Survivor: Kaôh Rōng(US)-[**SPOILERS**]

Kirby

Worst winner in years. I enjoyed the season but how aubrey didnt win that is ridiculous. Wtf were the jury smoking? Bitter voting for sure. She was carried for 90% of the game. Bloody ridiculous.

She won some immunities so fair played to her but for somebody with so little strategic play to win is a poor result for the show. I mean she was oblivious to over half the tribals!

The only person on that beach Michelle could "outwit" was mark.

seligehgit

Cracking finale doing justice to a highly enjoyable season,the reward and immunity challenges were tension filled and intriguing in nature.Loved the nature of the twist after some initial disappointment at the lack of an IC.The final tribal council was epic.Mystified as to why the final tribal did'nt proceed after the twist reveal.I suppose it allowed for the twist shock factor...no necklace

Neal's diatribe was as epic as it was unexpected,meek as a lamb...yeah right.Michelle chose well.Great questions and comments at final tribal,Scot may well have swung some votes although as seems to be the consensus on here I most definitely did'nt agree with his conclusion re Michelle position in the game.Julia,Nick and Jason probed and in some cases directed their comments towards their favoured victor.

How bad was Cydney at the fire making challenge?Always love this final 4 challenge as there's always somebody who is just so bad at it!Heart melted when she reiterated her motives for wishing to become the sole survivor.It certainly softened her at times hard and abrasive character.

Mention has to be made of Tai,he was a very decent human being who's encountered much adversity in his life.He played the game hard,Scot's comments were crucial in emphasising his poor use of his advantages during the game.Not all down to his fault and his betrayal of the bully boys was more so as a result of his inherent decency.This betrayal was never likely to forgiven by the same hostile and bitter cohort on the jury.

Re the win,Michelle did come on strong in the finale but Aubry was by some distance the best player over the whole season.Michelle's explanation as to why she was on the outs on votes/strategy in general and largely anonymous in large sections of the season,ineffectual in challenges was weak.She will surely join the likes of Natalie White and others as winners who will not join the higher echelons of Survivor winners.Yeah the usual bitter jury,pretty girl advantage and late flourish can't colour the great injustice that is Aubry's failure to become the sole survivor.

seligehgit

I must be the only one on here but I really enjoyed the reunion.Enjoyed the impromptu appearance and donation of Sia.I'd never heard of her.Only highlighted the shame that there is no Sprint player of the season any longer.

Quite a loud outfit worn by Jason,mixed feeling re the lack of an interview with our favourite narcissistic doctor Peter Obama and query if he'd learned anything from his Survivor experience.More likely it would have offered him more airtime to inflate his already overinflated ego.

Shame Neal was'nt interviewed re his diatribe.

Tad laughable Jeff sugarcoating Michelle with an initial underdog tag due to her beauty.Same is invariably an advantage in all areas of life.

I'd love to get to access to The Price Is Right Survivor edition on Monday.

Next season looks interesting,a return to beautiful Fiji.A generational conflict millennials v X!

GreNoLi

Axwell wrote: »

Its an unfortunate part of Survivor that when you watch it a lot the editing can be a bit foreshadowing and I feel this ones pointing to Michelle. She has been getting the winners edit for weeks, shes in lots of confessionals and everything for her is going well. She has a good social game and hasn't pissed anyone off, even when her and Tai had issues they worked it out. She didnt sit on a tribal for the first 24 days and that puzzle challenge she won she absolutely beasted it. Everything in Aubrey's confessionals is about things going wrong for her, alliances breaking up, not trusting people, Joe going home.I wouldn't completely rule out Aubrey and I would be happy enough if she won but the edits favour Michelle right now, but Tai and Cydney don't have a chance. If its final 3 and they are in with Michelle or Aubrey they don't even get a vote, if its final two then they wont be involved...so neither of them has any hope. If I was betting on it my money would be on Michelle for sure.

Post of the thread. :cool:

Did you happen to put any money on leicester? :pac:

noveltea

Not sure has it being mentioned but there is a podcast called Rob has a podcast.Its quite good. It. talks to the survivors and discusses the show. I just listened to Michele interview and Tai and Aubrey. It's quite good

Axwell

noveltea wrote: »

Not sure has it being mentioned but there is a podcast called Rob has a podcast.Its quite good. It. talks to the survivors and discusses the show. I just listened to Michele interview and Tai and Aubrey. It's quite good

That would be Rob Cesternino star of 2 previous seasons of Survivor.

Axwell

GreNoLi wrote: »

Post of the thread. :cool:

Did you happen to put any money on leicester? :pac:

Unfortunately not

Thargor

Very good season, Michelle didnt deserve it compared to the other 2 but still an okay winner, getting rid of whatshisname off the jury and his reaction probably won it for her ironically, what was going on there? The winners edit is getting pretty unforgivable now though, way too heavy handed.

Survivors still got it anyway, cant wait for next season.

tinpib

Looking forward to reading this thread.

Love Survivor, great show.

1. Jeff. Reminds me of Richard O'Brien in that if he leaves the show I think it will end like The Crystal MAze lasted one season after he left.

2. Every season is the same. Always plenty of gar-jess, stunning girl next door type girls. Although one recent season they were all scarily thin.

3. Always at elast one captain high school chiselled guy who often is so unbeleiveably arrogant he is useless at the social game and gets his commupence early on.

4. The priceless expressions in tribal council when he votes are read out and people get surprised.

Read a little bit on wiki and I agreed that Aubry was hard done by. Thought she was streets ahead of Michelle.

Thought Michelle could have played up her challenge successes at the end. Also a little surprised Tai got 0 votes.

Funny how Joe was treated in the edit. In some tribal councils he doesn't even get to give an innocuous answer. He made 0 strategy whatsoever. Just found that amusing.

Will probably take a break for a couple of weeks and tackle another past season.

Might add to this post in due course.

Foxtrol

I don't think Michelle winning is close to being such a poor decision from the jury as it's being made out to be.

Firstly lets look at Aubry and what she actually did. She was a basket case at the start and nearly quit. Yes, she was on the right side of every (or nearly) vote but that meant she never faced having to scramble. You could argue that she helped the 'biggest moves' in the game, Cydney and Tai flipping, but did she really? Neither of them gave Aubrey as their main reason to flip and she never claimed to the jury that she was the key driver of those moves. From the merge she won a single reward challenge and not one immunity. She didn't play a great social game, wasn't really liked outside of her alliance, and her pitch to the jury was disappointing (not even playing up losing her two closest allies to medical evac).

Now Michelle, she started weakly and was probably lucky Beauty avoided tribal early but from the merge onwards she scrambled the whole way through to make the final tribal. She managed to go from the wrong side of the numbers to ingrain herself into the dominant alliance, to the point where core members of that alliance were gunning for her but her relationships with the rest held out, showing she played a great social game. She won 6 challenges since the merge (3 reward, 2 immunity, and the vote out jury member advantage), used the final advantage wisely (I still say that Neal's outburst gave her more votes), and gave a strong story line at the end that the jury could buy into.

Michelle may have gotten some 'cute girl' votes but at the same time I think she is being underrated for the same reason, if Scot or Jason had lasted that long being on the wrong side they'd get plaudits. I think Aubry fell into numbers, thanks to Tai and Cydney, and kept a steady ship from there on (nearly losing it on a few occasions despite having a GOAT she didnt have to worry about), and the jury didnt appreciate that as much as Michelle's scrambling to stay in and then winning when she needed to.

Opinions can differ on which should be valued higher but I can't see how Aubry is an absolute slam dunk against Michelle.

S.M.B.

With a bit of hindsight I've come to the realisation that she probably didn't do a good enough job at presenting her case at the FTC. And her cloak and dagger strategic game required more explanation than Michelle's transparent game.

However, I do feel that the jury has a responsibility to do a bit more digging themselves. Jason has come out and said that after seeing the show he thinks that Aubry played the better game.

tinpib

S.M.B. wrote: »

However, I do feel that the jury has a responsibility to do a bit more digging themselves. Jason has come out and said that after seeing the show he thinks that Aubry played the better game.

I disagree. The person with a shot at a million dollars needs to make sure the jury knows exactly what they should know.

GreNoLi

So next season is basically another Nicaragua (old vs young) and that season annoyed me greatly, wonder if the 'Medallion of Power' will come back into play, groundbreaking twist.

Thargor

Hmmm, that's weird that I have absolutely zero recollection of that Medallion of Power before, sounds like a fairly lame idea anyway...

GreNoLi

Thargor wrote: »

Hmmm, that's weird that I have absolutely zero recollection of that Medallion of Power before, sounds like a fairly lame idea anyway...

Thargor

Ahhh Brenda...

kingtut

Still need to post a review of this season! Anyone buy anything in the auction? I only came away with one item but there was not a whole lot to choose from (have no interest in the live show set pieces lol)

Thargor

What did you get? You still ahvent posted pics of your Survivor collection.

S.M.B.

tinpib wrote: »

I disagree. The person with a shot at a million dollars needs to make sure the jury knows exactly what they should know.

A bit of snooping around confirms that Aubrey did get a decent opportunity to explain her game and by all accounts she did a decent job at making her claim. It just remained on the editing floor as it didn't fit the story the editors were trying to tell.

It looks like the block of Jason, Scott and Julia either

a) didn't believe her
b) arrived at TCC with their vote already locked in

Fair enough if it's the former, it's an interesting part of the game where you have to outwit, outlast and outplay while at the same time ensuring that the jury are somewhat aware of the moves you've made.

I've got a strong feeling it was 90% b) and only 10% a) though which is a real shame.

It's interesting that Michelles winning game draws a lot of parallels to a very successful Big Brother floating strategy. Is this the best way to approach survivor these days?

astonaidan

S.M.B. wrote: »

A bit of snooping around confirms that Aubrey did get a decent opportunity to explain her game and by all accounts she did a decent job at making her claim. It just remained on the editing floor as it didn't fit the story the editors were trying to tell.

It looks like the block of Jason, Scott and Julia either

a) didn't believe her
b) arrived at TCC with their vote already locked in

Fair enough if it's the former, it's an interesting part of the game where you have to outwit, outlast and outplay while at the same time ensuring that the jury are somewhat aware of the moves you've made.

I've got a strong feeling it was 90% b) and only 10% a) though which is a real shame.

It's interesting that Michelles winning game draws a lot of parallels to a very successful Big Brother floating strategy. Is this the best way to approach survivor these days?

Ive always believed the best way to win survivor is to be a part of very few of the big moves

Foxtrol

S.M.B. wrote: »

A bit of snooping around confirms that Aubrey did get a decent opportunity to explain her game and by all accounts she did a decent job at making her claim. It just remained on the editing floor as it didn't fit the story the editors were trying to tell.

It looks like the block of Jason, Scott and Julia either

a) didn't believe her
b) arrived at TCC with their vote already locked in

Fair enough if it's the former, it's an interesting part of the game where you have to outwit, outlast and outplay while at the same time ensuring that the jury are somewhat aware of the moves you've made.

I've got a strong feeling it was 90% b) and only 10% a) though which is a real shame.

It's interesting that Michelles winning game draws a lot of parallels to a very successful Big Brother floating strategy. Is this the best way to approach survivor these days?

If you want a million dollars you have to better than ‘a decent job’.

I don’t buy your editing conspiracy theory, they had no problem in previous seasons showing that another contestant was more deserving than the eventual winner. They put a lot of work in the editing to make Aubry seem like she consistently had a terrible social game with those outside her alliance, hide all those challenges she won, and make it appear she had only a minimal part in the biggest moves of the game.

Jason, Julia, and Scott were all part of Michelle’s alliance and were friends with her so you cant be surprised Aubry would have to work to get their votes, it’s not as if Neal or Joe would have come in with open minds. If Aubry was stronger in challenges she may have beaten Michelle to the final reward and used as wisely as Michelle would cause a two vote swing in the final voting (not enough to win but one vote away from winning).

If you want to be annoyed with anyone you should be annoyed with Cydney and Debbie. Both were in alliances and friendly with Aubry, yet voted for Michelle. Debbie may have been bitter about getting blindsided and Cydney was probably paying Michelle back for Michelle voting with her at final 4 but both saw Aubry’s play up close and clearly were not impressed enough by it.

Foxtrol

astonaidan wrote: »

Ive always believed the best way to win survivor is to be a part of very few of the big moves

It really depends season to season based on the jury.

Outside of a particularly bitter jury I would have to disagree with you. If you’re not part of a big move or two you have to be dominant in some respect, be it in challenges or clearly leading the power alliance. Big moves gain jury respect once they can be explained how they fit into your strategy.

Aubry’s problem was that she stayed behind the curtain too much and didn’t get the respect for what she was doing. When you add that to her social and challenge game being pretty dire she left the door open for Michelle to come in.

S.M.B.

Foxtrol wrote: »

If you want a million dollars you have to better than ‘a decent job’.

I don’t buy your editing conspiracy theory, they had no problem in previous seasons showing that another contestant was more deserving than the eventual winner. They put a lot of work in the editing to make Aubry seem like she consistently had a terrible social game with those outside her alliance, hide all those challenges she won, and make it appear she had only a minimal part in the biggest moves of the game.

Jason, Julia, and Scott were all part of Michelle’s alliance and were friends with her so you cant be surprised Aubry would have to work to get their votes, it’s not as if Neal or Joe would have come in with open minds. If Aubry was stronger in challenges she may have beaten Michelle to the final reward and used as wisely as Michelle would cause a two vote swing in the final voting (not enough to win but one vote away from winning).

If you want to be annoyed with anyone you should be annoyed with Cydney and Debbie. Both were in alliances and friendly with Aubry, yet voted for Michelle. Debbie may have been bitter about getting blindsided and Cydney was probably paying Michelle back for Michelle voting with her at final 4 but both saw Aubry’s play up close and clearly were not impressed enough by it.

I actually agree with a lot of what you say here. I wasn't claiming that there was some edit conspiracy theory. I simply meant that Scott, Jason and to a lesser extent Julia arrived at the FTC requiring Aubrey to give them a good enough reason not to vote for Michelle. Sources have confirmed that she did have this opportunity and was asked leading questions which she apparently 'nailed'. I was concerned that Aubrey didn't even have this chance but she clearly did. The producers chose not to show this which was their choice, not some conspiracy.

I also agree that Debbie's vote was primarily placed out of bitterness and Cydney used some weak rationale to justify why she couldn't vote for Aubrey too. There's some logic behind why both those would do so having worked closely with Aubrey.

I disagree with the comments that Aubreys challenge game was dire. Midway through the season when the 'jocks' were on top they commended Aubreys challenge abilities and marked her as a real threat. They appeared to do a u-turn regarding this as soon as the tides turned.

And you seem to infer that Aubrey wasn't part of any big moves throughout the season to go along with her poor challenge record. Again, I disagree.

Foxtrol wrote: »

Aubry’s problem was that she stayed behind the curtain too much and didn’t get the respect for what she was doing.

This I agree with 100% and a fair amount of that rests on her shoulders.

Foxtrol

S.M.B. wrote: »

I disagree with the comments that Aubreys challenge game was dire. Midway through the season when the 'jocks' were on top they commended Aubreys challenge abilities and marked her as a real threat. They appeared to do a u-turn regarding this as soon as the tides turned.

And you seem to infer that Aubrey wasn't part of any big moves throughout the season to go along with her poor challenge record. Again, I disagree.

Look at the results, since the merge Aubry won a single reward challenge whereas ‘the cute girl’ won 3 rewards, 2 immunities, and the final vote out jury reward. Aubry wasn’t a Joe in challenges, she was definitely competitive, but in results Michelle beat her convincingly so it could only be seen as a negative for at the final tribal.

I never said that Aubry wasn’t a part of big moves, she just didn’t appear to be the main driver of them. To me, post merge the two biggest were Cydney and Tai switching sides and it appeared that both were more down to the guys alienating each than any Aubry involvement (Tai even told on Aubry and it was the guys reaction which made him switch sides). The way these appeared maybe due to the edit but it is strange at no point anyone gave her as their reason nor did she claim it from what we saw at tribal council.

I think the above is subjective and we seem to agree on most things. The original point I came on to make was that Michelle wasn’t an outrageous choice to win, as some made out, and I think I’ve proved my case.

kingtut

Thargor wrote: »

What did you get? You still ahvent posted pics of your Survivor collection.

Apologies I need to get my finger out! I'll try and get it updated in the next few days. This time I got a contestant bag (better than nothing) but in the last auction I got a torch which is awesome although cost me a lot so have no intention of getting a second!

My collection is currently here:
https://www.yourprops.com/view_items.php?movie=&keywords=&suser=irishalanl&celebrity=&index_from=0&explizit=0&template=slides&number_of_items=25&do=search

If you search for survivor you will also see items that other people have if you are curious.

When it's up to date I'll let you know.

astonaidan

Foxtrol wrote: »

It really depends season to season based on the jury.

Outside of a particularly bitter jury I would have to disagree with you. If you’re not part of a big move or two you have to be dominant in some respect, be it in challenges or clearly leading the power alliance. Big moves gain jury respect once they can be explained how they fit into your strategy.

Aubry’s problem was that she stayed behind the curtain too much and didn’t get the respect for what she was doing. When you add that to her social and challenge game being pretty dire she left the door open for Michelle to come in.

Look at Russell, possibly the most dominant player of the game, gets to two finals and gets ****ed over twice
Tyson nearly got screwed by a bitter jury aswell
Ive watched every season and must be like 1/5 times a worthy winner

Mr E

I enjoyed the season and didn't mind the winner. I was kind of hoping for Tai but it wasn't to be.
Glad he got some recognition (and a nice reward) in the finale.

Sia's gesture was amazing, but she looked ridiculous.

Foxtrol

astonaidan wrote: »

Look at Russell, possibly the most dominant player of the game, gets to two finals and gets ****ed over twice
Tyson nearly got screwed by a bitter jury aswell
Ive watched every season and must be like 1/5 times a worthy winner

If you read my post I said outside of a particularly bitter jury (which is not really a regular occurrence).

Even with a case of a bitter jury, like Russell, everyone knows the rules going in. It’s up to you to read the people you play with and work out what makes them tick, who you want sitting beside you at the end and how you’re going to put everyone else on the jury with them still liking/respecting you enough to gain their vote at the end. That’s the difference between Tyson (presume you’re talking about him in Blood v Water) and Russell, Tyson managed to take out most of the jury yet won by a landslide whereas Russell didn’t learn his lesson after his first experience at final tribal and repeated his same mistakes.

It has little to do with ‘big moves’, like you mentioned in your post, and much more to do with how you make the moves and how you can get the jury to perceive them.

astonaidan

Foxtrol wrote: »

If you read my post I said outside of a particularly bitter jury (which is not really a regular occurrence).

Even with a case of a bitter jury, like Russell, everyone knows the rules going in. It’s up to you to read the people you play with and work out what makes them tick, who you want sitting beside you at the end and how you’re going to put everyone else on the jury with them still liking/respecting you enough to gain their vote at the end. That’s the difference between Tyson (presume you’re talking about him in Blood v Water) and Russell, Tyson managed to take out most of the jury yet won by a landslide whereas Russell didn’t learn his lesson after his first experience at final tribal and repeated his same mistakes.

It has little to do with ‘big moves’, like you mentioned in your post, and much more to do with how you make the moves and how you can get the jury to perceive them.

Honestly the only difference I see between Tyson and Russell is that one is funny. (When it comes to the game, in real life massive differences) but both were cut throat.
There has been so many bitter juries who I honestly feel can ruin a great season. I use Russell as a example as he should have won both easily, he was brilliant and the two goats that won ruined the season. I honestly think Russell would win a allstar game if he was in final 3 purely because they appreciate how hard it is
Like how many moves never mind big can either of the girls say they were not just dragged along in against russell.
Tyson's personality is better than Russell and he was clever to stay away from a southern bell/spicy latino

S.M.B.

Tyson has a much better understanding of jury management than Russel ever had.

I think it's no surprise that Russel has never won a series and can't see that changing either.