What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

Re: Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

Why would she want to get rid of the one player that she could beat if she makes it the end?

:confused:

Sandra needs to win the final challenge to get to the finals if she sticks with Russell and Parvati, which has roughly a 0% chance of happening. She won't get to the finals if Parvati and Russell are around with her in the final 3.
 
Re: Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

Sandra needs to win the final challenge to get to the finals if she sticks with Russell and Parvati, which has roughly a 0% chance of happening. She won't get to the finals if Parvati and Russell are around with her in the final 3.

That's one angle I didn't think of and it does make sense.


IMHO, Sandra knows that people will see her as a previous winner, and even if she makes it to the end, there's no reason to give her another million. Not that russell needs it either, but I think she hates him so much that she rather see anyone but him win.

If she was up against Jerri or Colby I agree 100%. Not Russell. I just don't see that jury voting to give him anything at all. He has made way too may enemies.
 
Re: Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

If she was up against Jerri or Colby I agree 100%. Not Russell. I just don't see that jury voting to give him anything at all. He has made way too may enemies.

Yes, but.

The last show, he made a HUGE point about playing the game better than anyone else. I'm not so sure I want to go up against anyone who has played the game so hard from day one when I've not really done much.

People think really strangely at the end, and the one way I can see people not voting for Russell is IF (and only IF) Colby is left. Otherwise, I can see many voting for Russell as the hardest player of the least desireable. Jerri and Sandra largely played under the radar, Parv was of equal evil to Russell.

If the players of this game were rational, and saw what we saw, I'd be with you 100%, but they've done odd things in the past. And a lot of how the game finishes is making sure who you don't like doesn't win, since odds are still pretty thin- I can see Sandra taking out Russell.
 
Re: Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

Remember that Russell obliterated his final opponent in the last show and got hosed. He may even be more irritating in person than the editing shows him to be, which is hard to imagine but would explain the seemingly nonsensical result last time.

I must be the only person who actively detests Sandra. Everything about her screams "entitlement queen" to me. Didn't get why she won her $1M (the bump on a log strategy) and don't get why anyone would vote for her this time.
 
Colby has been a worthless wuss (strategically and in challenges) this entire time around - I might have rooted for him if not for that but he doesn't deserve to win.
 
Re: Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

Pavrati is absolutely ridiculous at this game.

She deserves to win again but I don't think she'l have enough votes on the jury unless its her Jerri and Russell. That'd be her only shot.

If Sandra or Colby make it...I think they are automatic wins.

I THINK we're going to see Colby go home here...But I won't be shocked at all if Russell gets "blindsided"
 
Re: Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

I think the votes will split about 2-1 in favor of Parvati over Sandra(*if* the jury decides to reward strong play).

Russell may not get a single vote given the composition of the jury.

Sandra's biggest asset is the fact she tried to get the heroes to vote out Russell and they didn't listen to her. Other than that, she's been a non-factor in this game.

... and Sandra wins. Trying to get the heroes to vote out Russell multiple times must have counted for a lot.
 
Last edited:
Re: Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

"King Arthur's journey is now complete."

Oh, Coach. Don't ever change.
 
Re: Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

JT wins the vote for dumbest move in 20 seasons.

I think going home with two immunity idols in your pocket is a bit dumber.
 
Re: Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

That sucked. So much for the heros. Rupert really messed up by turning on Sandra so fast. Clearly it was going to be Rupert whether the idol was played or not....he got 3 votes. Do we see a Pavarti/Sandra final? How crazy would that be that two former winners get there. Sandra will take Russel out....

i forgot that they do a final 3 now. Amazing that Russel got no votes. I had a feeling Sandra would pull it out. You knew Russel had no chance against Parvati. It was great...that final immunity challenge was ridiculous. I really wonder if Parvati would have sent Russel home if she had won it. She was right about needing to get Sandra out.

Was a little disappointed to see Russel win the fan favorite...just cuz he definitely doesn't need the money. Looking forward to next season. I wish they would do a season in the arctic or something though.
 
Re: Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

If the only goal of Survivor was to make the final tribal than yes Russell should be considered one of the best ever because he has never been voted out even though he plays such a "In your face game" that everyone can see unlike Sandra or the Girl that beat him last season. But he can't seem to get the fact that to win you need to win the votes of the jury WHILE your are making the final vote.

Did anyone notice that at the jury during the final tribal all the guys had beards and looked like they were dressed for a ball game and the ladies looked like they were all models with all the make up and outfits, except for
Danelle who looked like a pornstar.
 
Re: Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

If it were me I'd have voted for Russell given how much of the game he controlled, even if he didn't control it as much as he thought. People that felt betrayed by him have only themselves to blame.

That said I knew he had no chance and was surprised Parvati didn't win. She played a much better game than Sandra and was no more deceiving or conniving, even if Sandra flew more under the radar. Perhaps her tie to Russel was her undoing.
 
Re: Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

Yes he did. And then he lost the $1 million by a 7-2 vote margin.

:eek:

When you are right, you are right. Good call- I was almost convinced that the Heros would see Russell as a good player vs. an A hole.

Russell may not get a single vote given the composition of the jury.

Sandra's biggest asset is the fact she tried to get the heroes to vote out Russell and they didn't listen to her. Other than that, she's been a non-factor in this game.

... and Sandra wins. Trying to get the heroes to vote out Russell multiple times must have counted for a lot.

I thought Russell would get Coach's vote, but hearing Rupert's comments at the last council really changed my mind- I almost thought he was bluffing, but it was pretty clear by all of their comments that Russell was not well liked by anyone. And Rupert's comments at the reunion show told even more (more on that later)

Sandra vs. Parv- Sandra's open goal was to get rid of Russell vs. Parv working with him. Got the Heros and some of her friends that way.

JT wins the vote for dumbest move in 20 seasons.

I think going home with two immunity idols in your pocket is a bit dumber.

Actually, while the stakes were a lot less, Eric's giving away his immunity to get voted off in that exact tribal council was more epic. Hearing JT's explanation was interesting, but I didn't buy it- the one thing that the villans did learn was to make sure you take out ALL of the opposing team- they didn't turn on themselves too badly.

Was a little disappointed to see Russel win the fan favorite...just cuz he definitely doesn't need the money. Looking forward to next season. I wish they would do a season in the arctic or something though.

So were we. But I think that was looking at his game play, and not thinking of Rupert's comments, which I thought were pretty darned strong.


If the only goal of Survivor was to make the final tribal than yes Russell should be considered one of the best ever because he has never been voted out even though he plays such a "In your face game" that everyone can see unlike Sandra or the Girl that beat him last season. But he can't seem to get the fact that to win you need to win the votes of the jury WHILE your are making the final vote.

I loved how he wanted this some kind of American Idol or Dancing with the Stars thing where the audience gets a vote. That's NOT the game, you moron. BTW, Sandra > Russell, since she's also 2 for 2, but instead of one second and one distant 3rd, she won twice. And I also give a lot of credit for Parvarti's two finals, since they were both in All Star Editions of Survivor.

If it were me I'd have voted for Russell given how much of the game he controlled, even if he didn't control it as much as he thought. People that felt betrayed by him have only themselves to blame.

I think Rupert said it best that Russell played the easy version of the game, convince and lie to their faces, and I really think all of these all starts took that into account more than the vote last season. I didn't really think of that until he said it at the reunion show, and do think he's quite right. It's a whole lot easier to get to the final by lying and deception than it is to play a straight up game- however irritating one is.

Look at Sandra- she's as smooth as 40 grit sand paper (except to her close allies), BOTH TIMES, and has won twice. She may be irritating, and manipulating (remember when she dumped the fish in a hidden but close area?), but when asked to her face, she didn't lie, either. Russell asked if she was for or against her- she flat out said- "I'm against you". I think Russell thought she was joking. Her biggest problem (and probably the thing that ultimately made her win) was that she could not convice the heros that Russell was WAY worse than they thought.

OTOH, instead of a few key stabs in the back where one or two (or even 3) votes were sacrificed to stay in the final, Russell did it to everyone- make an alliance- and end it without real regard. You can't pretend to be such a "player" and not live with the repercussions of your play. JT even told him that.

I was quite happy to see Russell so mad at the jury, and you could tell at the final count he knew he lost. Even better that he lost to Sandra who he held in such contempt for the entire show. And IF he's ever invited back to play this again, I don't suspect he'll last past the first tribal council, since EVERYONE know's his game. They'll not give him a chance to change, much like what happened do Cirie.
 
Re: Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

Perhaps her tie to Russel was her undoing.
Proof of Russell's dominant play: not only did he make the final three, but his strategy was so off-putting that it swung the vote to a player whose only positive attribute was opposing him (other than that, why would anyone vote for Sandra? She did nothing in the entire game other than find and play a single immunity idol near the end).
 
Re: Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

I'll preface this by saying I didn't watch the last 40 or 45 minutes of the reunion show yet because I was watching it on DVR and it was late.

I know Russell thinks he's the greatest player ever and he is very good at being decisive and bullying people into what he wants along the way. People can get too sensitive when they get some votes since it's what Survivor is all about, there will always be deception, and any conversations in Survivor are buyer beware. However, I just think he takes it too far in swearing on the life of his kids and in the end hiding behind "I was just playing the game" like he was joking or something. People seem to fear him when he can still do something to them because they know he's always scheming, but obviously they don't respect him once they are out.

I know he thinks he played everyone along the way and was control of the game, but I think it might have been the opposite this season. Parvati played him the entire way and Sandra played it brilliantly. Parvati knew she might end up going along with some things she didn't like along the way, but she also knew she could beat Russell in a jury vote because he would look like he made all of the calls because of his reactionary and aggressive nature. If Sandra made it to the end with 2 heros or 2 villans she was in good shape no matter what. If it was with 2 heros, she would have had a bunch of villans on the jury who would have blamed the heros for their demise and they wouldn't have been too upset with Sandra because she was always behind in numbers once Rob left. When she went with 2 villans like she did, she'd long planted the seed that Russell was the evil mastermind behind knocking off the heroes one by one and many of them were going to vote for her. She was brilliant playing up that angle.

Just once I want to see someone punch somebody or at the very least need to have their language bleeped out as they get up to have their torch extinguished. I'm sure part of the contract to go on the show has heavy penalties for that otherwise I'm convinced we would have seen it already. The burning of the hat was hilarious.
 
Re: Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

Proof of Russell's dominant play: not only did he make the final three, but his strategy was so off-putting that it swung the vote to a player whose only positive attribute was opposing him (other than that, why would anyone vote for Sandra? She did nothing in the entire game other than find and play a single immunity idol near the end).

She's done that twice now.... not win a thing until the final vote. I think Russell won the vote because of his play. Russell didn't take into account how much personal feelings are taken into account in the jury's vote. Russell thought that since they were "all stars" that they would vote based on game play and not personal feelings. He's played twice now and been burned twice by the same reason. They didn't vote based on play, they voted based on how much of an arsehole he is. (although, if based on gameplay, this one could have gone to either Parv or Russell and I'm leaning towards Parv on the greater number of challenges she won.) That said, Russell can never play this game again because he will be voted off quickly.
 
Re: Survivor: Heroes vs. Villians

Proof of Russell's dominant play: not only did he make the final three, but his strategy was so off-putting that it swung the vote to a player whose only positive attribute was opposing him (other than that, why would anyone vote for Sandra? She did nothing in the entire game other than find and play a single immunity idol near the end).

Which is a completely legitimate way of playing the game. yes, a lot of people don't like it, but vs. being like Russell, it was a lot more appealing.

there are a number of ways to win this game, and I really have to respect all of the winners. Russell does not, and that will always be his downfall.

You can be dominat, and not a jerk- and probably win the game. But when take the "easy way" - the way Rupert described Russell's play- well, it's pretty obvious that being *THAT* deceptive and lying is not looked upon that well.

I thought it was great how TJ told Russell to lie in the bed he made, just like he did when doing that dumb play with the idol. Russ seemed to almost break after a few of the comments- he may have realized he lost then, and was already mad about it.

The worst thing- Russell has no idea why he lost. Twice. Not a clue. Well, or at least he just claims not to care at all. IMHO, the ONLY reason he made it that far was that nobody saw his season, and his style of play. They were *close* to doing it quick, but nobody put it all together early enough.
 
Back
Top