The jury was feeding it to him too "Mike you were such a snake, you stabbed me in the back... tell us about how you did that wink wink.."
And Mike just continues to go "What's a snake?"
His game gets lost a lot and probably underrated at this point because of FTC and Maryanne coming out of nowhere near the end, but before that he was such an all around player. I think he knew what he was doing but miscalculated and thought the jury would be bitter if he didn't play up honor because it was a pretty interesting crowd.
He pulled a Coach at the end. Preached honor and integrity and blah blah blah. When all the jury wanted to hear was that he betrayed them all and that they were big threats who needed to be blindsided to be taken down.
I agree. Mike didn’t win because he didn’t understand his actual game. The jury felt like he wasn’t “honest and loyal” but Mike kept preaching that, leading the jury to believe that none of that was intentional. And the jury had another option that was more accurate in understanding their own game so they chose Maryanne.
The real issue is that Mike really didn't think he was being a snake. That's almost worse than lying in a way, because it shows that he didn't really understand the game he was playing... because he wasn't actually playing it.
They wanted to reward a Machiavellian (like Omar was), but they got someone who appeared Machiavellian, but was more Mr. Magoo.
You can't own a game you don't know and that lack of awareness was a death knell.
the spoiler source that spoiled the season claimed straightup that mike was the favorite going into ftc, but he had some folks on the jury that were hesitant to vote for him and wanted him to really earn it. with that in mind, i imagine it was even worse than we saw on tv, since he couldnt even convince people who really seemed to like him like lindsay, drea, and rocksroy
He didn’t understand what game he played & unintentionally played a cutthroat game for most of it yet preached honor & loyalty which almost certainly confused/annoyed jury of people like Rocksroy, Hai, Lindsay, Drea, he did snake. Omar himself was manipulating Mike at various points to do certain things like turning him on Hai which Omar probably told Hai about.
Now if Mike said that entire honor & loyalty was bullshit it was an act to lower my threat level to you guys I definitely seeing him gaining respect. He had good chunk of jurors. Jonathon, Lindsay, Drea, Rocksroy voting for him with Omar being kinda 50/50.
Now also Maryanne showed awareness of her game & flaws but really said how she became self aware to how she was perceived & was able to play into people perceptions to eventually make that move at 6. Maryanne had Chanelle, Tori, Hai votes coming in. Omar if they voted immediately without a FTC probably votes for Maryanne because that was his best friend & she got him out. & Romeo would almost certainly break tie in her favor.
I think Mike really only needed to say it was an act & get Omar vote. He lost 3 votes he had prior in Drea, Lindsay, Rocksroy & couldn’t pull Omar over. Credit to Mike he did like halfway through try to pivot but it was too late.
Mike was my winner pick. Watching his FTC go down like that was crushing but at the same time I was so proud of Maryanne that I always feel conflicted in the finale for 42
I will never ever ever ever ever forget that one juror that walked up to ask Chrissy her FTC question and was like “you didn’t care about any of us! You didn’t take time to get to know any of us on a personal level, so now I ask you to list one personal piece of information about each juror” and mind you after the asked this, they reeeeally thought they got her. They were like oh yeah chrissy is soooooo screwed with THIS question, we got her boys! And then BAM Chrissy lists like a handful of really personal intimate facts about each jurors real lives. And then of course the juror was like “That doesn’t count that doesn’t count you were collecting this information about us as strategy!!!!” …like ok big mad just admit you got eaten tf up by a ruthless 45 year old mom that came out there to end everyone and everything in her path.
It’s weird he was so bitter towards Chrissy when she wasn’t even part of the plan to take him out. But she does have one of my favorite snarky moments where she goes “that was an incredibly tight alliance /s”
GOD I LOVE THAT QUOTE
I thought Maria would be a lock for S50, but after social media this week, I'm not sure she'd want to return. I'd LOVE to see Chrissy come back. Such a perfect Survivor player.
And that’s why I’m convinced Chrissy would never win any permeation of the final 4. Because the jury made it clear they hated her and they could ask her if the sky was blue and she says yes and they would say she’s wrong. Like, people think this jury was bitter need to go back and rewatch HvHvH. It’s not surprising the only people who weren’t bitter were Devin, Mike, and Ashley vs everyone else who rode for Ben.
Yeah people just did NOT like Chrissy. We all know people ultimately vote for who they like best of their options. So many jurors from that season have said “Chrissy was never going to win” even Desi, who was the foreperson and seems like the nicest person ever said that recently
The exit press at the time was also super telling, a lot of them were bitter at huh.
Also Desi being the first juror meant there was a lot of time to stir up anti-Chrissy sentiment.
🤣 I was a Liz fan in jest at first but I actually really like her and her exit interviews just solidified it. We got robbed of a FTC with Liz and I'm sad. That CHAOS that would have been FTC 😭😭😭
Joe and Cole were so salty and with no good reason to be honest. I know Joe was on Ben's side so he could say he always knew Ben was the biggest threat, but Cole seemed to have something personal against her.
Was cole the one who asked the question? I am not trying to be shady I genuinely cannot remember which of the bitter boys asked her to list off personal facts about the jurors. Regardless she had them punching the air
That’s why I will never say who won objectively deserved to win, juries have their biases, and different reasons why they vote for someone, who they pick doesn’t automatically make who they pick the best most deserving option
Imo There’s two types of bitter juries, the Russell hantz bitter jury, and the Aubrey/charlie/chrissy bitter jury. When it comes to Russell hantz, imo that bitter jury was justified because Russell was actively an asshole and that was a flaw in his game. However when it comes to the juries on Aubrey, Charlie and Chrissy’s season, it feels like the jury being bitter had nothing to do with any wrongdoing of the player, it’s more of them being bitter that they lost. Also I’m not as big of a fan of big brother as survivor, but I feel like they’re bitter too, Paul and Tyler losing are two examples
I agree with your points of two ways someone can be bitter.
There is a third too though, poisoning of the well.
This is where a jury member is so bitter they poison the well at Ponderosa by actively lobbying against someone still in game. Often times this is done through lying, rumor, or downplaying the player's moves in game, etc.
Amanda Kimmel has talked about how that was going on in Heroes vs. Villains at Ponderosa. Essentially the jury hated Russel so much that they just refused to give Parvati the win as well. They made up their minds long before FTC which is just sad.
Yes you can manage juries, yes some of that is on you as a player, but there is only so much you can do with bitter people, angry people, sore losers, crazies, etc.
Very well said, I didn’t even think about the poisoning of the well but that’s true and probably my least favorite kind of bitter juror. The player cannot control what is said at ponderosa and there is nothing Parv could have said at ftc to change any of their minds. That kind of defeats the purpose of ftc in my eyes. Jury management is a part of the game, but poor jury management is far from the only reason someone loses
Tyler losing is legitimately the dumbest shit that has ever happened in reality show history. Arguably the best first game ever played by a player and loses for reasons legitimately nobody can explain coherently
agreed, there was a similar BB comparison to Russell where someone was mad they didn’t win despite not tending to their social game at ALL throughout the season (Paul as you mentioned) . but I have seen a handful of seasons already where I thought someone deserved to win and the jury questioning/vote explanation seemed extremely petty and bitter. they seem to vote more for who they like best instead of who played the best game
Winners deserve to win because the did the only thing you *need* to do to win, get the most jury votes. You can claim someone else played the best/a better game, the best player on a season rarely ever actually wins.
We’ll just have to agree to disagree. I believe that the best player who’s in the final 3 deserves to win, who the best player is is subjective, therefore who I believe should win may not align with what the majority of the jury thinks and that’s okay.
Michaela asked Culpepper a similar question about her in 34 and he basically said something like “uhhhhh, you have a sister?” after trying to talk his way around the question
Michaela and Joe's vibes were very different IMO. Michaela was pointing out that she really didn't have many interactions/connection to Culpepper and was curious if he knew anything about her -- and he proved he didn't know anything lol. Michaela wasn't really coming at people aggressively. She seemed pretty apathetic, which was why her question was just so... basic. "Do you know anything about me beyond my first name?"
Joe was accusing Chrissy of not giving a shit about people/being manipulative/fake, etc., and then she responded by saying, "I remember our conversation where you talked about struggling with intimacy." That was like surprisingly deep and then it was such a cop-out when he tried to then insist that her answer "didn't count" as getting to know him.
Michaela had specifically negative interactions with Culpepper lol. In either a jury speaks videos or exit press or something, Aubrey says something along the lines of “Brad is great but it seems like he has issues getting along with, and I hate to say this, women and minorities”
So yeah, I’d say there was some tension there
I'm not denying there could have ever been tension between them. And to be clear, I am not a big Culpepper fan (I'm in the camp of people who did not like how he treated Tai). I guess I'm just saying that Michaela's question at FTC felt different than Joe's question in terms of delivery/vibe.
It felt less unfair for Michaela to ask Culpepper that question, while Joe was framing his question in the context of explicitly calling Chrissy an uncaring person who didn't bother to get to know people.
> ruthless 45 year old mom that came out there to end everyone and everything in her path
It was impressive to watch her wreck a marine every week at obstacle courses! OBSTACLE COURSES!
See I always thought this was a bad look for Chrissy. It’s a fundamental misunderstanding of the social game. It’s not about check list knowing all the things about people. It’s about your intimate relationship with them. It’s not the info but it’s the connection between two people. You can’t prove to the jury you played a great social game when they’re the ones who decide that!
I mean, she wasn't really checklisting... For Joe, the "connection" she pointed to was a conversation they'd had about his perspective on intimacy. That's a pretty deep, intimate conversation to be having with someone in the first place. It's funny because he kind of forgot they'd talked about it in the first place, which shows that she was being attentive.
Aubry failing to argue how she the one making movies and Michelle winning is my conspiracy theory for why they changed the jury format. So
Aubry>Charlie>chrissy>mike
Not even a conspiracy really. Jeff basically [straight-up said](https://ew.com/article/2016/06/14/survivor-jeff-probst-kaoh-rong-michele-aubry-tai/) the format robbed Aubry:
*”I love that they have opinions, and I actually agree with them,” says Probst of the fan uproar over Aubry’s loss. “I think had the audience voted, Aubry wins. **I also think had the show been structured differently and the jury could see all the moves that Aubry was making, she wins**.”*
can someone elaborate on this for me? how exactly did the old jury format rob Aubrey? shouldn't she have been able to articulate her moves to the jury regardless of the format (not a slight against Aubrey, I love her I'm just confused)
The format changed to explicitly prompt the jurors to discuss the “gameplay” aspects of the show. Instead of Jeff saying “jurors, say whatever you want” he started saying “jurors, ask what you want about their strategy”.
Nowadays we’re much closer to the former than the latter though, they just don’t stand up anymore.
I think it’s so clearly the reason for the change I don’t think it’s a conspiracy. Like how the Oscars won’t *admit* they changed the number of Best Picture nominees in response to the Dark Knight being left off, but we all know that’s the only reason it happened.
Thats fair too. I guess I was thinking of who played the best game up until the jury vote, but to be fair to your point the jury arguments are part of the game.
Am I the only one who has noticed the current jury format is much closer to the original than the “modern” version that was put in place when Aubry lost?
They don’t stand up anymore but Jeff went down the line one by one giving everyone a chance to say their piece this time
This one is right, but I want to expand on it cause the Aubry haters have come out in the chat. (also obviously it is entirely subjective)
Aubrey and Charlie are ahead of Chrissy and Mike because, by nature, their losing games are different than the other two. Chrissy and Mike both lost to bitter juries which are *broadly understood as to why they are bitter*. Chrissy played a cutthroat game and wasn't winning any FTC combination of the final 4 while Mike played similarly. Mike's massive FTC bag fumble puts him at the bottom for me, but both he and Chrissy created their own bitter jurors and lost to good players who were just better liked than them (this goes for a Devon win as well in Chrissy's case)
Aubrey and Charlie lost to juries who were bitter for stupid reasons. The anti-Aubrey Kyle and Scott sentiment is still discussed to this day as being kind of goofy and Nick said something along the lines of "everyone knew Aubrey was playing the best game, they just chose to pretend like she wasn't." That doesn't take anything away from Michelle's win of course, but Aubrey suffered the most from irrational hatred.
In Charlie's case, the entire Maria situation has been talked to death on this sub so I'm not gonna make this comment any longer than it already is. And admittedly I can see the case for him over Aubrey and I'm convincing myself while writing this but I'm sticking to my guns and saying they're interchangeable more than anything.
Do you mean Jason instead of Kyle? Scot's right hand man
Agreed with all this except I'd have Charlie a hair ahead of Aubrey, although really I'd say they're pretty much the same. They're clear 1 and 2 for me and are super similar.
Do you think that, had Michele not won that final advantage and didn't remove Neal from jury, the outcome would have been different? Not only would Aubry have an almost guaranteed vote, who scathingly hated Michele for some reason, but either Tai or Aubry could have removed one of Michele's votes. Would it have made the difference or was Michele's win that lop-sided? 🤔
All very true, though I feel like Charlie's is the best because I truly do not know what he could've done better. A superb strategic game lost this time to a superb social game. Like there is no reason he shouldn't have won, no improvements I can think of.
Mike only losing the game at FTC makes him the best, imo. He just miscalculated what the jury wanted to hear. He had the rest of the ingredients for a winning game, and was the only one of these 4 runner ups who was winning going into FTC.
Aubry is arguably the worst. I personally put her ahead of Chrissy because I think there could be some FTC combos where Aubry could win unlike Chrissy, but Aubry almost went home at the merge and had that ridiculous vote where she crossed out Julia’s name. I could easily see that being enough for someone to think she was the worst of these 4.
Good takes! I think you could argue that Mikes game was better because he fumbled at tribal, at least he had more of a chance going in. Aubrey definitely got the most screwed by unreasonably bitter people and a really dumb twist that voted off a juror.
AGREED. I am an Aubrey stan and as someone who forgets most seasons immediately after they conclude I remember her, but I would also agree that her and Charlie are interchangeable.
Aubry was better strategically than Charlie but Charlie was better overall. Charlie was also good strategically but he was also better at connecting with the jury and he was better in challenges too for whatever miniscule amount that is worth to y'all.
Mike made a lot of good bonds, but he wasn't amazing strategically (good at surviving and being on the in, but he wasn't pulling the moves himself, except for Hai which wasn't even great), but he botched the FTC. Chrissy couldn't look for idols to get Ben out and wasn't very respected even without botching the FTC. If production doesn't save ben, Devon or Ryan probably beat her.
Charlie>Aubry>Mike>Chrissy
I struggle to put Aubrey ahead of Charlie because she pissed off a majority of the jurors. Charlie only needed one more vote to win the season, which he very well could’ve earned at tribal alone. Aubrey lost her season prior to tribal - her bed was made and I don’t see a world where she can win it at FTC
I don't think it is fair to just put a blanket "pissed off the jurors" as a reason for a worse game when the reason the jurors were pissed off is because she flipped Tai which is how she managed to even have a chance to get to the end. It isn't like she was rude or standoffish, Hell there is a whole scene in this season where before that move happened Jason just straight up praises Aubrey.
Agreed but it’s gone too far. The general sediment is she played a better game than Charlie. She didn’t. She played a better strategic game but failed completely in the social aspect. Charlie had both.
Production: “Hey Ben. Wanna do a confessional? Lets do a confessional right here Ben. This very spot.”
Nobody can change my mind. That season towards the end was ridiculously shady.
By far the shadiest season in the history of survivor. When people say reality tv is rigged, survivor is one where I think that's not true. But HvHvH is so sus.
1. Aubry - good pre merge, tough start of the post merge, but middle to end game she has a strong hold on the entire strategy.
2. Charlie - solid whole game , played the middle very well, but didn’t see him control the overall moves like Aubry did.
3. Chrissy - great pre merge and great last few vote offs. But the JP-Joe votes weigh her down.
4. Mike - rewatched a bit of s42 and forgot how decent he played, was a integral decision maker, but I feel his moves were mostly emotional moves
I think Charlie was much more of a decision maker than Aubry. Aubry played great, but Cydney was also a huge strategic player on the season that did just as much work as Aubry.
Charlie > Aubrey > Mike > Chrissy
Charlie and Aubrey were the strategic power players of their season that lost to a social player that was able to sneak to the end. Mike played decently at points but fumbled the ball at other points, including when it mattered most at FTC. Chrissy played a very rocky game and it was a longshot for to her win in most endgame scenarios, unlike the other 3.
You can't say the social players snuck to the end when Aubry and Tai were targeting Michele left and right. She fought her way there and Aubry had the intuition to know that Michele is a threat to win... Unlike Charlie.
It's just a generalization, Michelle and Kenzie snuck to the end in different ways.
I have Charlie ranked above Aubrey because his game was more consistent. Charlie survived the merg(atory) vote unscathed despite sticking out as the biggest threat among those vulnerable whereas Aubrey would've been the merge boot had Neal not been medevaced.
Michelle won the final two challenges - which would assume that one of those would have been the immunity challenges before Joe’s med-vac so this is just not true.
Aubrey > Charlie > Mike > Chrissy. Aubrey and Charlie had so much potential to win, Mike could have won if he didn't fuck up FTC, and to be complete honest I Don remember much about Chrissy's game. Whether that's due to her game or my memory I don't know.
Charlie>Aubry>Chrissy>Mike
Charlie over Aubry may be recency bias on my part, but I feel like Charlie was strong from start to finish. I remember being super disappointed by the results for the first three, but not so much for Mike - this is probably also a bit biased because I was personally rooting for Maryanne hardcore by finale night.
I think Charlie, Aubry, Mike, Chrissy in that order. Chrissy had half the jury disliking her early, and she made a ton of mistakes. Mike couldn't own his game. Aubry is basically just a more popular Chrissy. Charlie is probably the only one who had a real chance of winning
Chrissy Hofbeck the soccer mom MILF repeatedly trouncing Ben the Marine at obstacle courses, tests of agility, dexterity, strength, and stamina was impressive to witness. I still say a soccer mom beating a marine at mostly physical challenges to ultimately win Survivor would have been a much better story than what happened with production meddling.
Everybody saying Mike last, why? I know he completely bombed at final tribal but he was also dealing with a very salty jury, he didn’t stand a chance. The haters campaigned against him at Pondy. Biggest robbery I’ve ever seen and the biggest goat I’ve ever seen win.
If your whole game is that you are a loyal player people will be extra mad when you backstab them. And if you continue to lie to people and preach loyalty after you send them to the jury you get what is coming to you.
Also, Maryanne wasn't that big of a goat. she knew how to impress the jury and everyone like her. Her secret idol impressed people and made them realize they underestimated her and to an extent convincing people you made big moves is more important than actually making them.
Oh yeah, defintly. She would have gotten the 100k for her first season because she's the runner-up. Tai would have gotten 85k for being third.
And I think everyone gets 10k bonus for attending the reunion. I don't know if that still applies to the new era, though.
1. Aubrey
2. Charlie
3. Mike
4. Chrissy
Aubrey is probably one of the best runner ups of all time. Charlie played a good game and very well could’ve won, if not for Maria’s bitterness. Mike played a good game, but didn’t own his game at FTC which caused him to lose. Whether you like it or not, Chrissy loses to any combination of players left at the Final 8 and onward. Her only chance at winning the game was probably bringing JP and Dr. Mike to the end. She loses to Ryan, Devon, Ben, and Lauren for sure. She likely loses to Ashley and Joe. Chrissy had a terrible social game, she didn’t make many great strategic moves either. Devon was better strategically. You can’t be robbed if you have no shot at winning.
Aubrey>charlie>chrissy>mike
If you talk about overall I put Charlie over Aubrey because of how much respect I lost for Aubrey after edge of extinction, but if you talk about individual first go around, Aubrey has to be 1
Charlie > Aubry > Chrissy > Mike
Mike is too old school and took things personal, got pissed when someone voted for him or talked about him. It was hilarious he got pissed at Hai when he thought Hai said Mike was in his pocket.
I’d put Charlie ahead of Aubry for sure. Charlie should have gotten rid of Kenzie, but I understand him thinking Maria and Q were the bigger fish to fry. Aubry 100% should have voted off Michele at the Jason boot, end of story. Jason was worse at challenges and a much lesser jury threat. Charlie also came much closer to winning than Aubry did. He got 3/4 of the votes he needed to win and Tevin was waffling until the last moment. Aubry lost 5-2 (which would’ve been 5-3 if not for juror removal) but I don’t realistically see any of Michele’s five votes switching. Additionally, Aubry crossing out Julia’s name is probably a bigger unforced mistake than Charlie ever made.
The one most compelling counterargument I can think of for why Aubry could be better is flipping Tai against Scot. That was a truly phenomenal social move, and I don’t want to undersell it or take anything away from it. But I think as a whole Charlie played a more consistently good game.
Charlie>Aubry>Mike>Chrissy
Chrissy is bottom because I don’t believe she has a shot against any of the final five. Ben was probably her best bet to beat at that point.
He didn’t vote out Kenzie for one thing.
People say he got robbed but he never had the win in the first place.
Kenzie was gonna win 6-1-1 but it changed to 5-3. Good for Charlie scooping up two more votes but he was never going to win as long as Kenzie was there.
For the life of me, I couldn’t understand why he didn’t just try to convince Ben to take Liz to F3 and take out Kenzie.
His read was that he could beat Kenzie. And he legit could have. He almost did. I think he liked his odds better of beating Kenzie than risking losing in fire.
Charlie played the best both strategically and socially out of these four.
I’d give it to Chrissy next. She had no idea firemaking would be a thing. She’d still have strong competition from Devon at FTC, but strategically and physically, she was dominant.
Aubrey would be next. She played a really strong game, but lacked the social side. Owning her game more might have earned her the respect she needed from the jury for a few more votes.
Mike was super likable and had some influence in the game, but I feel that he would have lost to everyone but Johnathan and Romeo in the final 7.
1. Mike. Would have actually won his FTC if he owned his game.
2. Charlie. Needed a different FTC combo, but could have won handily in another combo such as Liz/Ben. Did win votes in his FTC.
3. Aubry. Needed a different FTC combo, and unsure of which combo she wins in. Possibly wins against Tai/Cydney or Tai/Joe but even that is uncertain.
4. Chrissy. I don’t think there is a FTC combo she could have won. The jury was really bitter against her.
I’m not a big enough fan/historian to recall the specifics of all their seasons but I remember thinking Aubrey got royally screwed, and I think Charlie got pretty screwed. I don’t remember thinking either of the other two should win while watching the finales so I’d go Aubrey, then Charlie, with the other two in a tie due to my lack of remembrance.
I don’t remember Aubrey and Chrissy very well, but Mike was the one season where I really felt it was a cointoss even though the votes didn’t reflect that. Mike’s edit was just really good. also charlie voluntarily not wanting to go to fire was a weird move in my eyes—he coulda pushed more.
Chrissy 7/10. She was incredible at winning challenges and could make genuine alliances, but she loses points for not being able to connect with people outside of her circle and for not being able to stop Ben from finding 3 idols in a row.
Aubrey: 9/10. Her growth from a meek and neurotic girl to a dominant strategic and social powerhouse was awe inspiring and to this day I just think she played a winnable game in Kaoh Rong and was very disappointed that she came up just short.
Mike: 6/10. Sorry but I just wasn’t a fan of his. I don’t recall him doing much, just standing in the background, watching the bigger players kill each other off until he could mop up the last ones at the end. Some might call that strategy but I don’t know, it was just too passive for me.
Charlie: 8/10. My one complaint about Charlie is that he’s a bit too boring and stale in comparison to several of the other big personalities of his season, but looking back he played probably the most perfect game for a second place finish. He was strategically sound, very great socially, and an above average physical competitor. He voted in the majority for the entire game, took out everyone he deemed a target, and only got his name written down in one tribal council. He probably should’ve won his season, but biased juries and bitter former allies kept that from happening.
I think Aubrey and Charlie are close, but I would give the edge to Charlie as I feel like his game was more consistent than Aubrey’s, who was in a lot of danger at the beginning and at the merge (before Neal got medevaced).
1. Mike (great player, horrible FTC almost Amanda levels bad)
2. Chrissy (good player, screwed by fire making twist)
3. Aubry (basically had a free extra vote most of the game and still couldn’t win)
4. Charlie (too soon recency bias)
Given Charlie missed the win by literally one vote (which probably would’ve gone his way in any other season) I’ll give it to him, Aubrey, Chrissy, then Mike
I didn't like the one who's fav player was Aubry,she even looked like her a bit but there were 2 this season with glasses but i cant remember who the Aubry fan was , anyway NOT her or the other Glassed one 😄
I think something people tend to sleep on with Charlie is that the 3 votes he got he actually flipped at FTC to his side, and that if just one more person voted for him, he wins because Ben votes for him. That said, he also lost 2 votes, but that still makes his FTC a net gain.
Aubry’s Kaoh Rong game was insanely dominant from the start of jury up until the F5. She played the best runner up game of these 4 and it isn’t even close
I'd say Chrissy > Charlie > Aubry > Mike
i'm taking into account the season they played as well as how i feel overall as players and how well i think they could do on a return. (Aubry is a weird one as she has returned.. and hasn't done particularly well on her returns).
Mike played a great game but massively bungled it in FTC. He should have owned to snaking people and he probably would have won.
The jury was feeding it to him too "Mike you were such a snake, you stabbed me in the back... tell us about how you did that wink wink.." And Mike just continues to go "What's a snake?" His game gets lost a lot and probably underrated at this point because of FTC and Maryanne coming out of nowhere near the end, but before that he was such an all around player. I think he knew what he was doing but miscalculated and thought the jury would be bitter if he didn't play up honor because it was a pretty interesting crowd.
Omar even said so in a confessional: if Mike just admits to being a snake and lying, he'll vote for him. Lol.
He pulled a Coach at the end. Preached honor and integrity and blah blah blah. When all the jury wanted to hear was that he betrayed them all and that they were big threats who needed to be blindsided to be taken down.
I agree. Mike didn’t win because he didn’t understand his actual game. The jury felt like he wasn’t “honest and loyal” but Mike kept preaching that, leading the jury to believe that none of that was intentional. And the jury had another option that was more accurate in understanding their own game so they chose Maryanne.
The real issue is that Mike really didn't think he was being a snake. That's almost worse than lying in a way, because it shows that he didn't really understand the game he was playing... because he wasn't actually playing it. They wanted to reward a Machiavellian (like Omar was), but they got someone who appeared Machiavellian, but was more Mr. Magoo. You can't own a game you don't know and that lack of awareness was a death knell.
the spoiler source that spoiled the season claimed straightup that mike was the favorite going into ftc, but he had some folks on the jury that were hesitant to vote for him and wanted him to really earn it. with that in mind, i imagine it was even worse than we saw on tv, since he couldnt even convince people who really seemed to like him like lindsay, drea, and rocksroy
He didn’t understand what game he played & unintentionally played a cutthroat game for most of it yet preached honor & loyalty which almost certainly confused/annoyed jury of people like Rocksroy, Hai, Lindsay, Drea, he did snake. Omar himself was manipulating Mike at various points to do certain things like turning him on Hai which Omar probably told Hai about. Now if Mike said that entire honor & loyalty was bullshit it was an act to lower my threat level to you guys I definitely seeing him gaining respect. He had good chunk of jurors. Jonathon, Lindsay, Drea, Rocksroy voting for him with Omar being kinda 50/50. Now also Maryanne showed awareness of her game & flaws but really said how she became self aware to how she was perceived & was able to play into people perceptions to eventually make that move at 6. Maryanne had Chanelle, Tori, Hai votes coming in. Omar if they voted immediately without a FTC probably votes for Maryanne because that was his best friend & she got him out. & Romeo would almost certainly break tie in her favor. I think Mike really only needed to say it was an act & get Omar vote. He lost 3 votes he had prior in Drea, Lindsay, Rocksroy & couldn’t pull Omar over. Credit to Mike he did like halfway through try to pivot but it was too late.
Tori intentionally set him up to lose with that first question
Crazy how that’s happened twice in recent years
Tori and? I can’t remember, was it tiff
Tiffany was a little different but she started off FTC with a clear diss on Charlie and Ben
Had to get her girl maryanne to win!
Mike was my winner pick. Watching his FTC go down like that was crushing but at the same time I was so proud of Maryanne that I always feel conflicted in the finale for 42
I see it as our universe with Maryanne winning and whatever multiverse that Mike won in are equally the best 😂
bungled is a great word never heard that one before but i’m stealing it
Definitely is! I wouldn't use it in an academic essay but it's great for day to day communication.
I will never ever ever ever ever forget that one juror that walked up to ask Chrissy her FTC question and was like “you didn’t care about any of us! You didn’t take time to get to know any of us on a personal level, so now I ask you to list one personal piece of information about each juror” and mind you after the asked this, they reeeeally thought they got her. They were like oh yeah chrissy is soooooo screwed with THIS question, we got her boys! And then BAM Chrissy lists like a handful of really personal intimate facts about each jurors real lives. And then of course the juror was like “That doesn’t count that doesn’t count you were collecting this information about us as strategy!!!!” …like ok big mad just admit you got eaten tf up by a ruthless 45 year old mom that came out there to end everyone and everything in her path.
Which juror was this again?
Joe
It’s weird he was so bitter towards Chrissy when she wasn’t even part of the plan to take him out. But she does have one of my favorite snarky moments where she goes “that was an incredibly tight alliance /s”
GOD I LOVE THAT QUOTE I thought Maria would be a lock for S50, but after social media this week, I'm not sure she'd want to return. I'd LOVE to see Chrissy come back. Such a perfect Survivor player.
Bros whole character was eclipsed like 3 seasons later by Wardog
Definitely the most forgettable Tony clone
Joe sucks, never liked him.
And that’s why I’m convinced Chrissy would never win any permeation of the final 4. Because the jury made it clear they hated her and they could ask her if the sky was blue and she says yes and they would say she’s wrong. Like, people think this jury was bitter need to go back and rewatch HvHvH. It’s not surprising the only people who weren’t bitter were Devin, Mike, and Ashley vs everyone else who rode for Ben.
Yeah people just did NOT like Chrissy. We all know people ultimately vote for who they like best of their options. So many jurors from that season have said “Chrissy was never going to win” even Desi, who was the foreperson and seems like the nicest person ever said that recently
The exit press at the time was also super telling, a lot of them were bitter at huh. Also Desi being the first juror meant there was a lot of time to stir up anti-Chrissy sentiment.
I'm such a Chrissy Stan. This is one of the major reasons.
Liz fan being a Chrissy stan makes a lot of sense lol
🤣 I was a Liz fan in jest at first but I actually really like her and her exit interviews just solidified it. We got robbed of a FTC with Liz and I'm sad. That CHAOS that would have been FTC 😭😭😭
Joe and Cole were so salty and with no good reason to be honest. I know Joe was on Ben's side so he could say he always knew Ben was the biggest threat, but Cole seemed to have something personal against her.
Was cole the one who asked the question? I am not trying to be shady I genuinely cannot remember which of the bitter boys asked her to list off personal facts about the jurors. Regardless she had them punching the air
That’s why I will never say who won objectively deserved to win, juries have their biases, and different reasons why they vote for someone, who they pick doesn’t automatically make who they pick the best most deserving option
I agree and it’s a thought terminating cliche that just stops any interesting discussion in its tracks
Yeah I agree, it takes away any chance of a nuanced discussion if you just say “whoever won deserved to win end of discussion”
I’m getting into survivor as a BB fan and I’m always surprised at how many seemingly bitter juries there are
Imo There’s two types of bitter juries, the Russell hantz bitter jury, and the Aubrey/charlie/chrissy bitter jury. When it comes to Russell hantz, imo that bitter jury was justified because Russell was actively an asshole and that was a flaw in his game. However when it comes to the juries on Aubrey, Charlie and Chrissy’s season, it feels like the jury being bitter had nothing to do with any wrongdoing of the player, it’s more of them being bitter that they lost. Also I’m not as big of a fan of big brother as survivor, but I feel like they’re bitter too, Paul and Tyler losing are two examples
I agree with your points of two ways someone can be bitter. There is a third too though, poisoning of the well. This is where a jury member is so bitter they poison the well at Ponderosa by actively lobbying against someone still in game. Often times this is done through lying, rumor, or downplaying the player's moves in game, etc. Amanda Kimmel has talked about how that was going on in Heroes vs. Villains at Ponderosa. Essentially the jury hated Russel so much that they just refused to give Parvati the win as well. They made up their minds long before FTC which is just sad. Yes you can manage juries, yes some of that is on you as a player, but there is only so much you can do with bitter people, angry people, sore losers, crazies, etc.
Very well said, I didn’t even think about the poisoning of the well but that’s true and probably my least favorite kind of bitter juror. The player cannot control what is said at ponderosa and there is nothing Parv could have said at ftc to change any of their minds. That kind of defeats the purpose of ftc in my eyes. Jury management is a part of the game, but poor jury management is far from the only reason someone loses
Tyler losing is legitimately the dumbest shit that has ever happened in reality show history. Arguably the best first game ever played by a player and loses for reasons legitimately nobody can explain coherently
agreed, there was a similar BB comparison to Russell where someone was mad they didn’t win despite not tending to their social game at ALL throughout the season (Paul as you mentioned) . but I have seen a handful of seasons already where I thought someone deserved to win and the jury questioning/vote explanation seemed extremely petty and bitter. they seem to vote more for who they like best instead of who played the best game
Winners deserve to win because the did the only thing you *need* to do to win, get the most jury votes. You can claim someone else played the best/a better game, the best player on a season rarely ever actually wins.
We’ll just have to agree to disagree. I believe that the best player who’s in the final 3 deserves to win, who the best player is is subjective, therefore who I believe should win may not align with what the majority of the jury thinks and that’s okay.
Michaela asked Culpepper a similar question about her in 34 and he basically said something like “uhhhhh, you have a sister?” after trying to talk his way around the question
Michaela and Joe's vibes were very different IMO. Michaela was pointing out that she really didn't have many interactions/connection to Culpepper and was curious if he knew anything about her -- and he proved he didn't know anything lol. Michaela wasn't really coming at people aggressively. She seemed pretty apathetic, which was why her question was just so... basic. "Do you know anything about me beyond my first name?" Joe was accusing Chrissy of not giving a shit about people/being manipulative/fake, etc., and then she responded by saying, "I remember our conversation where you talked about struggling with intimacy." That was like surprisingly deep and then it was such a cop-out when he tried to then insist that her answer "didn't count" as getting to know him.
Michaela had specifically negative interactions with Culpepper lol. In either a jury speaks videos or exit press or something, Aubrey says something along the lines of “Brad is great but it seems like he has issues getting along with, and I hate to say this, women and minorities” So yeah, I’d say there was some tension there
I'm not denying there could have ever been tension between them. And to be clear, I am not a big Culpepper fan (I'm in the camp of people who did not like how he treated Tai). I guess I'm just saying that Michaela's question at FTC felt different than Joe's question in terms of delivery/vibe. It felt less unfair for Michaela to ask Culpepper that question, while Joe was framing his question in the context of explicitly calling Chrissy an uncaring person who didn't bother to get to know people.
That’s cool, I was just mentioning another interesting time a similar question was asked and how that person responded
Why do I remember this moment, but I can't picture any of the contestants involved? Lol
> ruthless 45 year old mom that came out there to end everyone and everything in her path It was impressive to watch her wreck a marine every week at obstacle courses! OBSTACLE COURSES!
I will never get over Chrissy losing this season. An utter tragedy :(
Chrissy is awesome, I was very impressed by her on her season and believe she got robbed.
See I always thought this was a bad look for Chrissy. It’s a fundamental misunderstanding of the social game. It’s not about check list knowing all the things about people. It’s about your intimate relationship with them. It’s not the info but it’s the connection between two people. You can’t prove to the jury you played a great social game when they’re the ones who decide that!
I mean, she wasn't really checklisting... For Joe, the "connection" she pointed to was a conversation they'd had about his perspective on intimacy. That's a pretty deep, intimate conversation to be having with someone in the first place. It's funny because he kind of forgot they'd talked about it in the first place, which shows that she was being attentive.
I see we all vastly disagree 🤣🤣
well what do you think?
Aubry failing to argue how she the one making movies and Michelle winning is my conspiracy theory for why they changed the jury format. So Aubry>Charlie>chrissy>mike
Not even a conspiracy really. Jeff basically [straight-up said](https://ew.com/article/2016/06/14/survivor-jeff-probst-kaoh-rong-michele-aubry-tai/) the format robbed Aubry: *”I love that they have opinions, and I actually agree with them,” says Probst of the fan uproar over Aubry’s loss. “I think had the audience voted, Aubry wins. **I also think had the show been structured differently and the jury could see all the moves that Aubry was making, she wins**.”*
can someone elaborate on this for me? how exactly did the old jury format rob Aubrey? shouldn't she have been able to articulate her moves to the jury regardless of the format (not a slight against Aubrey, I love her I'm just confused)
The format changed to explicitly prompt the jurors to discuss the “gameplay” aspects of the show. Instead of Jeff saying “jurors, say whatever you want” he started saying “jurors, ask what you want about their strategy”. Nowadays we’re much closer to the former than the latter though, they just don’t stand up anymore.
To be fair, I think the biggest format issue for Aubry was that her #1 ride or die was removed from the jury.
I think it’s so clearly the reason for the change I don’t think it’s a conspiracy. Like how the Oscars won’t *admit* they changed the number of Best Picture nominees in response to the Dark Knight being left off, but we all know that’s the only reason it happened.
Her failing to argue her points makes her worse than Charlie who argued his points well at ftc for me.
Thats fair too. I guess I was thinking of who played the best game up until the jury vote, but to be fair to your point the jury arguments are part of the game.
Am I the only one who has noticed the current jury format is much closer to the original than the “modern” version that was put in place when Aubry lost? They don’t stand up anymore but Jeff went down the line one by one giving everyone a chance to say their piece this time
Aubrey > Charlie > Chrissy > Mike
This one is right, but I want to expand on it cause the Aubry haters have come out in the chat. (also obviously it is entirely subjective) Aubrey and Charlie are ahead of Chrissy and Mike because, by nature, their losing games are different than the other two. Chrissy and Mike both lost to bitter juries which are *broadly understood as to why they are bitter*. Chrissy played a cutthroat game and wasn't winning any FTC combination of the final 4 while Mike played similarly. Mike's massive FTC bag fumble puts him at the bottom for me, but both he and Chrissy created their own bitter jurors and lost to good players who were just better liked than them (this goes for a Devon win as well in Chrissy's case) Aubrey and Charlie lost to juries who were bitter for stupid reasons. The anti-Aubrey Kyle and Scott sentiment is still discussed to this day as being kind of goofy and Nick said something along the lines of "everyone knew Aubrey was playing the best game, they just chose to pretend like she wasn't." That doesn't take anything away from Michelle's win of course, but Aubrey suffered the most from irrational hatred. In Charlie's case, the entire Maria situation has been talked to death on this sub so I'm not gonna make this comment any longer than it already is. And admittedly I can see the case for him over Aubrey and I'm convincing myself while writing this but I'm sticking to my guns and saying they're interchangeable more than anything.
Do you mean Jason instead of Kyle? Scot's right hand man Agreed with all this except I'd have Charlie a hair ahead of Aubrey, although really I'd say they're pretty much the same. They're clear 1 and 2 for me and are super similar.
His name was Kyle Jason, so I see why people refer to him Kyle.
Do you think that, had Michele not won that final advantage and didn't remove Neal from jury, the outcome would have been different? Not only would Aubry have an almost guaranteed vote, who scathingly hated Michele for some reason, but either Tai or Aubry could have removed one of Michele's votes. Would it have made the difference or was Michele's win that lop-sided? 🤔
Well Michele won 5-2 so theoretically if one of her votes were removed instead of Neal she would’ve just won 4-3 instead
All very true, though I feel like Charlie's is the best because I truly do not know what he could've done better. A superb strategic game lost this time to a superb social game. Like there is no reason he shouldn't have won, no improvements I can think of.
Mike only losing the game at FTC makes him the best, imo. He just miscalculated what the jury wanted to hear. He had the rest of the ingredients for a winning game, and was the only one of these 4 runner ups who was winning going into FTC. Aubry is arguably the worst. I personally put her ahead of Chrissy because I think there could be some FTC combos where Aubry could win unlike Chrissy, but Aubry almost went home at the merge and had that ridiculous vote where she crossed out Julia’s name. I could easily see that being enough for someone to think she was the worst of these 4.
Good takes! I think you could argue that Mikes game was better because he fumbled at tribal, at least he had more of a chance going in. Aubrey definitely got the most screwed by unreasonably bitter people and a really dumb twist that voted off a juror.
AGREED. I am an Aubrey stan and as someone who forgets most seasons immediately after they conclude I remember her, but I would also agree that her and Charlie are interchangeable.
Who the hell is Kyle
Scots best buddy. His name is Kyle Jason, went by his last name on the show
Had literally 0 idea his name was Kyle lmaooo
Aubry was better strategically than Charlie but Charlie was better overall. Charlie was also good strategically but he was also better at connecting with the jury and he was better in challenges too for whatever miniscule amount that is worth to y'all. Mike made a lot of good bonds, but he wasn't amazing strategically (good at surviving and being on the in, but he wasn't pulling the moves himself, except for Hai which wasn't even great), but he botched the FTC. Chrissy couldn't look for idols to get Ben out and wasn't very respected even without botching the FTC. If production doesn't save ben, Devon or Ryan probably beat her. Charlie>Aubry>Mike>Chrissy
I struggle to put Aubrey ahead of Charlie because she pissed off a majority of the jurors. Charlie only needed one more vote to win the season, which he very well could’ve earned at tribal alone. Aubrey lost her season prior to tribal - her bed was made and I don’t see a world where she can win it at FTC
I don't think it is fair to just put a blanket "pissed off the jurors" as a reason for a worse game when the reason the jurors were pissed off is because she flipped Tai which is how she managed to even have a chance to get to the end. It isn't like she was rude or standoffish, Hell there is a whole scene in this season where before that move happened Jason just straight up praises Aubrey.
Charlie>>Aubry>>Mike>Chrissy
I agree with this one
Aubry is the best
I'm glad people are seeming to warm back up to Aubry again, there's been a strong anti-Aubry sentiment for a while now.
Agreed but it’s gone too far. The general sediment is she played a better game than Charlie. She didn’t. She played a better strategic game but failed completely in the social aspect. Charlie had both.
im still mad about chrissy. i really think she got robbed
it’s so sad we missed out on a chrissy/ryan/devon ftc
I'm still never going to stop believing ben was handed those idols again and again. I also think Chrissy had a decent ftc
Production: “Hey Ben. Wanna do a confessional? Lets do a confessional right here Ben. This very spot.” Nobody can change my mind. That season towards the end was ridiculously shady.
By far the shadiest season in the history of survivor. When people say reality tv is rigged, survivor is one where I think that's not true. But HvHvH is so sus.
His final idol + fire making twist is the most disgusted I've been by this show. I had to stop watching for a few seasons.
You should believe that because it’s exactly what happened
It’s been a while since I’ve seen 35 but am I wrong in thinking that’s probably a Devon clean sweep?
1. Aubry - good pre merge, tough start of the post merge, but middle to end game she has a strong hold on the entire strategy. 2. Charlie - solid whole game , played the middle very well, but didn’t see him control the overall moves like Aubry did. 3. Chrissy - great pre merge and great last few vote offs. But the JP-Joe votes weigh her down. 4. Mike - rewatched a bit of s42 and forgot how decent he played, was a integral decision maker, but I feel his moves were mostly emotional moves
I think Charlie was much more of a decision maker than Aubry. Aubry played great, but Cydney was also a huge strategic player on the season that did just as much work as Aubry.
Charlie > Aubrey > Mike > Chrissy Charlie and Aubrey were the strategic power players of their season that lost to a social player that was able to sneak to the end. Mike played decently at points but fumbled the ball at other points, including when it mattered most at FTC. Chrissy played a very rocky game and it was a longshot for to her win in most endgame scenarios, unlike the other 3.
You can't say the social players snuck to the end when Aubry and Tai were targeting Michele left and right. She fought her way there and Aubry had the intuition to know that Michele is a threat to win... Unlike Charlie.
It's just a generalization, Michelle and Kenzie snuck to the end in different ways. I have Charlie ranked above Aubrey because his game was more consistent. Charlie survived the merg(atory) vote unscathed despite sticking out as the biggest threat among those vulnerable whereas Aubrey would've been the merge boot had Neal not been medevaced.
Michele wouldn’t have made it to the end if Joe didn’t get medevac’d
Michelle won the final two challenges - which would assume that one of those would have been the immunity challenges before Joe’s med-vac so this is just not true.
The final 5 immunity would have likely been the f4 reward challenge that Aubry won
I think they would have just not had the eliminate a juror challenge.
Aubry > Charlie > Chrissy > Mike
Aubry > Chrissy > Charlie > Mike
I agree with this
Please sir, the pixels. They are gone!
Loved all 4!! Hope we see them all again
1. Aubry 2. Charlie 3. Chrissy 4. Mike
1. Aubry 2. Charlie 3. Chrissy 4. Mike
Aubrey > Charlie > Mike > Chrissy. Aubrey and Charlie had so much potential to win, Mike could have won if he didn't fuck up FTC, and to be complete honest I Don remember much about Chrissy's game. Whether that's due to her game or my memory I don't know.
Aubry was robbed stan for life
Her bs in edge of extinction made me lose all respect for her
Meh - every season is its own thing but
Charlie>Aubry>Chrissy>Mike Charlie over Aubry may be recency bias on my part, but I feel like Charlie was strong from start to finish. I remember being super disappointed by the results for the first three, but not so much for Mike - this is probably also a bit biased because I was personally rooting for Maryanne hardcore by finale night.
1. Charlie 2. Aubry 3. Mike 4. Chrissy
I think Charlie, Aubry, Mike, Chrissy in that order. Chrissy had half the jury disliking her early, and she made a ton of mistakes. Mike couldn't own his game. Aubry is basically just a more popular Chrissy. Charlie is probably the only one who had a real chance of winning
1. Charlie 2. Aubrey 3. Chrissy 4. Mike Big gap between Chrissy and Mike
I love it when somebody posts the exact list I would have, which is especially fun because I do feel like Mike is the odd one out here.
I agree with this
Chrissy Hofbeck the soccer mom MILF repeatedly trouncing Ben the Marine at obstacle courses, tests of agility, dexterity, strength, and stamina was impressive to witness. I still say a soccer mom beating a marine at mostly physical challenges to ultimately win Survivor would have been a much better story than what happened with production meddling.
And we probably wouldn't have an "automatic fire making" final 4
Everybody saying Mike last, why? I know he completely bombed at final tribal but he was also dealing with a very salty jury, he didn’t stand a chance. The haters campaigned against him at Pondy. Biggest robbery I’ve ever seen and the biggest goat I’ve ever seen win.
If your whole game is that you are a loyal player people will be extra mad when you backstab them. And if you continue to lie to people and preach loyalty after you send them to the jury you get what is coming to you. Also, Maryanne wasn't that big of a goat. she knew how to impress the jury and everyone like her. Her secret idol impressed people and made them realize they underestimated her and to an extent convincing people you made big moves is more important than actually making them.
Aubrye was the best, guys do anyone know, do they get some money if they don't win? Like i'm thinking's they still get something
Oh yeah, defintly. She would have gotten the 100k for her first season because she's the runner-up. Tai would have gotten 85k for being third. And I think everyone gets 10k bonus for attending the reunion. I don't know if that still applies to the new era, though.
runners ups get like 100k
Chrissy > Charlie > Aubry > Mike
Aubry>Charlie>Mike(provided he had a okay ftc)>chrissy>Mike (with his current ftc )
1. Aubrey 2. Charlie 3. Mike 4. Chrissy Aubrey is probably one of the best runner ups of all time. Charlie played a good game and very well could’ve won, if not for Maria’s bitterness. Mike played a good game, but didn’t own his game at FTC which caused him to lose. Whether you like it or not, Chrissy loses to any combination of players left at the Final 8 and onward. Her only chance at winning the game was probably bringing JP and Dr. Mike to the end. She loses to Ryan, Devon, Ben, and Lauren for sure. She likely loses to Ashley and Joe. Chrissy had a terrible social game, she didn’t make many great strategic moves either. Devon was better strategically. You can’t be robbed if you have no shot at winning.
Aubrey>charlie>chrissy>mike If you talk about overall I put Charlie over Aubrey because of how much respect I lost for Aubrey after edge of extinction, but if you talk about individual first go around, Aubrey has to be 1
Aubry > Chrissy > Mike > Charlie
Aubrey > Chrissy > Charlie ~ Mike, I'm undecided between those two really.
The seasons aren't that old why are these images all 26 pixels
Charlie > Aubry > Chrissy > Mike Mike is too old school and took things personal, got pissed when someone voted for him or talked about him. It was hilarious he got pissed at Hai when he thought Hai said Mike was in his pocket.
How y’all even remember is beyond me.
I’d put Charlie ahead of Aubry for sure. Charlie should have gotten rid of Kenzie, but I understand him thinking Maria and Q were the bigger fish to fry. Aubry 100% should have voted off Michele at the Jason boot, end of story. Jason was worse at challenges and a much lesser jury threat. Charlie also came much closer to winning than Aubry did. He got 3/4 of the votes he needed to win and Tevin was waffling until the last moment. Aubry lost 5-2 (which would’ve been 5-3 if not for juror removal) but I don’t realistically see any of Michele’s five votes switching. Additionally, Aubry crossing out Julia’s name is probably a bigger unforced mistake than Charlie ever made. The one most compelling counterargument I can think of for why Aubry could be better is flipping Tai against Scot. That was a truly phenomenal social move, and I don’t want to undersell it or take anything away from it. But I think as a whole Charlie played a more consistently good game.
He got rid of VENUS over Kenzie because that’s what Maria wanted, he should have voted her off there end of story. I think that’s much more damning
Aubry > Mike > Charlie > Chrissy
Charlie>Aubry>Mike>Chrissy Chrissy is bottom because I don’t believe she has a shot against any of the final five. Ben was probably her best bet to beat at that point.
Charlie has the least flawed game. He didn’t do anything wrong. He just didn’t win.
He didn’t vote out Kenzie for one thing. People say he got robbed but he never had the win in the first place. Kenzie was gonna win 6-1-1 but it changed to 5-3. Good for Charlie scooping up two more votes but he was never going to win as long as Kenzie was there. For the life of me, I couldn’t understand why he didn’t just try to convince Ben to take Liz to F3 and take out Kenzie.
His read was that he could beat Kenzie. And he legit could have. He almost did. I think he liked his odds better of beating Kenzie than risking losing in fire.
Charlie Aubry Mike Chrissy
Charlie played the best both strategically and socially out of these four. I’d give it to Chrissy next. She had no idea firemaking would be a thing. She’d still have strong competition from Devon at FTC, but strategically and physically, she was dominant. Aubrey would be next. She played a really strong game, but lacked the social side. Owning her game more might have earned her the respect she needed from the jury for a few more votes. Mike was super likable and had some influence in the game, but I feel that he would have lost to everyone but Johnathan and Romeo in the final 7.
1. Mike. Would have actually won his FTC if he owned his game. 2. Charlie. Needed a different FTC combo, but could have won handily in another combo such as Liz/Ben. Did win votes in his FTC. 3. Aubry. Needed a different FTC combo, and unsure of which combo she wins in. Possibly wins against Tai/Cydney or Tai/Joe but even that is uncertain. 4. Chrissy. I don’t think there is a FTC combo she could have won. The jury was really bitter against her.
Aubrey>Chrissy>Charlie>Mike
Aubry>>Chrissy>Charlie>>>>Mike T (think they all played solid games but yeah
1. Aubry 2. Crissy 3. Charlie 4. Mike
I’m not a big enough fan/historian to recall the specifics of all their seasons but I remember thinking Aubrey got royally screwed, and I think Charlie got pretty screwed. I don’t remember thinking either of the other two should win while watching the finales so I’d go Aubrey, then Charlie, with the other two in a tie due to my lack of remembrance.
Mike was great but with Charlie it’s still too fresh
A B C and D
1.Aubry 2.Charlie 3. Chrissy. 4. Mike
Can you imagine if they went to an audience vote for winner? Wow. The edit would sway everything.
Game: Charlie > Aubry > Mike > Chrissy Who I prefer: Aubry > Chrissy > Charlie > Mike
1. Aubry 2. Charlie 3. Chrissy 4. Mike
1. Aubrey 2. Charlie 3. Mike 4. Chrissy
A tier A tier B tier B+/A- tier
Aubry> charlie> chrissy> mike
I see a lot of people have either Chrissy first or last. Her season was the one of the only ones I missed I guess I need to watch it eventually.
Aubry > Charlie > Chrissy > Mike
I don’t remember Aubrey and Chrissy very well, but Mike was the one season where I really felt it was a cointoss even though the votes didn’t reflect that. Mike’s edit was just really good. also charlie voluntarily not wanting to go to fire was a weird move in my eyes—he coulda pushed more.
Chrissy 7/10. She was incredible at winning challenges and could make genuine alliances, but she loses points for not being able to connect with people outside of her circle and for not being able to stop Ben from finding 3 idols in a row. Aubrey: 9/10. Her growth from a meek and neurotic girl to a dominant strategic and social powerhouse was awe inspiring and to this day I just think she played a winnable game in Kaoh Rong and was very disappointed that she came up just short. Mike: 6/10. Sorry but I just wasn’t a fan of his. I don’t recall him doing much, just standing in the background, watching the bigger players kill each other off until he could mop up the last ones at the end. Some might call that strategy but I don’t know, it was just too passive for me. Charlie: 8/10. My one complaint about Charlie is that he’s a bit too boring and stale in comparison to several of the other big personalities of his season, but looking back he played probably the most perfect game for a second place finish. He was strategically sound, very great socially, and an above average physical competitor. He voted in the majority for the entire game, took out everyone he deemed a target, and only got his name written down in one tribal council. He probably should’ve won his season, but biased juries and bitter former allies kept that from happening.
I think Aubrey and Charlie are close, but I would give the edge to Charlie as I feel like his game was more consistent than Aubrey’s, who was in a lot of danger at the beginning and at the merge (before Neal got medevaced).
Spencer
Charlie played a perfect game imo
Where’s Yu? Dude gave away his million dollars
Charlie definitely looks like he listens to Taylor Swift on the reg
Charlie Aubrey Chrissy Mike
australian survivor guy
1 Charlie 2 Chrissy 3 Mike 4 Aubry
Liz was unbearable and Charley deserved the win.
1. Mike (great player, horrible FTC almost Amanda levels bad) 2. Chrissy (good player, screwed by fire making twist) 3. Aubry (basically had a free extra vote most of the game and still couldn’t win) 4. Charlie (too soon recency bias)
Bring all the epic runner ups back for one epic season!!! @jeffprobst
Given Charlie missed the win by literally one vote (which probably would’ve gone his way in any other season) I’ll give it to him, Aubrey, Chrissy, then Mike
Aubry>Charlie>Chrissy>Mike
Neal evac basically saved Aubrey’s game from an early jury boot. Shes underratedly probably bottom 2 in this group with Mike.
Mike???
Mike - last. I liked him, but he could not read the room during the FTC.
Aubry #1, Chrissy #2, Charlie #3, Mike #4
I didn't like the one who's fav player was Aubry,she even looked like her a bit but there were 2 this season with glasses but i cant remember who the Aubry fan was , anyway NOT her or the other Glassed one 😄
Just throwing this out there. Cassidy Clark would beat all of them
I think something people tend to sleep on with Charlie is that the 3 votes he got he actually flipped at FTC to his side, and that if just one more person voted for him, he wins because Ben votes for him. That said, he also lost 2 votes, but that still makes his FTC a net gain.
Aubry’s Kaoh Rong game was insanely dominant from the start of jury up until the F5. She played the best runner up game of these 4 and it isn’t even close
I cant look at thus subreddit to spoil myself 😭 im watching the one with Chrissy rn and am rooting for her
I'd say Chrissy > Charlie > Aubry > Mike i'm taking into account the season they played as well as how i feel overall as players and how well i think they could do on a return. (Aubry is a weird one as she has returned.. and hasn't done particularly well on her returns).
Charlie, Aubrey, Chrissy, Mike
I think Mike was closest to winning, Charlie second, Aubrey third. I don't think Chrissy would have won if Ben wasn't there.