Surfing Hippo in Trouble wrote:
Russell should write the book on how to make it far on Survivor and not win the game. With him being such a big fan he should know how to play the end game a little better.
It would only be a sequel to Amanda's book.

| Started By | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
ilovekelly752 |
|||
|
Posts: 764 (12/21/09 07:59 PM) |
Surfing Hippo in Trouble wrote: It would only be a sequel to Amanda's book. |
||
XtremeInnovator420 |
|||
|
Ouch. Reminds me of the "Choke-Artist Showmance" in Micronesia, haha.
|
|||
Cyberball2072 |
|||
|
It's not that I wanted Natalie to win, but I am OK with Natalie winning. While I believe Russell really played and made the game, Natalie played well
enough and did enough to earn her title and I am OK with her winning over Russ.
|
|||
Strahlx |
|||
|
russell played a good game, but he made a huuuuge mistake in treating the jury and others like they were beneath him, and taking someone likable to the end
when he could have taken unlikable people with him
he played well, but made such a huge mistake with his social game that he definitely does not deserve to win natalie was the better player, while russell was a better strategist |
|||
troynuncdicit |
|||
ElmoEmo wrote:He was voted out. Natalie wasn't. You can't deny that. |
|||
ElisabethNelehHeidiRok |
|||
|
Posts: 1765 (12/21/09 08:44 PM) Registered User |
XtremeInnovator420 wrote:Yeah and what is funny is that Russell thought that gaining people's trust and then breaking it was a good social game. Russell is just bitter. The winner of each season is essentially the best "player" of the season. Strategically Natalie played a good game, so did Russell it was 2 different "strategies" in the game and it just so happens that Natalie's strategy was better. |
||
seltzer3 |
|||
|
The funny thing is that the people Russell claims to have good "social ties to", only two of them are on the jury (Shambo and Jaison). So in other words, he ignored the other 7 people. |
|||
troynuncdicit |
|||
seltzer3 wrote: Funnier that Jaison didn't even vote for him to win |
|||
SurferZ |
|||
|
I don't get this board, most people love Natalie for her social game, yet they hate JT. JT probably had the best social game ever. Half the people in the
merge were charmed enough by him to want him to win. Brendan and Taj wanted JT to win over themselves.
|
|||
novaya |
|||
SurferZ wrote:Conversely, those that say Natalie winning was just bitter anti-Russell -- POWAR PLAYER OF SAMOA!!! -- sentiment will also say Sugar was horrendous and should never have won when she lost because of anti-Sugar -- POWAR PLAYER OF GABON!!! -- sentiment. Wheels spin in many directions. |
|||
PrettyGoodYear1988 |
|||
novaya wrote: Even if Sugar had never vocalized her complete apathy towards actually winning the game (which she did), I would still think her losing was deserved. In fact, I think Sugar played the exact same game Russell did. Bold and abrasive, with little regards for people's feelings or treating them well, and augmented by a Hidden Idol. The only difference is Sugar knew she was playing this way and knew she was securing herself third place and nothing more. Russell actually played very similarly to a woman who was actively playing to lose. Sure, there were differences. Sugar used moralizing bullshit and played up the sweetheart angle while Russell took a more aggressive approach to get people to dislike them. In either case, they can't blame people for being bitter towards them when they were assholes who just happened to have power |
|||
Cyberball2072 |
|||
Strahlx wrote: Agreed. It is OK to talk and dump on your fellow people to the camera during confessional, but Russ was treating them like that ALL THE TIME. |
|||
Shred |
|||
|
Russell is overrated like crap, he was all editing and nothing deep as a player. Natalie wiped the floor up with him in the social part. And playing a good
social game is way more important in the end of the day. Russell made moves to say he made them, he never thought them through and they came back to bite him
in the ass. He has only seen one season of Survivor and it shows. He is not a true fan or a true great player.
Natalie and Brett were the only ones I would have voted for in a final 3 this season. Natalie is already a hugely underrated winner Brett is one of the most underrated players in a while. |
|||
ImANewUser |
|||
Shred wrote:Fixed. I literally stopped watching after Liz was voted off. (I keep lurking the forums for TAR/AI and sometimes I end up here for the fanfics. |
|||
alnusrubra |
|||
|
I honestly don't know who played the better game; what I am certain of is that this was probably one of the worst edited season of all time, and I'm
sure that a lot of information and context (as boring as it might have been) probably got buried in the Russel hype machine editing.
|
|||
JLK Name |
|||
druhoang wrote:Natalie played a better social game. Jury will want to vote for the person who treat them better and didn't pissed them off that much. Russell H pissed off a lot of people in the jury and those jury members wouldn't want him to win the million dollars. Russell is an idiot for pissing off those people, It was like when Rob M pissed off the majority of the jury and Amber won. Like Brett said you gotta stay humble if you wanna win the million dollars and Russell did not do that. Another mistake he did was taking a very likeable person in the final 3. |
|||
Axie.rsfd |
|||
|
Does this thread means we'll have a "Thread to Get Over Samoa" this time next year?
|
|||
Jedijake |
|||
|
You need to break down strategy. Russell was more assertive and people were weak not to vote him out, but I am not sure if he is a strategic mastermind.
However, he did play grassroots Survivor better than Natalie. I think the times may have dictated the jury's attitudes. With all of the attention on the evils of corporate America and the arrogance of CEO's, voting Natalie was kind of a way to say "screw you" to those who are cocky and already have their cool million. But since we never truly heard the reasons for the Natalie win but saw and heard every reason Russell should win because they were shoved down our throats, yes Russell was much better of a strategic player. (it also helped that idols grew on trees, er, under them in Russell's world). |
|||
cardswin5 |
|||
|
Also people are neglecting to mention Russell's luck in the cast he was given to play with. After his idol play no one was ballsy enough to take him out
but I guarantee 9 out of 10 seasons Russell plays the way he did and some better players will take him out. I bet he isn't near as abrasive with his game
on Heroes vs. Villains.
|
|||
lostintime.biddingfortravel |
|||
|
Russell should have been kicked out of the game the moment he emptied his tribe's canteens. End of story.
|
|||