Yuku free message boards

By Erinn Lobdell Special to OnMilwaukee.com E-mail author | Author bio More articles by Erinn Lobdell

Published Dec. 11, 2009 at 10:13 a.m.

And then, there were six....

In the game of "Survivor," you must plan on a twist. This week's twist was a double-elimination. No reward challenge, just the chance to compete for safety in back-to-back immunity challenges. That should shake things up, right?

This entire season has been the Russell show. Love him or hate him, one must agree that he has truly been running the game since Day 1 in Samoa. He has mastered the fine art of planting seeds of doubt, playing on emotions and even on people's good faith. Russell has become a master manipulator, maybe the best ever, but here is my question to you: is it getting old?

It is fascinating to watch Russell in action, they way he can bob and weave through this rough terrain. It's almost as though the very second he makes a decision to take another player out, votes fall from the sky, the same way that idols seem to fall into his pocket. Every week, the show's producers do a decent job of keeping us guessing, but when it comes right down to it, I think we all know that by the end of each episode, things will go Russell's way. Its sort of boring now.

Last night, I was ready for a change. Mick and Jaison, two great players, both seemed to be ready to jump ship, each for different reasons. Mick is very concerned, with good reason, that Russell will take him out before Day 39. Jaison seems certain Russell will take him to the finals, though he is concerned, with good reason, that the jury will vote based on gameplay rather than likability or need and he won't have a case on which to stand.

Was I the only one at home last night screaming at my television for these two to have this conversation with EACH OTHER, as opposed to anyone else who would listen? How is it even possible that the other players aren't using this to drive a wedge between the Foa Foa alliance? The castaways have six days left to make something happen. The world has loved watching Russell, but do we want to watch him win?

By Erinn Lobdell Special to OnMilwaukee.com E-mail author | Author bio More articles by Erinn Lobdell

The big question: did the right person win "Survivor: Samoa" this season?

Anyone will admit that it is easy to like Natalie. She is as sweet as she is charming and developed a lovely story of personal growth. We watched as she started out, in her pretty yellow dress, completely out of her element, happy to follow along with everything Russell said and did. Then, weeks later, we saw her kill a rat, practically with her bare hands, and single-handedly orchestrate a move to put a Galu member on the jury, when she knew Foa Foa was outnumbered, 2-1.

On the other hand, Russell determined how nearly every single vote was going to play out. He was playing the game before they got off those little boats and continued until the bitter end. Some have said he is the greatest castaway to have ever played the game. He was ruthless, cut-throat and incredibly strategic. And whether you liked him or not, Russell certainly played a game that will go down in the "Survivor" history books.

Mick also was in the final three.

I will say, as the last vote was read, I thought "Yay, I like Natalie." I do, she seems like a wonderful girl and I hope she enjoys her $1 million dollar prize. As I went to bed last night, mulling over what to say to all of you today, I had to ask myself, "What if I were on that jury?"

Surely many of you arm-chair quarterbacks thought the same thing... The difference being that I actually know what it feels like to decide who walks away a millionaire and who does not. It is not something to be taken lightly.

It may have seemed as though it was an easy decision to make in Tocantins, but it's easy to forget that it is a huge responsibility and you are often forced to choose between friends. While I love them both dearly, I was much closer to Stephen than JT.

He treated me with more respect than anyone in the game and always kept his word to me. If you recall, JT was the reason I sat on the jury and not in Stephen's place in the final two. I lost a lot of sleep over it, even after the vote was cast, but ultimately I had to set my personal feelings aside to cast my vote based on how the game was played.

I would also like to note that yes, I understand that I was choosing between two wonderful men, as opposed to America's sweetheart and a little troll. Oh yeah, Mick was there, too. No matter who is in the finals, a million dollars is a lot of money and deciding who gets it sucks.

The point is that when you are on the jury, I feel it should be taken seriously, not treated like a vote for prom queen. No one wants to see a bad guy win anything, but how does the damsel in distress come out on top? It is easy to be bitter about being out-witted, out-played and out-lasted, but isn't that LITERALLY the name of the game?!?!?

I suppose if i were on the jury,it would come down to this -- Natalie played a great social game with little to no strategy, while Russell played so strategically he forgot about the social game.

Short of handing the money to Mick, I would compare the two methods of play. In 10 years, or even next season, I just don't think we will be talking about how nice Natalie was. I promise, though, that we will still be saying that Russell was the greatest "Survivor" ever.