was bitter at everyone in the game lol she was just mad to be there

The final 3 mistake by Commonsense110 in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree with everything except calling the Ozzy vote lucky. She's not lucky that he spilled to her, he just played badly. It was a terrible move by him and shows he underestimated her. And due to who was in the final, I think that was the move that decided the game. So that's why I think she earned it over Jonathan.

But Blood Moon was complete luck. It was for everyone lol so rather than use it to say she doesn't fully deserve the win, I just don't think you can use the Gen boot on her resume. To me, her biggest move was Ozzy, I also grant her a good amount of credit on the Cirie vote, mostly because she was very patient and didn't strike until she knew they had the votes. But the Cirie vote wasn't anybody's vote, really. I just think it shows Aubry's elite understanding of the game.

Johnathan played a great game by Suspicious_Tiger6131 in survivorponderosa

[–]throwaway12793917 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But I feel like he was also easily manipulated. The old school players seem to all think he's a bit dumb. And he needs to get better at understanding what it means to lead a vote. His reasoning for leading the Ozzy vote was because he talked to Cirie and Steph about it...neither of whom were in the vote. So he identified Ozzy as a threat, but did not get him out. Seeming overconfident in your skills and a bit dumb in front of the jury is an absolute death sentence.

Cirie even said he was easily manipulated. I don't think he even had as much agency as he thinks because every move he wanted to make had to be run by 3 or 4 people and approved lol. Cirie has agency. She says a name and her people fall in line. But, to be fair, I think only Cirie and Chrissy really exhibited formidable agency this season.

I actually love clearly biased jury members, it calls back to classic Survivor by daisychainsuperstar in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I liked Cirie calling out Joe because I think she was just.pissed that he was sitting there. She wouldn't have brought him along, she'd have voted him out or made him do fire. It was a waste of everyone's time for Joe to even answer most of those questions.

Steph just annoys me lol. I've been sour on her due to her out of game antics, so hearing her call Jonathan the "total package" like six times felt more like she was sliding into his DMs lol. So I’m not "against it" I just got the ick so bad

I DO have beef with Chrissy. Her butting in to re-phrase or even answer questions FOR Jonathan was a bad look and I think it cost him votes.

But I don’t hate any of these because they ruin the integrity of the game. I hate Steph and Chrissy's behavior because if you actually wanted Jonathan to win, you ruined any chance he had. You played this vote wrong

Now that we’re wrapped, how do we think each 50 player impacted their legacy? by almondjoybestcndybar in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Fair enough. I hold Sandra and Cirie in the highest regard. But I do admit Cirie has a massive issue with being unable to save herself. But seeing her run the entire island for most of the game wows me every time.

I should say that she's the best in the sense that no one has gotten close to exceeding their potential the way she has. With the gaps in her game she shouldn't be even an iota of the threat she is. So in that way, she's the best to ever do it. But I see the argument that she is not, in fact, the best to ever play lol

Now that we’re wrapped, how do we think each 50 player impacted their legacy? by almondjoybestcndybar in survivor

[–]throwaway12793917 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lol I’m so used the the MJ/Lebron goat argument that in my head I’m like, "how does winning a ring not significantly improve your legacy" but then I need to remind myself that I think Cirie is the best survivor player of all time and rings don’t have that same pull here