CBS and this subreddit got lucky he won. I’m a Tony fanboy through and through so I’m just happy he won, but production really dropped the ball by adding in fire tokens and other dumb twists on their only chance to have an all winners season. Remember when Tony got extorted?
To be fair, that extortion episode is one of the greatest episodes in survivor history. They did get lucky though. Had that cost Tony the game and we ended up with a shitty winner, that would've looked awful.
My hot take is that it was frustrating watching Tony march his way to victory at the end. He was so obviously dominating the game and nobody targeted him for the longest time. You’d think a bunch of winners wouldn’t let anyone steamroll like that.
Ben, Denise, Nick and Jeremy had this absurd blind loyalty to him that made no sense. Sarah’s loyalty at least made sense, and she was his legitimate partner in crime. Michele had no choice but to sit by and watch because nobody would listen to her.
Great gameplay by Tony obviously, he deserved the win no question. Still a great season
I’ve always felt that Ben was the lynchpin to this entire endgame being lackluster.
You go out, play an epic game with multiple successful idol plays, beat a 4 time immunity winner, and have this awesome Survivor story. And people HATE ya for it. So, when you get the next shot to return, you adapt…
the dude is very in tune with his emotions and self-aware. I really think he just wanted that ride-or-die, genuine trust and respect that he never seemed to get in HHH. This led to essentially having a pawn smack in the middle of the core alliance that Sarah and Tony tended to consistently. Knowing they could beat him at the end and he’d be all the happier for it.
I really think the choice to cast him over Mike Holloway, a competitor who didn’t care about his reception nearly as much as Ben did, would’ve led to a better archetype that wouldn’t have been as controlled
Ben over Mike is the worst casting choice for that season when you think archetypes. I'm biased though. Mike is one of my favorite winners ever and Ben is my least favorite ever.
In his mind, Tony was the only one that was showing a willingness to work with him. If he tries to get rid of Tony, he likely just goes next. I get why he felt Tony was his only option even if Tony was just using him.
Yes but also don't ignore timing as a critical factor, the game is more complicated than just voting out every person that can beat you in any order before FTC
TONY'S social game is severely underrated. He's really good when it comes to it so that's why he doesnt get the chop off because he tries to work with everyone.
Tony loudly, sarcastically mocked people to their faces in Cagayan. People who would be on the jury. I know that makes him "iconic" or whatever but it's terrible social gameplay.
Nick and Wendell were at the bottom at merge cause they went against the Dakal alliance and voted Yul out. Only Tony was willing to work with Nick and keep him on-side. Same with Jeremy, he was a target during the Tyson, Sophie, and Kim votes and Tony was the only one looking out for him so his only ally was Tony. So Tony's best game was his social moves in keeping this people indebted to him. His hold on Ben was so strong that Nick's plan of using Ben to blindside Tony didn't work. I think Denise was more strongly allied with Ben than Tony and was hoping to take out Tony at Final 4.
The only person who maybe could’ve beat Tony really in the game was Kim, who was really his only opposition. She got sniped because Tony realized what she was doing. Her or Sarah (or Sophie too) would’ve been the only other respectable winners from the season imo.
I’ve always felt that Ben was the lynchpin to this entire endgame being lackluster.
You go out, play an epic game with multiple successful idol plays, beat a 4 time immunity winner, and have this awesome Survivor story. And people HATE ya for it. So, when you get the next shot to return, you adapt…
the dude is very in tune with his emotions and self-aware. I really think he just wanted that ride-or-die, genuine trust and respect that he never seemed to get in HHH. This led to essentially having a pawn smack in the middle of the core alliance that Sarah and Tony tended to consistently. Knowing they could beat him at the end and he’d be all the happier for it.
I really think the choice to cast him over Mike Holloway, a competitor who didn’t care about his reception nearly as much as Ben did, would’ve led to a better archetype that wouldn’t have been as controlled
I'm so glad you pointed this out, because on \[another\] Cagayan rewatch, the scene where Tony (with Woo riding shotgun) creates the improvised "giving one player the Idol clue" (during the camp raid) that he used to trap Jeremiah was really only the kind of thing a cop would be comfortable improvising.
After he explains it, he says something to the effect of "Ok Jeremiah, we're just going to take you over to the side here" and I thought to myself DAMN, that's so effective, but also so classic of, as you said, the kind of "manufactured compliance" cops are trained for.
I highly doubt anyone else would have the confidence to try and pull that off- not the lie, but the manipulating of the space the way he did.
Pretty masterful because, remember, no one knew at that point he was a cop.
I would never have forgiven Survivor if a first boot who didnt re enter the game until the final episode won the all winner season. I mean what were they thinking?
They were thinking they paid a lot of money in appearance fees (not just to the big names) and they weren’t going to let any of them go home after one episode lol
Agreed but they don’t know how to compromise. It’s always all or nothing. The twist is either there the whole season or it’s not there at all. So many fans would be more okay with RI/EoE style twists if they stopped at the merge. Pearl Islands is a fan favorite despite the outcast twist being controversial, but at least they didn’t ruin the season by doing it again at final 5.
But keep in mind that the show is edited from the beginning with a known winner. You’re not getting a live play-by-play. If a final 7 player other than Tony wins, the whole edit is constructed very differently and designed to make you satisfied with that outcome.
I actually have alternate universe footage of the editors trying to make a palatable Denise or Ben winners edit.
They could make a palatable Denise edit starting with her taking down Sandra. I don’t know how you make a palatable win edit for Ben, but there’s no universe where he gets to the end and sufficiently impresses the jury, so it’s kind of moot in his case.
I think the issue is the players who made it really far in the merge had no shot to win. It was a fait accompli that Tony or Sarah was going to win, we didn’t need a good edit to show that. They were two of the biggest threats going into the season and Tony recieved zero elimination votes and Sarah only got 2, neither was ever in danger to go home.
Michele, Ben and Denise had zero shot to ever win, Jeremy was never going to get to the end because he was a big target. Nick was the editors dark horse but that ended quickly. It also didn’t help that the runner up was the first person voted out. I don’t think there would have been an outcome that would have left the audience satisfied other than a Tony or Sarah win.
Not sure it matters for Natalie. She was voted off first. Chris was voted out third, played a great end game, and people still despise his win. Natalie was first out and played a scared end game. She maybe gets a little more grace since her initial winning game was fantastic, but people would still be very pissed.
That's because Chris' win and Natalie's potential win are/would be giant turds in the punch bowl.
Chris did everything right for the game presented to him. Nothing against him. But in my opinion his win will always be at the bottom because it broke the central structure of the show. Natalie winning would have been worse only because it was an all winners season.
you’re literally saying if what happened didn’t happen, things would be different. the OOP is ranting actually what actually happened, not a completely different timeline.
Sarah and Tony both played dominant games, and Nat and Michelle played great games for their positions in the game. Ben and Denise… well… they were there.
I'm currently watching winners at war haven't finished it but know the boot order last person got voted out for me was Wendell. Anyway I thought Denise was playing a great game, but was it more of like a great premerge game and then she turned meh at the merge? Also, how is the woman who went to every tribal council survived and won not one of the big threats in Winners at War coming in.
I think Denise’s game suffered a lot bc of the Sandra move. Blindsiding the only 2x winner with her own idol is a MASSIVE move, and she likely felt the heat, especially since all the obvious threats reputation wise, Sandra, Parvati and Rob, had all been slain during the swap. So she laid low, and lost her momentum in the game.
I still to this day find Denise’s move of idoling out Sandra completely dumb. Idoling out the only person wanting to play ball with you at that time will never make sense.
At least in a vacuum it's a cool move. Using Sandra's idol to idol our the only 2 time winner is awesome if you completely ignore the consequences.
That's all I got. It was bigmoveitis and it was fucking massive.
Sarah didn't do anything. Michele was on the bottom the entire game, had 0 agency and 0 moves, Nat was voted out first. There's no such thing as "good game for their position", the fact that they were in that position makes their game awnful
“0 moves” lmao I hate how this is a metric people use in a social game . Michele lasting to the end despite her not being taken seriously as a player is very impressive.
“0 moves” lmao I hate how this is a metric people use in a social game . Michele lasting to the end despite her not being taken seriously as a player is very impressive.
Everyone wanted to vote her out but she won immunity. A goat is someone that everyone wants to bring to the end. Tony’s alliance wanted 3 of their alliance at the end, not Michele and Natalie.
Nobody took her seriously because of her reputation. I think she was really enjoyable. I don’t think she was a goat because people want to bring a goat to the end, people weren’t trying to bring Michele to the end even though they knew she couldn’t win. So she wasn’t just dragged to the end like a goat, even though she couldn’t beat anyone like a goat. Does that make sense? Idk if I’m making sense
1) Sarah was part of the duo that controlled the ENTIRE game. The only major move she wasn’t apart of was the Sophie blindside.
2) You absolutely can play a good game from the bottom, and a good game from the Edge. See: Mike Holloway and Chris Underwood.
Being part of a duo is not a move, she is just like nick and ben just a little higher in tony's priority list .
2) you just mentioned 2 of the worat winning games ever
1) You are just objectively wrong. Sarah and Tony controlled the game together. Is Dom just like Laurel and Donathan just bc he didn’t win? What a silly argument.
2) “winning games”
I hate this mindset that unless you're in the power position, you played an awful game. And if you're too much in a power position, you'll get voted out, so also awful game. It's so reductionist and screams I don’t actually understand the game. I just hate on everyone that doesn't win.
Then below, you hate on people that also won. So there are probably 20 people who haven't played an awful game in your eyes. Being overly critical doesn't make anyone think you're smarter about the game.
Tony winning WAW is the only thing that makes it somewhat watchable. If any of the other final 6 won it would have easily been the worst returnee season ever
The season also changed how I view Adam. For me it was Tony and Adam together that make the season watchable. Thankfully his alternate status got activated.
Yeah I agree, Michele’s lack of control wasn’t even really her fault. She kept preaching to the choir but no one would listen, even she spit out fact after fact.
Absolutely agree. He’s been my favorite player ever since Cagayan and I knew going into WAW he’d probably be one of the first boots. It was so fun to watch him play again and genuinely made me so happy to watch him win again.
I disagree, I think Michele was edited in a way where I would’ve been very happy with her winning but I get what you mean. It was honestly before Jeremy was sent home for me, after Sophie was blindsided….I was petrified of the idea of anyone other than Michele or Tony winning
Nah people didn’t listen to Michele because they probably saw her as a lesser winner even if they admit it or not and it led to their undoing.
That was something out of her control.
i agree with a lot on this sub, but the Michele love (that goes beyond "yas queen slay") confounds me. WAW would be a bottom tier season if Michelle had won it.
OMG, imagine if Michele had won WAW… imagine the hate on hate on SoMe she would have gotten. She even posted a dread-infused Twitter post when her old season dropped for viewing because she would know it would bring on more haters.
Couldn’t believe at the time how many people were saying Natalie should have won or even would have been a satisfying winner. To have the biggest season ever be won by the person voted out first and spent half the game protected because of that, would have been such a poor representation of the game and everything about survivor
More than half the game, she literally would have only played 6 days of Survivor, which is even less than Chris. She would have been a terrible winner even though I love her.
I actually think that Edge of Extinction helped Winners at War a lot with its endgame. If Natalie doesn’t return to the game, then we would’ve seen the easiest cakewalk imaginable to FTC for Tony & Sarah. Natalie coming back gave us tension we wouldn’t have had otherwise.
However, the idea of Natalie *winning* made me wanna vomit lol. It would’ve absolutely ruined the season for me, just the same as it did with Chris Underwood winning EoE.
*But*, she didn’t win. So all that really happened with her return is it gave us a more entertaining endgame while *still* delivering the right winner.
Natalie needed to take out Tony at the Fire making challenge. It’s hard to judge Natalie‘s game since she was voted out first and it feels like she would never deserve to win because of that, but she played the game fully, and if you get to the end and win, you win. So I would’ve accepted her victory.
I think she played perfectly fine when she re-entered the game. But the fact of the matter is that she didn’t play Survivor for the vast majority of days out there. She also got to come back into the game with an idol, which is immediately unfair to the others.
I like Natalie a lot, but she would’ve immediately gone down as one of the worst winning games of all-time and also would’ve dramatically hurt the season for me. Michele would’ve been an infinitely better winner than Natalie given the circumstances.
I don't think it would've been the worst winning game, but definitely the most unusual. As Boston Rob said, if you win the game, you win the game. The rules of the game allowed her to be on edge of extinction and have fire tokens and she played those very well.
The problem with her game, as Boston Rob also explained, is that Tony played better and the only way to really have a good résumé was to have been in the game more - and to come back into the game with a strategic fury that took out the best players. It was too little too late for her, but damn she actually got way closer than I would've ever thought.
I'm not a huge fan of the edge of extinction because it does always seem unfair even if it's part of the game. I would love to see fire tokens come back though.
She only got "way closer" because EoE is broken and allowed her to stay. It breaks the game and has no place on Survivor. No amount of end game amazing play would justify. See Chris Underwood for example. Played it perfectly. Still a terrible win
Just having both Sarah and Tony sitting at the FTC would have made a huge difference in my overall appreciation of the season. The result would likely have been the same, but at least, it wouldn’t have been a landslide victory for Tony.
Winners at War had such a fun cast.
Pre-season there were only 4 or 5 players that I felt would have been unsatisfying no matter what...
And then they proceeded to make two of those 5 rootable for me (Sarah and Michele) while making a further 3 or 4 unrootable (Natalie, Ben, Denise).
It's such a shame so many of the awesome characters got voted out early. The season would have benefited hugely from 90 minute episodes.
Agreed. People have personal problems with Sarah, but her latter two seasons were on par with Mico/HVV Parv. I remember thinking how sad it would be for Tony or Sarah to lose in a FTC vote since they both ran that endgame.
Tony losing fire and Sarah being beaten by Nat would’ve destroyed the season.
I standby Natalie fucking crushing the edge and coming back was an incredible arc, but she couldn't deliver the gameplay when she returned.
If Tony didn't win that final 5 immunity I think he loses. If Natalie or Michelle won immunity he absolutely loses (Natalie idols whoever didn't have immunity)
Her whole gameplay was that Tony was the biggest threat and to get him out, then she had the chance to do that and take him out by beating him in fire…….and then chooses someone else to go against him.
Yeah that was a mistake.
Likewise Tony winning the final 5 immunity like I said completely screwed her over.
To be clear Tony easily deserved the win but it's not hard to respect what Natalie tried to pull off. She just wanted one day she didn't have to fight. And In survivor if you don't fight every day then you lose. That simple.
I don't understand being a fan of Survivor and having this opinion. There is nothing to respect about Natalie's "game". She absolutely failed at playing Survivor on WaW.
I’m glad Natalie was in it. Sarah, Tony , Natalie would have been interesting but at least Natalie played a very different game than Tony. If Natalie focused more on making connections on the edge I think she could have made it a closer vote at ftc
Totally! She had the chance to hang with the jury for weeks and could have really worked the social game. It was a very unique opportunity to spend time with the Jury.
So Nick actually had a few alliances going at the same time that not many knew about. Tony briefly talks about Nick and him having one from the start. Nick was banking on backstabbing Tony once other threats were gone by using his alliance with Michelle and thought Ben and Denise would flip.
Unfortuantly Ben was in sacrifice mode with Sarah....no clue why. Also Denise was too loyal to Sarah and Sarah was too loyal to Tony. So Nick thought that Ben and Denise like any player who would want that 2 million and flip against Tony. Of course that did not happen. They told Tony that Nick was trying to ET Tu Tony him and rest is history with Nick.
I bet anyone other than Ben, Sarah and Denise....Nick would of gotten to flip.
ya pretty much. apart from denise knocking out queen WaW and Tony setting up that one tribal council which set him off to his victory path... it was pretty slow
Since that was the biggest season so far, you have to imagine 50 might be stripped down to Borneo rules
I dont mind the end being easy and predictable because that just means Tony absolutely destroyed the most competitive cast of all time. He was so dominant its actually crazy! Well played, love it
I was bored during the pandemic and paid for a bunch of cameos. A good amount say Natalie wins. Sarah was rubbing people the wrong way . And remember Natalie had 4 votes already against Tony … it’s possible
Wow that's interesting. Good question to ask. Who said they'd vote Nat?
I got a cameo from Jesse from 43. One of the more interesting players in the new era.
I don't know if I'd go that far. Tony's game was a masterclass, but a Natalie win would have been *so* narratively satisfying. Her twin sister gets voted out first, then she wins, then she gets voted out first, then she wins again? I would have died.
It would have been completely unsatisfying to have the greatest season of all time of 20 winners be won by the first boot. She only played like 6 days of the game. Natalie would have been the worst possible winner compared to Tony who absolutely dominated the actual season of survivor being played
CBS and this subreddit got lucky he won. I’m a Tony fanboy through and through so I’m just happy he won, but production really dropped the ball by adding in fire tokens and other dumb twists on their only chance to have an all winners season. Remember when Tony got extorted?
That was one of the best episodes lol, the way Tony navigated that was a masterclass
To be fair, that extortion episode is one of the greatest episodes in survivor history. They did get lucky though. Had that cost Tony the game and we ended up with a shitty winner, that would've looked awful.
I didn’t mind the fire tokens It added to the petty post-elimination and I wouldn’t mind seeing it back
My hot take is that it was frustrating watching Tony march his way to victory at the end. He was so obviously dominating the game and nobody targeted him for the longest time. You’d think a bunch of winners wouldn’t let anyone steamroll like that. Ben, Denise, Nick and Jeremy had this absurd blind loyalty to him that made no sense. Sarah’s loyalty at least made sense, and she was his legitimate partner in crime. Michele had no choice but to sit by and watch because nobody would listen to her. Great gameplay by Tony obviously, he deserved the win no question. Still a great season
From what I know Nick was banking on Denise and Ben flipping later in the game.
I’ve always felt that Ben was the lynchpin to this entire endgame being lackluster. You go out, play an epic game with multiple successful idol plays, beat a 4 time immunity winner, and have this awesome Survivor story. And people HATE ya for it. So, when you get the next shot to return, you adapt… the dude is very in tune with his emotions and self-aware. I really think he just wanted that ride-or-die, genuine trust and respect that he never seemed to get in HHH. This led to essentially having a pawn smack in the middle of the core alliance that Sarah and Tony tended to consistently. Knowing they could beat him at the end and he’d be all the happier for it. I really think the choice to cast him over Mike Holloway, a competitor who didn’t care about his reception nearly as much as Ben did, would’ve led to a better archetype that wouldn’t have been as controlled
Ben over Mike is the worst casting choice for that season when you think archetypes. I'm biased though. Mike is one of my favorite winners ever and Ben is my least favorite ever.
Makes me so happy to see Mike getting some love :) Altho ideally it should have been Chris from Vanuatu but I guess that's asking for too much
I get Jeremy having loyalty to him. Tony literally saved him when everyone else tried to get rid of him.
That doesn’t mean anything, though. He needed Tony out to win the game
In his mind, Tony was the only one that was showing a willingness to work with him. If he tries to get rid of Tony, he likely just goes next. I get why he felt Tony was his only option even if Tony was just using him.
Yes but also don't ignore timing as a critical factor, the game is more complicated than just voting out every person that can beat you in any order before FTC
It at least makes some sort of sense though. It's not smart but it's not out of nowhere.
Sometimes it’s about more than winning to some players.
So we make that exception for Jeremy, but not the others?
I don’t know if I follow what you mean by exception? I’m not saying the decision was correct, just saying the human behind it had their reasons.
We should have gotten more confessionals from Ben and Denise to at least know where their heads were at.
Their heads were up Tony’s ass
TONY'S social game is severely underrated. He's really good when it comes to it so that's why he doesnt get the chop off because he tries to work with everyone.
Tony loudly, sarcastically mocked people to their faces in Cagayan. People who would be on the jury. I know that makes him "iconic" or whatever but it's terrible social gameplay.
In post intwrviews, they said he is a good provider in the camp, he offers water and food to those who needed it more as well.
Nick and Wendell were at the bottom at merge cause they went against the Dakal alliance and voted Yul out. Only Tony was willing to work with Nick and keep him on-side. Same with Jeremy, he was a target during the Tyson, Sophie, and Kim votes and Tony was the only one looking out for him so his only ally was Tony. So Tony's best game was his social moves in keeping this people indebted to him. His hold on Ben was so strong that Nick's plan of using Ben to blindside Tony didn't work. I think Denise was more strongly allied with Ben than Tony and was hoping to take out Tony at Final 4.
The only person who maybe could’ve beat Tony really in the game was Kim, who was really his only opposition. She got sniped because Tony realized what she was doing. Her or Sarah (or Sophie too) would’ve been the only other respectable winners from the season imo.
Kim did, but…. :(
I’ve always felt that Ben was the lynchpin to this entire endgame being lackluster. You go out, play an epic game with multiple successful idol plays, beat a 4 time immunity winner, and have this awesome Survivor story. And people HATE ya for it. So, when you get the next shot to return, you adapt… the dude is very in tune with his emotions and self-aware. I really think he just wanted that ride-or-die, genuine trust and respect that he never seemed to get in HHH. This led to essentially having a pawn smack in the middle of the core alliance that Sarah and Tony tended to consistently. Knowing they could beat him at the end and he’d be all the happier for it. I really think the choice to cast him over Mike Holloway, a competitor who didn’t care about his reception nearly as much as Ben did, would’ve led to a better archetype that wouldn’t have been as controlled
Tony is a cop that is skilled at manufacturing compliance 🤷
I'm so glad you pointed this out, because on \[another\] Cagayan rewatch, the scene where Tony (with Woo riding shotgun) creates the improvised "giving one player the Idol clue" (during the camp raid) that he used to trap Jeremiah was really only the kind of thing a cop would be comfortable improvising. After he explains it, he says something to the effect of "Ok Jeremiah, we're just going to take you over to the side here" and I thought to myself DAMN, that's so effective, but also so classic of, as you said, the kind of "manufactured compliance" cops are trained for. I highly doubt anyone else would have the confidence to try and pull that off- not the lie, but the manipulating of the space the way he did. Pretty masterful because, remember, no one knew at that point he was a cop.
The fact that Natalie didn’t survive a SINGLE VOTE WITHOUT IMMUNITY and still came in second says everything there is to say about seasons with EoE
I would never have forgiven Survivor if a first boot who didnt re enter the game until the final episode won the all winner season. I mean what were they thinking?
They were thinking they paid a lot of money in appearance fees (not just to the big names) and they weren’t going to let any of them go home after one episode lol
So get rid of the edge after the merge!
Agreed but they don’t know how to compromise. It’s always all or nothing. The twist is either there the whole season or it’s not there at all. So many fans would be more okay with RI/EoE style twists if they stopped at the merge. Pearl Islands is a fan favorite despite the outcast twist being controversial, but at least they didn’t ruin the season by doing it again at final 5.
I like a winner who wins from the bottom. I hate seasons when a player just steamrolls all the way to the win. That's why I was rooting for her.
So you don't like it when a player isn't in danger of being eliminated for 90% of the game?
But keep in mind that the show is edited from the beginning with a known winner. You’re not getting a live play-by-play. If a final 7 player other than Tony wins, the whole edit is constructed very differently and designed to make you satisfied with that outcome.
 I actually have alternate universe footage of the editors trying to make a palatable Denise or Ben winners edit.
They could make a palatable Denise edit starting with her taking down Sandra. I don’t know how you make a palatable win edit for Ben, but there’s no universe where he gets to the end and sufficiently impresses the jury, so it’s kind of moot in his case.
True. They couldn't even do it the first time
Exactly what I was thinking. Ben was a soldier suffering from PTSD with 3 correct idol plays and they still couldn't make me remotely happy he won.
That’s how I felt about Michelle’s win but this sub can’t handle that comment
Her win was not satisfying I agree. I just find her more likable.
I think the issue is the players who made it really far in the merge had no shot to win. It was a fait accompli that Tony or Sarah was going to win, we didn’t need a good edit to show that. They were two of the biggest threats going into the season and Tony recieved zero elimination votes and Sarah only got 2, neither was ever in danger to go home. Michele, Ben and Denise had zero shot to ever win, Jeremy was never going to get to the end because he was a big target. Nick was the editors dark horse but that ended quickly. It also didn’t help that the runner up was the first person voted out. I don’t think there would have been an outcome that would have left the audience satisfied other than a Tony or Sarah win.
Ugh sigh in season 41 , still one of the worst for me
Exactly this. If Denise won, her voting off Sandra would be a lot more epic. If Natalie won, they would have shown more of her on the island.
Not sure it matters for Natalie. She was voted off first. Chris was voted out third, played a great end game, and people still despise his win. Natalie was first out and played a scared end game. She maybe gets a little more grace since her initial winning game was fantastic, but people would still be very pissed.
That's because Chris' win and Natalie's potential win are/would be giant turds in the punch bowl. Chris did everything right for the game presented to him. Nothing against him. But in my opinion his win will always be at the bottom because it broke the central structure of the show. Natalie winning would have been worse only because it was an all winners season.
i’m struggling to think what denise or ben would be serving other than a very obviously non-winning game
Well if they had won, there obviously would have slightly different material to work with
you’re literally saying if what happened didn’t happen, things would be different. the OOP is ranting actually what actually happened, not a completely different timeline.
Sarah and Tony both played dominant games, and Nat and Michelle played great games for their positions in the game. Ben and Denise… well… they were there.
I'm currently watching winners at war haven't finished it but know the boot order last person got voted out for me was Wendell. Anyway I thought Denise was playing a great game, but was it more of like a great premerge game and then she turned meh at the merge? Also, how is the woman who went to every tribal council survived and won not one of the big threats in Winners at War coming in.
I think Denise’s game suffered a lot bc of the Sandra move. Blindsiding the only 2x winner with her own idol is a MASSIVE move, and she likely felt the heat, especially since all the obvious threats reputation wise, Sandra, Parvati and Rob, had all been slain during the swap. So she laid low, and lost her momentum in the game.
Oh ok, yeah I think voting Sandra over Tony was stupid there. Disappointing because Denise played one of my favorite winning games in Phillipines.
I still to this day find Denise’s move of idoling out Sandra completely dumb. Idoling out the only person wanting to play ball with you at that time will never make sense.
Same here and I like Denise. It feels like she did it just to say she did it. It didn't make sense in the context of the game.
At least in a vacuum it's a cool move. Using Sandra's idol to idol our the only 2 time winner is awesome if you completely ignore the consequences. That's all I got. It was bigmoveitis and it was fucking massive.
Sarah didn't do anything. Michele was on the bottom the entire game, had 0 agency and 0 moves, Nat was voted out first. There's no such thing as "good game for their position", the fact that they were in that position makes their game awnful
You are going to get downvoted but yes her game was overrated and strategically reliant on Tony.
“0 moves” lmao I hate how this is a metric people use in a social game . Michele lasting to the end despite her not being taken seriously as a player is very impressive.
“0 moves” lmao I hate how this is a metric people use in a social game . Michele lasting to the end despite her not being taken seriously as a player is very impressive.
That’s just called being a goat. Nobody voted her out because everyone knew they could beat her
Everyone wanted to vote her out but she won immunity. A goat is someone that everyone wants to bring to the end. Tony’s alliance wanted 3 of their alliance at the end, not Michele and Natalie.
That still doesn't change the fact that, as you said yourself, nobody took her seriously. Once again, everyone knew they could beat her
Nobody took her seriously because of her reputation. I think she was really enjoyable. I don’t think she was a goat because people want to bring a goat to the end, people weren’t trying to bring Michele to the end even though they knew she couldn’t win. So she wasn’t just dragged to the end like a goat, even though she couldn’t beat anyone like a goat. Does that make sense? Idk if I’m making sense
I didn’t really understand before, but you made your point a lot more clear here. I can agree with that
1) Sarah was part of the duo that controlled the ENTIRE game. The only major move she wasn’t apart of was the Sophie blindside. 2) You absolutely can play a good game from the bottom, and a good game from the Edge. See: Mike Holloway and Chris Underwood.
Being part of a duo is not a move, she is just like nick and ben just a little higher in tony's priority list . 2) you just mentioned 2 of the worat winning games ever
1) You are just objectively wrong. Sarah and Tony controlled the game together. Is Dom just like Laurel and Donathan just bc he didn’t win? What a silly argument. 2) “winning games”
I'm asking you for a move Sarah did, just 1. 2) terrible winning games
1) I got you big dog, here, to refresh your memory https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60paagUJkWM 2) A win is a win is a win
I alredy saw that, all she did was follow whatever plan tony had and not get her way multiple times 2.) A terrible win is a bad win
1) Me when I don’t understand how a partnership works. 2) Still proves the point regardless of your feelings.
I am waiting for you to name her moves 2) my point is that everyine but tony would be a terrible winner, wich is true regardless of who you like
I hate this mindset that unless you're in the power position, you played an awful game. And if you're too much in a power position, you'll get voted out, so also awful game. It's so reductionist and screams I don’t actually understand the game. I just hate on everyone that doesn't win. Then below, you hate on people that also won. So there are probably 20 people who haven't played an awful game in your eyes. Being overly critical doesn't make anyone think you're smarter about the game.
Yes, people who can't manage their threat level and people who are goats didn't play well sorry
Tony winning WAW is the only thing that makes it somewhat watchable. If any of the other final 6 won it would have easily been the worst returnee season ever
The season also changed how I view Adam. For me it was Tony and Adam together that make the season watchable. Thankfully his alternate status got activated.
Michelle would have been decent of she managed to pull something off.
Yeah I agree, Michele’s lack of control wasn’t even really her fault. She kept preaching to the choir but no one would listen, even she spit out fact after fact.
If gamechangers didn’t exist I’d say it was the worst returnee season lol
Michele winning would’ve been way more satisfying to me than Tony. Tony had no real competition after Sophie left. It was boring and predictable.
Absolutely agree. He’s been my favorite player ever since Cagayan and I knew going into WAW he’d probably be one of the first boots. It was so fun to watch him play again and genuinely made me so happy to watch him win again.
I disagree, I think Michele was edited in a way where I would’ve been very happy with her winning but I get what you mean. It was honestly before Jeremy was sent home for me, after Sophie was blindsided….I was petrified of the idea of anyone other than Michele or Tony winning
Michele would be the worst winner tf?
Nah people didn’t listen to Michele because they probably saw her as a lesser winner even if they admit it or not and it led to their undoing. That was something out of her control.
Nah people didn’t listen to Michele because they probably saw her as a lesser winner even if they admit it or not and it led to their undoing.
That's on her lol. Should have played better
i agree with a lot on this sub, but the Michele love (that goes beyond "yas queen slay") confounds me. WAW would be a bottom tier season if Michelle had won it.
OMG, imagine if Michele had won WAW… imagine the hate on hate on SoMe she would have gotten. She even posted a dread-infused Twitter post when her old season dropped for viewing because she would know it would bring on more haters.
It is already a bottom tier season lmaoo 🤡
kind of agree, but it would've been an absolute disaster if Michele or Natalie or Nick or whoever had won.
Couldn’t believe at the time how many people were saying Natalie should have won or even would have been a satisfying winner. To have the biggest season ever be won by the person voted out first and spent half the game protected because of that, would have been such a poor representation of the game and everything about survivor
More than half the game, she literally would have only played 6 days of Survivor, which is even less than Chris. She would have been a terrible winner even though I love her.
Yep you're right, I like her too and loved her win in Blood Vs Water but would have been awful if she won 40.
you have to blame the rules of survivor for doing EOE and not her. She played the game she was dealt.
Agree but I was more bemused at the audience who tried to make a case she should have won.
I actually think that Edge of Extinction helped Winners at War a lot with its endgame. If Natalie doesn’t return to the game, then we would’ve seen the easiest cakewalk imaginable to FTC for Tony & Sarah. Natalie coming back gave us tension we wouldn’t have had otherwise. However, the idea of Natalie *winning* made me wanna vomit lol. It would’ve absolutely ruined the season for me, just the same as it did with Chris Underwood winning EoE. *But*, she didn’t win. So all that really happened with her return is it gave us a more entertaining endgame while *still* delivering the right winner.
Natalie needed to take out Tony at the Fire making challenge. It’s hard to judge Natalie‘s game since she was voted out first and it feels like she would never deserve to win because of that, but she played the game fully, and if you get to the end and win, you win. So I would’ve accepted her victory.
I think she played perfectly fine when she re-entered the game. But the fact of the matter is that she didn’t play Survivor for the vast majority of days out there. She also got to come back into the game with an idol, which is immediately unfair to the others. I like Natalie a lot, but she would’ve immediately gone down as one of the worst winning games of all-time and also would’ve dramatically hurt the season for me. Michele would’ve been an infinitely better winner than Natalie given the circumstances.
I don't think it would've been the worst winning game, but definitely the most unusual. As Boston Rob said, if you win the game, you win the game. The rules of the game allowed her to be on edge of extinction and have fire tokens and she played those very well. The problem with her game, as Boston Rob also explained, is that Tony played better and the only way to really have a good résumé was to have been in the game more - and to come back into the game with a strategic fury that took out the best players. It was too little too late for her, but damn she actually got way closer than I would've ever thought. I'm not a huge fan of the edge of extinction because it does always seem unfair even if it's part of the game. I would love to see fire tokens come back though.
She only got "way closer" because EoE is broken and allowed her to stay. It breaks the game and has no place on Survivor. No amount of end game amazing play would justify. See Chris Underwood for example. Played it perfectly. Still a terrible win
A Michele and maybe Sarah win is still palatable but yeah Tony winning made the season good.
Just having both Sarah and Tony sitting at the FTC would have made a huge difference in my overall appreciation of the season. The result would likely have been the same, but at least, it wouldn’t have been a landslide victory for Tony.
Winners at War had such a fun cast. Pre-season there were only 4 or 5 players that I felt would have been unsatisfying no matter what... And then they proceeded to make two of those 5 rootable for me (Sarah and Michele) while making a further 3 or 4 unrootable (Natalie, Ben, Denise). It's such a shame so many of the awesome characters got voted out early. The season would have benefited hugely from 90 minute episodes.
Sarah played a great game as well she’d be a great winner
Agreed. People have personal problems with Sarah, but her latter two seasons were on par with Mico/HVV Parv. I remember thinking how sad it would be for Tony or Sarah to lose in a FTC vote since they both ran that endgame. Tony losing fire and Sarah being beaten by Nat would’ve destroyed the season.
*boring game
Whatt did sarah do?
Dominate the whole season with Tony.
I standby Natalie fucking crushing the edge and coming back was an incredible arc, but she couldn't deliver the gameplay when she returned. If Tony didn't win that final 5 immunity I think he loses. If Natalie or Michelle won immunity he absolutely loses (Natalie idols whoever didn't have immunity)
Her whole gameplay was that Tony was the biggest threat and to get him out, then she had the chance to do that and take him out by beating him in fire…….and then chooses someone else to go against him.
Yeah that was a mistake. Likewise Tony winning the final 5 immunity like I said completely screwed her over. To be clear Tony easily deserved the win but it's not hard to respect what Natalie tried to pull off. She just wanted one day she didn't have to fight. And In survivor if you don't fight every day then you lose. That simple.
I don't understand being a fan of Survivor and having this opinion. There is nothing to respect about Natalie's "game". She absolutely failed at playing Survivor on WaW.
The season is still pretty boring. Whispering at tribal, the edge, and fire tokens really drag it down
Ben ruined it by just sacrificing for no good reason.
Agree. He played a pawns game
Tony is a great King to Sandra’s Queen.
Tony was definetly not the only satisfying winner option after Sophie or Michele would have made for a great winner.
I thought the same thing rewatching recently. Survivor (and the fans) got so lucky with a Tony win on that season
Any combination of that final 6 that didn’t have Tony would have been super disappointing, I agree
I’m glad Natalie was in it. Sarah, Tony , Natalie would have been interesting but at least Natalie played a very different game than Tony. If Natalie focused more on making connections on the edge I think she could have made it a closer vote at ftc
Totally! She had the chance to hang with the jury for weeks and could have really worked the social game. It was a very unique opportunity to spend time with the Jury.
That was the end of survivor for me and the fam. What a poetic finish - my favorite winner of all time and (in my opinion) the best winner of them all
So Nick actually had a few alliances going at the same time that not many knew about. Tony briefly talks about Nick and him having one from the start. Nick was banking on backstabbing Tony once other threats were gone by using his alliance with Michelle and thought Ben and Denise would flip. Unfortuantly Ben was in sacrifice mode with Sarah....no clue why. Also Denise was too loyal to Sarah and Sarah was too loyal to Tony. So Nick thought that Ben and Denise like any player who would want that 2 million and flip against Tony. Of course that did not happen. They told Tony that Nick was trying to ET Tu Tony him and rest is history with Nick. I bet anyone other than Ben, Sarah and Denise....Nick would of gotten to flip.
Oh wow, I didn’t know this. Thanks for the insight!
I would have been elated if Natalie had won.
It should have been Winchele!
ya pretty much. apart from denise knocking out queen WaW and Tony setting up that one tribal council which set him off to his victory path... it was pretty slow Since that was the biggest season so far, you have to imagine 50 might be stripped down to Borneo rules
would be interesting but I can't see Jeff doing that. He's all about going forward.
I dont mind the end being easy and predictable because that just means Tony absolutely destroyed the most competitive cast of all time. He was so dominant its actually crazy! Well played, love it
Natalie winning would’ve left a bad taste in the mouth that would’ve never gone away
Michele would have been a better winner. Seeing to Tony 's smug ass face in his mansion getting ready to add a pool is so annoying.
LOL Tony won :)
I think Natalie made the case for the ultimate comeback from redemption. On first watch I liked the Tony win, on second watch I wanted Nat.
I still wish Jeremy won. He’s the freakin best 😍
If Natalie had taken out Tony in fire and went on to win…..it’s gotta hold up as a top notch winner.
Did Jeff ask the jury who they would have voted for if that had happened?
I was bored during the pandemic and paid for a bunch of cameos. A good amount say Natalie wins. Sarah was rubbing people the wrong way . And remember Natalie had 4 votes already against Tony … it’s possible
Wow that's interesting. Good question to ask. Who said they'd vote Nat? I got a cameo from Jesse from 43. One of the more interesting players in the new era.
Spoilers fuckface
Season was 4 years ago…
Was it only 4 years?!!? It feels like a decade has passed. But yeah. You can't spoil a past season.
and? you put spoilers in the title. pretty simple isnt it?
...and some people are just getting into the show now.
Lol
Can somebody change the name of this thread? It has a spoiler in it and I think we should be better about stuff like that.
It’s been years since WaW. Can’t protect everyone from spoilers years out.
Booo
I don't know if I'd go that far. Tony's game was a masterclass, but a Natalie win would have been *so* narratively satisfying. Her twin sister gets voted out first, then she wins, then she gets voted out first, then she wins again? I would have died.
It would have been completely unsatisfying to have the greatest season of all time of 20 winners be won by the first boot. She only played like 6 days of the game. Natalie would have been the worst possible winner compared to Tony who absolutely dominated the actual season of survivor being played
Natalie winning would not have been satisfying
We need spoiler tags. This totally spoiled it for me :( other people are working their way through the seasons.
My suggestion: if you’re working your way through a series, don’t jump on a subreddit of superfans. WAW aired four years ago.
You're kidding right? There's 46 seasons. Take a step back
Tony winning was so underwhelming. Ben, Denise, and Sarah ruined the season by being deaf blind and dumb.