i am surprised you hadn't met Courtney's dead pet chicken frickles yet :(

Yeah. But still, he did what Stephenie, Bobby Jon, Russell H, Coach, Ozzy, Skupin, Penner and Russell S couldn't do. We'll see how Joe, Wentworth, Aubry and David do. But as of now Rob is the only returning player to win a season with a small number of returning players overwhelmingly outnumbered by newbies

@@bc5163 Dumb ass, none of those were a 4th timer against all 1st timers. Your comparision is utterly null and void, as are your other worthless opinions. When another 4th timer is allowed to play with 16 first time players, then we can talk.

@@bc5163 Rob is smart, there is no doubt about that. He is not dumb like someone like Coach, lol. But he isn't among the smartest. You know damn well if he is playing with a much experienced player he wouldn't have won. He could have been the greatest but oftentimes his cockiness and his mockery of other people. Make him look like such a heartless person that people hated him and at times make him looked dumb. Sandra is just as vicious as Rob is but she knows how to tone down her cockiness a lot better than Rob. When you are too arrogant and you viewed others as dumb, you will eventually make errors.

Russell also went up against the newbies. Look how that turned out.

charlie z and in winners at war

She’s smarter than anyone gives her credit for

I was so sad she wasn't on the jury on winners at war, but I got why she left too

Not third, fourth or fifth

The queen stays queen. Overrated Russell and Rob bow.

And she would have made it even farther if it wasn't for the unlucky tribe swap!

@@dianeross4361 I don't think Rob was overrated. Rob was a great player and if only Tyson wasn't that dumb for sure Rob would have gone much further and I believe he would have won. Russell never saw Sandra as a threat, Rob for sure will. Also lets face it, Amber's win was Rob's win as well and if Rob would have won it would have been Amber's win too. They couldn't have reached the final if it wasn't for their partnership. Russell is the most overrated and he never even won 🤣

Margaret S. Yeah I love Sandra but I don't even want her to win s34. I want players like Cirie, Ciera, and Sarah to win since they haven't yet.

She got swap fucked on Game Changers. Totally screwed. War of Winners she fucked herself with a dumb ass move. Still the queen though, while Tony is the king.

+Winston Smith in Oceania she wouldn't have got there if it wasn't for Russell

+haircut experience Russell thought he was taking a goat when in fact he was taking the most heroic villain. That's his fault for not seeing how dangerous Sandra is when it comes to jury votes.

TurangaMaxx Yeah but I think this comment it directed more at the comments saying she is a bad player

anony moose that’s her game. She plays down her threat level and makes it to the end without pissing people off

@@NightRises234 Parvati even told him. Russell didn't listen.

Its not just "THE SOCIAL GAME" ... How do you make it to the end without a strategic play ?? ..Russell carried Sandra to the end, thinking that he would win over her.. just didn't work the way he thought.. Russell dominates in Strategy, he thought outstrategizing everyone makes him the best ... Samoa - 8-4 at the merge... he took his alliance to top 5 Heroes vs villains - 6-3 pre merge.. those 3 went to top 7 ( he intentionally took out danielle) .. Survivor is all about different kinds of people at a common place.. you get good guys, bad guys, shit heads, ass holes, bullies and then you have RUSSELL ... Just deal with him..

+Ravindra Sharma voting out Danielle was his downfall as it cost him Danielle's jury vote. Yeah. Some strategy.

taebor obor I understand that Russel lacks in the social game but he shouldn’t be criticized for that. In survivor people play a game similar to how they live their lives. Russel is an outright villain while Parvati is a lot more charming when she does bad things.

@@RavindraSharmaP from the last line there, Russell is 2, 3, 4 and 5...and he's Russell.

Exactly Survivor is not a treasure hunt like Russhole thinks it is.

He would've wiped the floor with any one of those jabronis on his tribe.

Lol what? No way would anyone beat him. Maaaaybe Andrea. But definitely not Ashley or Grant.

@@bc5163 LOL the jury have said everyone but Phillip and Natalie beat Rob. Fuck according to the jury Phillip would have beaten Rob 6-3 (with Steve, Ashley, Julie still voting Rob) if Phillip admitted his play was an act. Yes that is right, even fucking Phillip would have beaten him if he had a good FTC, so of course anyone else (besides Shitalie Tenerelli) would have. And how the fuck could Andrea beat him but not Ashley and Grant when Grant and probably Ashley would have easily beaten Andrea. The Zaps mostly hated Andrea for what she did to Matt, Ralph and Julie especialy thought Andrea was a joke and even said so many times, and some of the other Zaps like Ashley and Natalie disliked her too. While Grant and Ashley were pretty liked by everyone, and more of a factor in the game all season than Andrea who was the first voted out of the Ometepe 6 despite not even being much of a threat. You are colored by Andrea's future seasons where she did become a good player, but she was not a good player that season. Anyway there is no logic to anything you just said, Grant and Ashley would have destroyed Andrea, yet despite that both Grant and Ashley would have easily beaten Andrea, somehow Andrea beats Rob and Grant and Ashley do not. Is your concept of math A then B then A then C or something. What you really mean is if there is anyone besides Natalie and Philip Rob might have beaten it is Andrea. You are a retarded fuck.

@@wildfiregaming6939 Dumb ass the jury themselves say everyone but Phillip and Natalie would have beaten him. And they also say had Phillip admitted it was an act and strategy to get to the end at FTC he would have won. Julie, Steve, Ashley say they would have each still voted for Rob (which makes sense since all 3 hate Rob). Rob's own fucking wikipedia page says something like that too. So if Rob even loses to Phillip if Phillip doesnt blow FTC, he obviously loses to everyone except of course Natalie T who couldnt beat a rock.

@@bc5163 Andrea sucked ass that season so your comments makes no sense. And according to the jury themselves yes everyone else would have beaten Rob. Probably since the jury didnt want to see a 4th time player against all 1st timers win. Probably even Andrea who as I said sucked ass that season.

Love love Sandra! Queen stays queen!.

Yeah. She was soooo close to destroy Russell on HvV but the Heroes they were just so dumb I cant even process 🤣. But in the end, at the tribal council. Sandra knew what she's doing and she just let Russell make himself look like an idiot.

Lol

@@richardross4677 I guess you forgot about him risking his own ass to save Parvati when he gave her his idol knowing that he would be voted for when Tyson got blindsided

@@marycornett3165 Which was great, as was most of his pre merge game, but his post merge game was total garbage and the worst jury management in history.

@@marycornett3165 Russell played 1.5 good games out of 4 basically. Good game on Samoa. Good pre merge on Heroes vs Villians. Horrible merge game on Heroes vs Villians. And last 2 seasons on Redemption Island and Australia Survivor terrible.

@@dianeross4361 redemption island he didn't get far enough in the season to get much play time his team was dominating the challenges until the dumb asses threw the challenge to vote Russell out and Australian survivor I haven't watched so I don't know how he played in it

@@marycornett3165 I agree the tribe was dumb, not to vote Russell out, but to throw a challenge just to vote him out. Throwing challenges is always dumb, and deserved the bad karma they got after. Still if he was so hated by his own tribe they threw a challenge to get him out, he obviously wasn't playing a good game.

There are no "should've won" in survivor. There just winners. Nobody "deserves" to win more than anyone else. If you sincerely believe that, then Russell "deserves" to be the first voted off the island since he's already a millionaire and he doesn't need the money.

+Evocati2008 I think what really helped Boston Rob is that the people on his tribe were fans of his from Heroes vs Villains, where he came off as this really great likeable guy. I don't think they watched All-Stars, if they had they'd have treated him like Russell. So I don't know if it was his tribe being stacked with fans as much as it was his tribe being stacked with people who hadn't watched a lot of Survivor.

I agree on RI being a huge set up for Rob, and that Parvati should have won RI. Also yes Russell did kick Rob's ass on HvV even if his end game and jury management were atrocious that season as far as ever winning.

Even if Russell had kept Danielle I am guessing Sandra is still at the end. Dumbass Russell was so set on taking Sandra as a so called goat even though the jury was stacked in her favor with atleast 4 real life close friends there. He probably takes Sandra, and 1 of Parvati/Danielle/Jerri. The only way Sandra goes is if the girls team up or team up with Colby/Rupert at some point to take her out. Teaming up with Colby/Rupert would never happen since everyone was scared of a hero making it. So it would have had to be the 3 of them teaming up and taking Sandra out against Russell's wishes at some point.

Rob and Russhole are both insanely overrated players, but yeah RI was rigged for Rob and set up for Russell to fail. Russhole was dumb to even play RI so soon after HVV aired though, he would probably have been an early boot with any cast unless he waited atleast a couple years to play.

Russell played one of the biggest goat games ever on Heroes vs Villians. Literally everything he said was to the goal of losing a jury vote.

I bet Russell is a far bigger asshole in real life than Sandra. Russell would just crow about himself and how great he is, and expect you to do it too. Sandra would be chill to hang out with and tell you she thinks with no inhibitions.

100% false

I would challenge the idea that anyone was in charge of Heros vs. Villians. I think everyone was kinda doing their own thing. It was just a fluke that certain people were naive to Russell. MOST people (Rob, Parvati, and especially Sandra) saw through Russell's deception quite immediately.

Gr8 b8 m8

Yeah that Russell is such a challenge beast. A grand total of 3 challenge wins in 4 seasons, two of which he lasted the whole game. And 2 of those 3 were in challenges that had only 4 people competing. Sandra sucks in challenges, but lets not pretend Russell is Ozzy or Boston Rob.

Yes worst player ever is one of only 2 people to win twice. I bet you could only wish you sucked so bad at anything. Sandra is laughing all the way to the bank.

Still there... :)

She is still here, darling.

@@keaton8418 so.... how did that go?

You dont win survivor by luck... Russell may be good strategist but he did not play a social game and hence lost... the winner outwit, outplayed and outlasted everyone not buy luck.... the reason i love survivor is that sometimes, not strategizing is also a strategy

thelousyllama You do win by luck. Jury members hold the fate of the final 3(or 2 in older seasons). They sometimes completely disregard strategy. Tyson won because of strategy. Russell's first 2 times were just like Tyson's 3rd time, except Russell was even more dominant. The jury were bitter about it and didn't award him. If you don't strategize, make it to the end and win, then yea it's 100% luck. So I don't get your point. Also the "social" argument is ridiculous when people use it. If Russell is not social, why was he the leader of alliances? Even in his 3rd time playing he had 2 girls wanting to play with him. It's Survivor, not "The Social Game". Awarding someone for being nice is dumb. It defeats the purpose of the entire game. Sandra wasn't too nice either and how was she social? She got carried to the end and lucked out. She was social with Courtney and Courtney voted for her because they were friends. Courtney is one of the shittiest players ever, I might add...

I disagree.... Luck is the type of people they put into the game... Everything else is how the players can adapt and manipulate the others. Tysons game was far better than russell hantz and it is a good comparison. Although both managed to lie and get others voted out before themselves, people wanted to vote for tyson in the end and not russell. Why? Because Tyson was not only playing a strategic game, the social factor did count... Russell on the other hand, and his in your face attitude, played a good strategic game to get to the end, but not a game to win... people wanted to be with him because they wanted to get to the end with him... But he lacked that social factor, people can look past his strategy and not vote for him because he was very negative on the social game... When in the game, you wanna make friends who you would have to lie to and convince them to give you a million bucks... Russell failed to play to convince people to give him a million bucks unlike Tyson, Parvati, Rob etc etc... So he isnt actually a good survivor player... He is good at getting himself far in the game, but not good at winning it

thelousyllama Tyson came close to getting voted out, like when they drew rocks. Russell was amazing in 19 and then he did it again and it was against all the best players too. Tyson was in that season and he was an idiot. Russell had 2 better single seasons than him and is a better player overall. I'm happy Tyson won because it was justice. Some of the time, the wrong person wins. Tyson is funny and was pretty well liked, but he's not all that nice either. Monica annoyed people a bit, but overall the nicer one. So if your definition of social game is niceness only, then Tyson didn't really have it. I disagree that people wanted to be with him. Parvati even said she had no other choice and Sandra didn't choose to play with either of them, she lucked out. HvV is actually a great example of why being nice doesn't help because look who the final 3 were...all villains. I disagree, but you can say Russell didn't play to win in the end, but how did Sandra? She just happened to be the lucky 3rd person aka coat tail rider. Sandra wanted Russell gone and it never happened. If Russell wanted her out, she would have been. Had Russell brought say Danielle to the final 3 with him and Parvati, it would have been 1 of those 2 that won. Sandra won from doing nothing. Just because the jury picked Sandra, doesn't mean it was the correct choice. I'm pretty sure that most people just agree with whatever happens and don't form their own opinion on the game. Hypothetically, if Russell had won, I don't think you or most people would be complaining. You'd likely just go along with what the result was.

spfan68 I did not say Tyson played a perfect game, i said he played a better game in BvW than Russell in HvV... Tyson was an idiot that season, but that does not mean he didnt play a better game in BvW. Again I AM NOT SAYING ITS SOCIAL GAME vs STRATEGIES.... I am saying that it is finding the balance between and knowing what the possible JURY would want... and Russell Hantz did not do that in HvV, and to say he is the great player is downright wrong...... "Just because the jury picked Sandra, doesn't mean it was the correct choice." Survivor is NOT a game of juries awarding 1 million to the person who could lie the most... Survivor is a game of 1 person convincing people that he lied to, to give him the million bucks. Russell failed at that... If it was a different jury, the outcome may have been different.. But russell, played a game to get him to the end only to find it a dead end... Whether you hate or love the winner, you can never run away from the fact that the winner managed to outwit, outplay and outlast every1 else.... Why? because everyone else made mistakes...

Sandra created much of her own good luck. there is a difference.