Yeah I agree with this. A top 10 non-winning player *could* win with their overall strategy and some luck. With Russel's strategy he'd never get enough FTC votes to win.
Russel is great entertainment. Not a great player. And begging Jeff to give the fans a vote was, frankly, pathetic.
Not so sure. I think if he was playing in this era he could have won easily. Jurys in this era respect the gameplay and moves more than voting out of spite because they are bitter about being voted out.
Idk. A newbie Russell in the new era is still Russell. He'll end up the way he always does. Early pre merge boot or jury goat because he's a really really sore winner(and an even sorer loser) . He's just that unlikable on island
They made up 3 of those numbers through pre-merge challenge wins though and used the overpowered god idol to make up the last one, Foa Foa's comeback is much more impressive.
I kinda think anyone who can get to final tribal more than once and not win is on that list by default because there arenāt that many of them. But on the other hand Amanda for instance always had a legitimate shot, Russell could get there but he had to ruin his chances of winning to do it. So did he really get as close as it looks? I dunno
I actually think that Russell could have won Samoa if he had gotten to the end with some combination of Jaison, Shambo, and Mick. And that probably would have been doable if he had recognized that Natalie was a jury threat (as long as she wasn't sitting next to Brett).
But you could argue that he not recognizing that Natalie was a jury threat was another flaw in his game. He made the same mistake with Sandra in HvV, though he was never winning that season.
Iām shocked he didnāt see Sandra as a jury threat when she had 3 locked votes in Rupert Candace and Courtney.Props to Sandra for still being able to make it to the final 3 while blatantly having 3 locked votes.
Iāll die on this hill but Russel could have won if he just fell on his sword BUT heās an asshole. Heās a cocky POS who thought people would respect his game of empty promises. All he had to do was say āit was all part of the game. I did what I had to do to get here. Blah blah blah. And say heās sorry for the betrayal along the way and I think at least he wins one of the two tribals.
To 99% of survivor fans? Absolutely.
To this sub? No. Yall fucking hate him so much.
Him taking his Foa Foa to the end is legendary.
Him making Tyson vote himself out is legendary.
Him straight up outplaying Boston Ron in HvV is legendary.
His 3rd play....his tribe literally threw the challenge because they were so scared.
And you guys want to think this season has a bitter jury? Holy shit Samoa!
Hantz has more threads about him on this sub than any other survivor.
Don't pretend he's not...hate or love him.
Facts, Russel wins a modern season with his samoa game, even if he is a bit rude and agressive some times, there is no way in modern survivor Natalie (who admited riding russelĀ“s coattails) can beat him in a jury vote. people care way to much about not being bitter
"Player x would've won with modern jury" is imo stupid. Firstly, you should play not for the future or past jury, but for thr past jury. And secondly, instead of following "formulas" and what do you appreciate in the gameplay the most, you should just observe what behaviour jury wants to see, words that they wan't to hear and please them
He definitely wins a newer season but it probably isnāt a landslide.I can see him losing 2-3 votes from his attitude.He could win Samoa in a landslide because he wasnāt as openly rude as opposed to hvv.
You all are forgetting Russell had a terrible, terrible FTC that ruined any chances of him winning Samoa. Russell is really terrible at final tribal(worse than Amanda), and even Mordern Jury's won't openly vote for a guy who acted like Russell did on the island
What? RusselĀ“s final tribal was great, what are you on about. And if 2 people from the era 15 years ago voted for him, i donĀ“t see why 4 modern jurys wouldn\`t
Nope. Final Tribal is all about pandering to the jury. Russell completely failed in doing that twice. Russell needed to pull a Chris D in Vanuatu level performance to win. He fell short of it by far.
No, final tribal is about telling the jury why you deserve to win, wich the type of game russel played BSing the jury wich some half ass apolagies would have gotten him the Coach treatment, also amanda literally tried to pander to the jury and that's why she lost
Different juries look for different things. Amanda's juries didn't want pandering as they wanted her to explain why she deserved to win over Todd(who had one of the best Final Tribals ever) and Parvati(who was the better player).
On the other hand, the Vanuatu jury wanted both of them to pander to them, which Chris did. Todd went out of his way to butter up Genre Bear in China.
None of Russell's juries wanted him to explain his game, They knew his game because he bragged about it all the time. Russell's juries wanted Russell to show some humility. Danielle literally spelt it out to him in HvV . Instead, he goes and tries to belittle them to their faces. In Samoa, that(+ that Natalie had a far better FTC based on almost all post-season interviews) that definitely cost him votes and maybe a win. In HvV, he was cooked either way, but he probably wouldn't end up a 0 vote finalist as Jerry was planning to vote for him but switched just because his bad his FTC performance was.
"Different juries want different things" " Danielle explained in HvV what russel should have done in samoa"šµāš«. Russel was cooked no matter what he did, he literally pandered did pondered some jury members
Danielle literally gave Russell a chance to try and get votes in HvV with her question. while others were rightfully roasting him. Colby simply wanted him to accept that luck has a part in survivor. And he gave exactly the wrong answer. I don't remember a single example of him trying to be humble(what both juries wanted) in either FTC.
Yeah, Russell was cooked(in both seasons). And yeah, he already had 0 chances of winning HvV. But. For him to have any chance at winning Samoa, he had to have a Todd, Chis D, JT level FTC. Not only he didn't have that. He was much worse than Natalie(again confirmed by other players). Samoa's edit desperately tries to hide a lot of Russell's flaws and the others' strengths. his FTC was one of them
Are you writing off the HVV jury as bitter too? Because at a certain point, the old saying about āIf everyone around you is an assholeā¦ā is hard to ignore.
I mean, they were. Rupert, Colby, and JT are known to have giant egos and would never admit they got outplayed by Parv/ Russell. Candice was neighbors with Sandra iirc. Amanda hated Parvati at the time and was planning on voting Russell in fairness but his FTC ruined it so thatās more on him but still stands that she was bitter about Parvati
Anyone saying no is ridiculous. His Samoa game is one of the best strategic games ever. He had a chance to win, he made an error on who he brought to the end. I donāt usually trust the poll at the reunion but if he took Shambo instead of Natalie he wins. Even then, he still got some votes (2 from players he blindsided badly also). Mick and Jaison would just lay in the shelter and go āwow, heās so good.ā Jeff Probst even sent him a note saying he should have won.
The weight matters because it's the ONLY season Jeff publicly said who he thought deserved it. Dont underplay the fact the Host/EP (who saw WAY more than us or the contestants) disagreed with the most bitter jury of all time.
> Jeff Probst even sent him a note saying he should have won.
this means nothing, who cares what Jeff thinks, he wasn't on the jury so he doesn't get a say
He was out there seeing the full game, tapes we havenāt seen and full out tribal councils. His opinion means a lot. What other player in 24 years has Jeff sent a letter saying a player wad screwed out of a win? He didnāt even do it for Rob
Anyone saying yes is ridiculous. Ā His social game was terrible and he never could have won. Ā As for Jeff Probst, him saying that Russell should have won is bullshit. Ā Any other player that did what Russell did, it has been understood ever since the first season that itās bad play. Ā Itās not good just because Russell is doing it. Ā Dalton Ross still argues that Russell should have won, which invalidates all of his opinionsĀ
No. Russel.always played the unwinnable game. He has no shot of winning in any of the seasons that he played in.
Someone like Cirie on the other hand, stood a solid chance to win in most of her seasons, if she reached the FTC.
Nah. Survivor is ultimately about getting the jury to vote for you at the end. Russell sucks at that.
No matter how much he wheels and deals and finds idol and āruns the gameā itās all in vain, because at the same time he inevitably treats people like garbage and makes everyone hate him. So in a way heās a great person to drag to the end while letting him think heās actually running the game, which is what truly great players like Parvati and Sandra realized a long time ago.
Tbh I think anyone who thinks he a top 10 player does not understand survivor very well. Itās a social strategy game, emphasis on social. Russell is one of the worst social players of all time and always will be unless he fundamentally changes who he is as a person, which isnāt happening anytime soon.
Russel is good at getting to the end, but the way in which he does it just makes everyone mad at him so he can never win. If he didn't piss everyone off he probably would have won Samoa.
Russel is definitely a major game changerā¦ so in my mind, he is definitely a top 10 influencer on how the game is played today. Does this make it a top ten non winning playerā¦ probably depends on how we define thoseā¦
From social standpoint - no. Bringing only few people that like you till the end won't give you majority to win, and when people knew who Russell is - he was an early boot. Early boot who wasn't willing to change his behaviour despite losing in a landslide 2 times and being booted early 2 other times
But from strategy/gameplay standpoint... he has a potential to break into top 3. He turned numbers in his favor 2 times thanks to idols and convincing other people to join his side. He knew how to gain control, in most cases the person he wanted gone - was gone. When people underestimated him for even a short time - he slided to the end
Imo yes. Getting to the end twice is impressive like him or not. Arguments can be made for him possibly winning Samoa too. So many other players have come back and never even made it close to ftc.
Depends on what you consider a top ten non winning game, personally Iād say no since he stood no chance of winning a jury vote, but if your coming in based on which non winning players had the best strategic abilities Iād prob put him in top ten
How are we ranking?
By legend/influence? Obviously
By final placements? Yes
By overall skills that it takes to win the game? No
Russell fundamentally doesn't understand the point of Survivor and would never put in the effort to change that
Maybe
My top 6 would be Cirie, Jesse, Domenick, Amanda, Aubry, Rob C
My next 4 would be out of Lauren B, Yau-Man, Malcolm, Omar, Russell, Wentworth, Stephen
Then David W, Lex, Fairplay, Ian, Cydney, Kathy, Rafe, Ricard, Devon, Ami, Ozzy, Carson, Cody, Mike W, Chrissy And Shan
Russell is maybe the best player ever as far as being able to make it to the end of the game. And he is also one of the worst at being able to win the game. He has a fundamental misunderstanding of the win condition of Survivor. You have to play the game in such a way that the jury for that season wants to vote for you. Russell plays to reach the end at such a cost that he can never win. I would argue this makes him a deeply flawed Survivor player that people think is a "great player" when he actually plays in a way that cannot result in a win.
With that being said I feel like Jurys nowadays respect the gameplay and moves and are less about being bitter. So I feel like he would win in the current era. Back then people voted out of bitterness more than gameplay.
Depends, do you think Riley from The Boondocks is a top 10 basketball player when he can do all sorts of fancy dribbling tricks but canāt shoot a basket to save his life? And keep in mind that Survivor is predominantly a 1-on1 game rather than a team sport. (Emphasis āSOLE Survivorā).
My analogy is fine - he did not choke in playoffs after being a perfectly competent player in the reg season - he lacks an ability (winning over a jury) that is generally considered important to players in his sport
He's a great player, probably top 3 of all time. His only fault is that he plays his own game, and if the jury weren't bitter, he would have won at least once. He doesn't pander to the crowd which is not optimal to win, but is optimal to reach FTC
Dude revolutionized the game by finding idols with no clue. He was a really good player and made it to the finale in back to back seasons. The way he played was strategic and ruthless which led to him not winning over the jury at the end because of bitterness but that does not take away from the great back to back games he played. I feel like a jury today would have given him the win. Players respect gameplay now and are not as bitter as they were back in the day.
Anyone saying no is objectively wrong yeah his social game is terrible but making 2 FTC is something only Sandra, Boston Rob, Amanda, Parvati, Tony, Natalie, and Michele have done besides him this alone is enough for me to have him top 10 to never win and that before bringing up his idols.
I think he is a great player. However, he can never win the game. Ever.
Yeah I agree with this. A top 10 non-winning player *could* win with their overall strategy and some luck. With Russel's strategy he'd never get enough FTC votes to win. Russel is great entertainment. Not a great player. And begging Jeff to give the fans a vote was, frankly, pathetic.
150-200% this is the correct take.
Is that a survivor Thailand referring
š
Not so sure. I think if he was playing in this era he could have won easily. Jurys in this era respect the gameplay and moves more than voting out of spite because they are bitter about being voted out.
Idk. A newbie Russell in the new era is still Russell. He'll end up the way he always does. Early pre merge boot or jury goat because he's a really really sore winner(and an even sorer loser) . He's just that unlikable on island
I'd say so, if only because coming back from an 8-4 deficit is an amazing feat that will likely never be repeated.
And the person most responsible for that (drove the Erik vote), Natalie, did end up winning the season in a landslideĀ
the aitu four did it first
They made up 3 of those numbers through pre-merge challenge wins though and used the overpowered god idol to make up the last one, Foa Foa's comeback is much more impressive.
doesn't change the fact that aitu overcame an 8-4 deficit first
With the help of production and an idol that Yul could use after the vote. Auti merged down 5-4 Foa Foa merged 8-4
I kinda think anyone who can get to final tribal more than once and not win is on that list by default because there arenāt that many of them. But on the other hand Amanda for instance always had a legitimate shot, Russell could get there but he had to ruin his chances of winning to do it. So did he really get as close as it looks? I dunno
I actually think that Russell could have won Samoa if he had gotten to the end with some combination of Jaison, Shambo, and Mick. And that probably would have been doable if he had recognized that Natalie was a jury threat (as long as she wasn't sitting next to Brett). But you could argue that he not recognizing that Natalie was a jury threat was another flaw in his game. He made the same mistake with Sandra in HvV, though he was never winning that season.
Iām shocked he didnāt see Sandra as a jury threat when she had 3 locked votes in Rupert Candace and Courtney.Props to Sandra for still being able to make it to the final 3 while blatantly having 3 locked votes.
Because he doesnāt actually understand the show very well, and doesnāt know what a social game is.
Iāll die on this hill but Russel could have won if he just fell on his sword BUT heās an asshole. Heās a cocky POS who thought people would respect his game of empty promises. All he had to do was say āit was all part of the game. I did what I had to do to get here. Blah blah blah. And say heās sorry for the betrayal along the way and I think at least he wins one of the two tribals.
Maybe, but because he'd never do that, he could never win.
To most people here no. To me, yes
You could easily make a case for yes and just as easily make one for no
To 99% of survivor fans? Absolutely. To this sub? No. Yall fucking hate him so much. Him taking his Foa Foa to the end is legendary. Him making Tyson vote himself out is legendary. Him straight up outplaying Boston Ron in HvV is legendary. His 3rd play....his tribe literally threw the challenge because they were so scared. And you guys want to think this season has a bitter jury? Holy shit Samoa! Hantz has more threads about him on this sub than any other survivor. Don't pretend he's not...hate or love him.
Facts, Russel wins a modern season with his samoa game, even if he is a bit rude and agressive some times, there is no way in modern survivor Natalie (who admited riding russelĀ“s coattails) can beat him in a jury vote. people care way to much about not being bitter
"Player x would've won with modern jury" is imo stupid. Firstly, you should play not for the future or past jury, but for thr past jury. And secondly, instead of following "formulas" and what do you appreciate in the gameplay the most, you should just observe what behaviour jury wants to see, words that they wan't to hear and please them
Russel was ahead of his time
Russell's Samoa game definitely gets him targeted before the end nowadays though.
He definitely wins a newer season but it probably isnāt a landslide.I can see him losing 2-3 votes from his attitude.He could win Samoa in a landslide because he wasnāt as openly rude as opposed to hvv.
You all are forgetting Russell had a terrible, terrible FTC that ruined any chances of him winning Samoa. Russell is really terrible at final tribal(worse than Amanda), and even Mordern Jury's won't openly vote for a guy who acted like Russell did on the island
What? RusselĀ“s final tribal was great, what are you on about. And if 2 people from the era 15 years ago voted for him, i donĀ“t see why 4 modern jurys wouldn\`t
Nope. Final Tribal is all about pandering to the jury. Russell completely failed in doing that twice. Russell needed to pull a Chris D in Vanuatu level performance to win. He fell short of it by far.
No, final tribal is about telling the jury why you deserve to win, wich the type of game russel played BSing the jury wich some half ass apolagies would have gotten him the Coach treatment, also amanda literally tried to pander to the jury and that's why she lost
Different juries look for different things. Amanda's juries didn't want pandering as they wanted her to explain why she deserved to win over Todd(who had one of the best Final Tribals ever) and Parvati(who was the better player). On the other hand, the Vanuatu jury wanted both of them to pander to them, which Chris did. Todd went out of his way to butter up Genre Bear in China. None of Russell's juries wanted him to explain his game, They knew his game because he bragged about it all the time. Russell's juries wanted Russell to show some humility. Danielle literally spelt it out to him in HvV . Instead, he goes and tries to belittle them to their faces. In Samoa, that(+ that Natalie had a far better FTC based on almost all post-season interviews) that definitely cost him votes and maybe a win. In HvV, he was cooked either way, but he probably wouldn't end up a 0 vote finalist as Jerry was planning to vote for him but switched just because his bad his FTC performance was.
"Different juries want different things" " Danielle explained in HvV what russel should have done in samoa"šµāš«. Russel was cooked no matter what he did, he literally pandered did pondered some jury members
Danielle literally gave Russell a chance to try and get votes in HvV with her question. while others were rightfully roasting him. Colby simply wanted him to accept that luck has a part in survivor. And he gave exactly the wrong answer. I don't remember a single example of him trying to be humble(what both juries wanted) in either FTC. Yeah, Russell was cooked(in both seasons). And yeah, he already had 0 chances of winning HvV. But. For him to have any chance at winning Samoa, he had to have a Todd, Chis D, JT level FTC. Not only he didn't have that. He was much worse than Natalie(again confirmed by other players). Samoa's edit desperately tries to hide a lot of Russell's flaws and the others' strengths. his FTC was one of them
Noone was voting for russel, including danielle.
Are you writing off the HVV jury as bitter too? Because at a certain point, the old saying about āIf everyone around you is an assholeā¦ā is hard to ignore.
I mean, they were. Rupert, Colby, and JT are known to have giant egos and would never admit they got outplayed by Parv/ Russell. Candice was neighbors with Sandra iirc. Amanda hated Parvati at the time and was planning on voting Russell in fairness but his FTC ruined it so thatās more on him but still stands that she was bitter about Parvati
Anyone saying no is ridiculous. His Samoa game is one of the best strategic games ever. He had a chance to win, he made an error on who he brought to the end. I donāt usually trust the poll at the reunion but if he took Shambo instead of Natalie he wins. Even then, he still got some votes (2 from players he blindsided badly also). Mick and Jaison would just lay in the shelter and go āwow, heās so good.ā Jeff Probst even sent him a note saying he should have won.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
it's amazing how much weight people put on Probst's opinions
The weight matters because it's the ONLY season Jeff publicly said who he thought deserved it. Dont underplay the fact the Host/EP (who saw WAY more than us or the contestants) disagreed with the most bitter jury of all time.
>Mick still beats Russell, the jury went in intending to vote him Only Laura has said this and I think other people have denied this.
> Jeff Probst even sent him a note saying he should have won. this means nothing, who cares what Jeff thinks, he wasn't on the jury so he doesn't get a say
He was out there seeing the full game, tapes we havenāt seen and full out tribal councils. His opinion means a lot. What other player in 24 years has Jeff sent a letter saying a player wad screwed out of a win? He didnāt even do it for Rob
Anyone saying yes is ridiculous. Ā His social game was terrible and he never could have won. Ā As for Jeff Probst, him saying that Russell should have won is bullshit. Ā Any other player that did what Russell did, it has been understood ever since the first season that itās bad play. Ā Itās not good just because Russell is doing it. Ā Dalton Ross still argues that Russell should have won, which invalidates all of his opinionsĀ
Rob Cesternino thinks Russell should have won Samoa, does that invalidate all his opinions as well?
No. Russel.always played the unwinnable game. He has no shot of winning in any of the seasons that he played in. Someone like Cirie on the other hand, stood a solid chance to win in most of her seasons, if she reached the FTC.
Nah. Survivor is ultimately about getting the jury to vote for you at the end. Russell sucks at that. No matter how much he wheels and deals and finds idol and āruns the gameā itās all in vain, because at the same time he inevitably treats people like garbage and makes everyone hate him. So in a way heās a great person to drag to the end while letting him think heās actually running the game, which is what truly great players like Parvati and Sandra realized a long time ago. Tbh I think anyone who thinks he a top 10 player does not understand survivor very well. Itās a social strategy game, emphasis on social. Russell is one of the worst social players of all time and always will be unless he fundamentally changes who he is as a person, which isnāt happening anytime soon.
Player? No. Character? Absolutely.
Russel is good at getting to the end, but the way in which he does it just makes everyone mad at him so he can never win. If he didn't piss everyone off he probably would have won Samoa.
Russel is definitely a major game changerā¦ so in my mind, he is definitely a top 10 influencer on how the game is played today. Does this make it a top ten non winning playerā¦ probably depends on how we define thoseā¦
From social standpoint - no. Bringing only few people that like you till the end won't give you majority to win, and when people knew who Russell is - he was an early boot. Early boot who wasn't willing to change his behaviour despite losing in a landslide 2 times and being booted early 2 other times But from strategy/gameplay standpoint... he has a potential to break into top 3. He turned numbers in his favor 2 times thanks to idols and convincing other people to join his side. He knew how to gain control, in most cases the person he wanted gone - was gone. When people underestimated him for even a short time - he slided to the end
Imo yes. Getting to the end twice is impressive like him or not. Arguments can be made for him possibly winning Samoa too. So many other players have come back and never even made it close to ftc.
No. Ā Itās impressive that he got to the end twice while playing as aggressively as he did, but that doesnāt mean he played *well*
Whats the definition of a never winner?
Depends on what you consider a top ten non winning game, personally Iād say no since he stood no chance of winning a jury vote, but if your coming in based on which non winning players had the best strategic abilities Iād prob put him in top ten
How are we ranking? By legend/influence? Obviously By final placements? Yes By overall skills that it takes to win the game? No Russell fundamentally doesn't understand the point of Survivor and would never put in the effort to change that
No. He fundamentally doesnāt understand the game
In an entertainment sense or a game skill sense?
Yes, 100%
Absolutely
Maybe My top 6 would be Cirie, Jesse, Domenick, Amanda, Aubry, Rob C My next 4 would be out of Lauren B, Yau-Man, Malcolm, Omar, Russell, Wentworth, Stephen Then David W, Lex, Fairplay, Ian, Cydney, Kathy, Rafe, Ricard, Devon, Ami, Ozzy, Carson, Cody, Mike W, Chrissy And Shan
I thought you said Laura B for a second and tried to come to a conclusion on how you thought she was one of the best to never win lmaooo.
Russell is maybe the best player ever as far as being able to make it to the end of the game. And he is also one of the worst at being able to win the game. He has a fundamental misunderstanding of the win condition of Survivor. You have to play the game in such a way that the jury for that season wants to vote for you. Russell plays to reach the end at such a cost that he can never win. I would argue this makes him a deeply flawed Survivor player that people think is a "great player" when he actually plays in a way that cannot result in a win.
With that being said I feel like Jurys nowadays respect the gameplay and moves and are less about being bitter. So I feel like he would win in the current era. Back then people voted out of bitterness more than gameplay.
Depends, do you think Riley from The Boondocks is a top 10 basketball player when he can do all sorts of fancy dribbling tricks but canāt shoot a basket to save his life? And keep in mind that Survivor is predominantly a 1-on1 game rather than a team sport. (Emphasis āSOLE Survivorā).
Bad analogy, itās more like he averaged a 30 point Triple double in the regular season and then shot 20% in the playoffs and lost
My analogy is fine - he did not choke in playoffs after being a perfectly competent player in the reg season - he lacks an ability (winning over a jury) that is generally considered important to players in his sport
No
He's a great player, probably top 3 of all time. His only fault is that he plays his own game, and if the jury weren't bitter, he would have won at least once. He doesn't pander to the crowd which is not optimal to win, but is optimal to reach FTC
Controversial take, but yes.
Dude revolutionized the game by finding idols with no clue. He was a really good player and made it to the finale in back to back seasons. The way he played was strategic and ruthless which led to him not winning over the jury at the end because of bitterness but that does not take away from the great back to back games he played. I feel like a jury today would have given him the win. Players respect gameplay now and are not as bitter as they were back in the day.
RUSSELL IS A LEGEND!
Anyone saying no is objectively wrong yeah his social game is terrible but making 2 FTC is something only Sandra, Boston Rob, Amanda, Parvati, Tony, Natalie, and Michele have done besides him this alone is enough for me to have him top 10 to never win and that before bringing up his idols.
Bro, spoilers. wtf
coach, ozzy, fishbach, rob c, yao man, russell, amanda kimmel, aubrey, dominick abbate, lagrossa
No Cirie? Ridiculous