7:2

Shambo & John voted for Russell

Look here near the bottom:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivor:_Samoa

Good speech, but I don't think so.

I suspect that the whole Galu tribe got together at Ponderosa and all agreed on voting for Natalie. Laura and Erik probably ran the conversation. Monica, Dave, Kelly, and Brett just said "Ya I agree lets do that." That is probably exactly how the voting went. Jaison probably also voted for her. We saw Shambo vote for Russell. John probably voted for Russell also since he can actually make up a thought on his own, he doesn't need his tribemates to do it for him.

I'm king_tanner on both stars and tilt, you can send to either one.

I know that Eric voted for Natalie, but was actually surprised since we kept seeing Eric's pleasant reaction everytime a Galu member got voted off.

Ok, that prediction didn't work out so well.

Watching this late last night, I was seriously dumbfounded. Could not believe this happened. Was I just blind to this happening because I was rooting this hard for Russell?

Seriously, I'm watching Probst read the votes and I'm thinking Natalie gets Erik's vote and maybe Jaison's (he seems like the bitter, childish type and was still mad at Russell). Then she gets a third vote and I'm like "What??!! Maybe Kelly gave her a vote?." Then vote #4 and I'm thinking Monica, too? Wow.

I can't remember an entire former jury clearly voting this personally. It was almost as if they knew the votes should've been a slam dunk and purposefully wanted to vote opposite the way everyone thought. Plus I think some of them were feeling embarrassed and a little foolish. After hitting the merge with an 8-4 lead, all former Galu felt a little dumb sitting up there and felt their only revenge was "We're just not gonna let this guy win even though he clearly outplayed everyone."

Don't get me wrong, I like Natalie, she seems sweet and played a good game (maybe better than Mick), but I honestly don't think she deserved to win. Probst even alluded to the fact that everyone thought Russell should've won and after the first 3 minutes of the reunion show I forgot Natalie was even there.

Maybe the editing was made to make it look like all Russell all the time, and Natalie's social game paid off, I don't know. After she came into the merge with her 3 Foa Foa guys, those 3 did stick to themselves a lot while she hung out quite a bit with Kelly, Laura, and Monica. Maybe that's what swung personal feelings toward her.


Oh well, time to catchup and see what the rest of you thought.


And Russell has to be an obvious choice to come back next season on the Villians team.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with either of your feelings about Russell's actions the last day (actually I kind of agree), but the jury doesn't see any of that.



As for Erik's speech, I found it to be incoherent, obnoxious, over-the-top grandstanding. It was him saying "HEY!!! I WANT EVERYONE TO REMEMBER I WAS EVEN ON THE SHOW THIS SEASON!!! I THOUGHT I WAS TOTALLY IN CHARGE AND I WENT OUT 12TH SO I'M GOING TO MAKE A JOKE OUT OF THE VOTING!!!!"

John might be smart, but when he switched his vote it doomed him and what was left of his original tribe. If he'd stuck with the plan they could have still maintained a majority. Ultimately, he didn't make a single individual decision that bought him anything other than a useless Idol clue and a slice of pie in the auction. For such a smart guy, he didn't really do a lot of smart stuff. I am trying to remember if he ever actually made much of a difference in the challenges. I think he won the tee ball challenge.

^^^^^
This.


Most of them either didn't really ask a question or they asked a really dumb one. I guess you can't expect much brainpower from a crew that turned an 8-4 lead into a 0-3 deficit.

I guess I'd feel better about the result if something drastic happened at final tribal. But Natalie said nothing that should've swayed jury votes, had no clever speech or witty strategies/remarks to earn her the win.

The jury voting was simply votes against Russell, not really for Natalie. It was them saying, "You've been untouchable since you've had a immunity idol the whole game, so here's us voting you out now."

...or maybe they just hated the arrogant prick. Again, Survivor is a very cool mix of a physical and social game. And the social aspect goes beyond the individual votes. It isn't just about manipulating votes during the "regular season". This is the best example I can remember of the Jury getting revenge for their feelings against a contestant. Sure there have been notable Jury individuals whining. But this is just a great reminder of the power of the Jury and the importance of courting their votes. For the first time that I can remember, the Jury really did have the power that Probst always reminds people to consider. Russell completely failed in this aspect of the game - and it was a reminder of just how important that aspect can be.

Perhaps I am a little biased in accepting the outcome because while I grew to admire Russell's play - I was always hoping this would eventually happen to him because I disliked his arrogance and wanted to see him get knocked down a couple of pegs. I was rooting against him. He wanted to be the villain and got what I felt he had coming to him. When you actively choose to play the villain you can't be surprised when people actually hate you (See: Jerri crying when she was booed by the studio audience after being such a bitch).

I don't know man, he could have stuck with his tribe so there was a tie between Natalie and Laura, then there would be a 50% chance that his tribe would have had the majority. His tribe was also quick to throw him under the bus and try to use him as a pawn without consulting him. They all said (especially Monica) that they didn't trust John. Going with Russell got him voted off, but I do think it was his best move. He would have been going home either way.

Oh, Russell definitely rubbed a lot of them the wrong way. He played a great social game with Foa Foa members only but didn't interact a whole lot with Galu much at all. I see your point. I just felt the jury voted totally personal, which I found a bit cowardly.

In seasons past, I think more jury members have voted strategically, like "I don't like this guy, but he played the game the best and outwitted me, so he deserves to win." This jury just wanted to stick it to Russell as punishment for dominating them.

But true, he may have just overplayed his villain role. It was entertaining and great for TV, but couldn't quite get him the win.

Though he certainly wasn't getting booed by the studio audience.

"..... but at least I didn't cry on TV when I got hurt"

I thought the votes would be:

Erik - Russell
John - Russell
Dave - Russell
Shambo - Russell

Brett - Natalie

Monica - Not Russell (but should have been)
Laura - Def not Russell
Kelly - Def not Russell...she was sour he played the idol and that got her voted out. Haha, fck you.
Jaison - Not Russell (but should have been, ya fckn baby)


Idiots, really. Except for the trash talking BS, which I don't condone, Russell H played a great game.

Another reason why I think the jury is stupid...

Mick did just as much, if not more than Natalie. He also did well in the challenges. He was just as nice as Natalie. They pretty much played exactly the same. What makes Natalie's game better than Mick's?

Obviously the main Galu group in the jury got together before and decided as a group to vote for Natalie to win instead of Mick. The jury deliberation meant nothing, it was decided beforehand.

Dave: "What chance do you have of winning by percentage?" STFU idiot.

LEAVE MY GUY ALONE BASTARD!

Dave's hair is just as retarded as Shambo's.

Well. It is sort of like the whole "who needs the money?" consideration. It shouldn't be a factor in people's votes, but it clearly has been at times.

I am shocked at how many people seem surprised that personality is a factor in Survivor. We accept throughout the season that personality influences votes - why shouldn’t it come into play in the Final Vote? You guys seem to want the Final Vote to be based solely on the best strategic play throughout the season. It is interesting how personal it actually wound up being.

In the past there were always a couple of Jurors who were scorned, or voted for the player who they felt played the game the best, or needed the money, or who they liked most, or disliked least...

...this time Russell's overpowering personality seemed to be the biggest factor for a number of votes. And apparently Natalie's personality was a big factor in attracting votes. You are right though, I would have expected that Mick could have been a choice for people who hated Russell, but wanted to reward a strong player. I guess that since Russell's personality made them vote with emotion, the flip-side of the "I hate Russell" coin is "I like Natalie". By voting for Natalie, they were voting against Russell. Voting for Mick would have been acknowledging that the "Better player" deserved to win. They couldn't allow themselves to go down that path because it would ultimately have to lead back to Russell. Everyone would probably admit Russell > Mick > Natalie in terms of Strategy and overall ability (Reason). But Natalie > Mick > Russell in terms of Personality (Emotion). Mick just doesn't beat either player for the Emotion nor Reason votes. That is the only way I can explain him not getting any votes.

I hated Jaison's question. He wanted to out them for how much money they make/made, yet he is a ****ing law student who after graduating or whatever will probably make alot of money as well, just stupid.

Dave's quote shows that the jury had schemed to destroy Russell. Dave asked that question in order to establish what each person thought of their chances of winning. It seems he wanted Russell to make a fool out of himself by stating 100 percent. Dave probably knew the jury had schemed to make sure Russell did not win. I agree with an earlier post that whether you like russell or not, Nathalie is not deserving. Nathalie and Mick are the same player. They played the same game with neither deserving victory. If the finals had been just two players, like in past seasons, I can see how nathalie might pull off an anti russell vote. But with Mick in the finals how can nathalie beat a player identical to herself--- obiviously a setup since a player identical to Nathalie does not get even one vote. such pettiness

I disagree on this one. I actually liked Jaison's question. It sounded like some people on the jury had a grudge against Russell for already being a millionaire. Jaison was putting Natalie and Mick on the same playing field so they couldn't use the "Russell is already rich" argument. Or at least that is how I saw it.

Hmmm, didn't think about it like that. It seemed more to out Russell, especially when he said that Russell made 6 figures (it was actually 7 figures), but Jaison said 6 (pretty sure he said that).

Shortly after the merge there was some confilct between Russel and Eric at tribal. That may be what prompted Eric to turn the jury against Russel. Thanks Eric.

I heard seven so even though Jaison said that Nathalie did fine as a sales rep, there's no way the jury would figure that she made that much. Also, she was unemployed.

Another factor might have been Shambo forcefully putting her vote with Russel. Her former Galu teammates hate her so why give Shambo the satisfaction of backing the right horse?

Like everyone has said, the power resides with the Jury and they don't have to reward the best player, they can reward the person they like the best and Nathalie was extremely likable. Mick's answers during tribal made him seem pretty weak so if you're going to ride Russel's coattails, it's better to be a woman obviously.

I'm starting to think something stupid like this happened at Ponderosa:

[players chatting away about the game while having dinner]

Shambo: I'm voting for Russell he's just AWESOME, he beat all of you
Laura: Whatever Shambo, your opinion doesn't matter
Shambo: It's true he did, COO COO
Laura: Yeah ok... if you're voting for him I'm definitely not
Shambo: Well I'm voting for Russell 1000%
Laura: Well I guess it's Natalie or Mick then
Erik: Natalie's gameplay is just as respectable as Russell's. He lied to all of us, Natalie didn't really do anything and made it to the finals. So that's an awesome strategy that's more deserving because she did it with.... integretiy. So maybe... just maybe... we should all come together as o......
Shambo: I don't understand
Laura: We know
Dave: Blank look
John: Russell screwed me over and I respect him as a player.
Monica: I guess I'll give the bitch my vote. Because us girls rock. Love you Laura.
Laura: I'm such an awesome grandma
Jaison: Now wait a minute here. I came to this show to prove something. Ultimately Russell told me I was going to the finals with him and he lied to my face. You can't just lie to peoples faces like that. I'm a well educated man, a law student and I played on the men's national swimming team. I can beat anyone, you know how I can beat Russell? By not giving him my vote.
Brett: Jaison, want to go on a bro-date? We can talk strategy and how to not vote for Russell.
Jaison: I'd love that
Kelly: Does anyone even know my name?

For that to be his motivation wouldn't he have to be voting for Russell?

I'm with ya, I thought it was borderline insane.

I don't know what his motivation was, it is just my opinion on what he said. I don't think Jaison hated Russell that much until he watched the show.

I think who has the most money should not be an issue. I hope that factor did not go towards the jury voting for Natalie.

Jaison is still a huge fag imo. He's a great example (and there have been many on Survivor) of people overestimating their own worth and talent at this game. John and Shambo come to mind. Rocket Surgeon Scientist, my ass.

I would totally love to be on this game. It may be my only regret about being Canadian.

Hmm, just saw this article, it was printed Dec. 14th. We probably would've seen it coming if we read this:
Monica's Interview

I think the reason why I'm pissed Natalie won is because *anyone* could've been in that spot, where only Russell could've done what he did. She grabbed the right person and rode coattails to the end. That is a valid strategy, but it's not a respectable one. It's like the backup kicker on the Super Bowl winner saying "I should be MVP, because I understood that I'm not strong enough or talented enough to play all the time, so I just chose to ride the coattails of the talented players." Sorry, that doesn't fly with me. Yes, you get the Super Bowl ring, but it doesn't mean you were any good along the way.

And I don't mind that if it's close. But this season, there was Russell, and there was everyone else. If you give personality and strategy equal weight, Russell should STILL win, because he was so much better than everyone else at that. Everyone else, on the personality/social side, was pretty middle of the road: "oh, I'll just stay quiet and hope..."

The thing is, you know what wasn't "close"?

The jury vote.

It wasn't as if one pissy person got their panties all bunched up and messed up a majority. The vote was 7:2. Russell failed when it came to the Jury phase of the competition. Failed. He rocked everything else, but in this he failed. Not middle of the road. He failed at a major component of the game.

Russell bullied and lied without regard for the Jury vote. He got arrogant. Apparently he didn't just barely miss the mark. He did everything wrong to get the needed votes. And Nathalie didn't. Two cars at the end of a race and one guy runs into the wall in the final turn.

I used to be very good at Sparring at Karate. Even against opponents with multiple belts above my level I was often able to use my limited strengths and wait for a target from a stronger opponent.

Survivor isn't the Superbowl. It isn't a team sport. The Superbowl analogy doesn't hold. It is ultimately individual vs. individual. Waiting for a powerful opponent to expose his weakness IS a valid strategy. Nathalie recognized that she could use her alliance (her personality) with Russell to wait for an opportunity. And guess what? Russell gave her EXACTLY that opportunity. It was a 1 in a 1000 shot. Her one single strength fit perfectly into Russell's one weakness. Was she brilliant? Clearly not. But she did what she needed to do and hoped for the best. The best happened. Russell blinked. He got arrogant and ignored a crucial element at exactly the wrong time. He spiked the ball at the 2 yard line.

Leon Lett would be proud.

This is a damned good explanation. There are a few things I could say, but really, your explanation would still be better.

And I do ultimatley agree with you that even though I didn't like Russell, he was the BEST at this game. I think if he'd just done a very little bit of work at the end game he could (should) have won.

Some of my analysis is "results based" thinking.

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL


NHNH

Here is what Jaison was trying to accomplish in his question. I was off.

Reality TV World: What was the point of your jury question -- what were you looking to accomplish and did you get what you were looking for out of it?

Jaison: Yeah, I think I did get what I was looking for out of it. What I was trying to accomplish really was to let everybody on the jury know that Russell and Mick were two wealthy guys. Now whether or not Russell is a millionaire, I really don't know. But that's what he was throwing about on the island. So I knew that money was going to play into a lot of people's votes and who they were going to give it to.

I was really fighting for Natalie in the jury. But I was trying to do it without being as blunt as [Erik Cardona] and some of the others.

Reality TV World: That leads well into my next question. After asking your jury question you told the other jury members "no one is broke" and said "I think you guys should look for other criteria," which almost made it seem like you were attempting to convince the jury to vote for Russell. But you were just trying to point out he's wealthy without being blunt about it?

Jaison: Yeah, because I knew everybody hated Russell to begin with. There were a couple who were on the fence about who played the best game versus who deserved the money. So I figured if we actually defined if one's a doctor and one's a multimillionaire, Natalie will get it.

Very interesting.

It's already done filming. They are just waiting for May to reveal the final vote.



Correct. My understanding is that filming was complete before the first episode aired.




I disagree with this. I would be shocked if decisions weren't made during final tribal. I think it's the only tribal council where most if not all votes are decided as it's happening.

I hate Jaison.

FYP

And he's a law student, so he won't be hurting later either.

You don't think it's a coincedence that Brett, Laura, Kelly, Dave, Eric, and Monica all voted for the same person to win when they were all pretty close on the show, and close at Ponderosa? They all decided on their own at the jury deliberation that Natalie was better than Russell and Mick? No way. If this was the case Mick would have gotten at least a couple votes since he and Natalie pretty much played the same game.

What is sad is that after seeing a lot of the interviews after the reunion, a lot of the jury have said they made a mistake in not voting for Russell. One interview I read (I'll try to find the link) said that Kelly, Brett, and Eric all said that they made a mistake voting for Natalie to win.

I disagree with your premise and I disagree with your conclusion.


The fact that many thought they voted incorrectly, points to my conclusion, that the vote was an immediate, feelings based, not well thought through decision that could have been easily based on the last person to speak... which was Erik.

Yeah I get it you disagree... the only way we could settle this would be to ask the jury for ourselves, which isn't going to happen. So let's just agree to disagree.

I still think the vote was decided beforehand probably by everyone except maybe John. If they had a decision to make they would have had more meaningful questions that had nothing to do with man dates or winning percentages.

I think that some people feel that they voted incorrectly based on how they saw Russell dominate on TV, I don't think Erik's lame speech had to do with anything.

They kept accusing Russell of being "unethical", but the only thing he did that was probably unethical was the sock-burning and the lying about his dog dying. The other forms of lying, such as forming alliances and betraying them, are entirely within the scope of the game, and are probably the whole point of it. Criticizing him for that would be like criticizing someone for bluffing in a poker game.

He should have made that argument more clearly to the jury instead of just bragging about his manipulations. Also, if he could have toned it down at that point and changed his demeanor a bit, it would drive home the point that he was just playing a game and was not actually a jerk. Instead, he let the floodgates open on his jerkiness at exactly the wrong time. I really think if he played that jury differently he could have won it.

fyp

I think Russell the player deserved to win the game but was overruled by Russell the person who didnt deserve a million dollars

This was very good... but Jaison's paragraph should have been about twice as long and included stuff about being held down because he was black.



I disagree that anyone could have been in that spot. If you rewatch the finale, there were many times, when Natalie would say something to the camera that was very logical and well thought out. I was yelling at Jaison and Mick because they were being idiots and not thinking about obvious things and then Natalie would say the exact thing I was thinking. This isn't the first time. She was actually fairly logical. She single-handedly got out Erik. If she hadn't done that, then her alliance with Russell would have been meaningless, so Russell was dead wrong about her latching on to him being the most important. She latched onto him and it got her into an 8-4 hole. She turned the game on it's head and then was able to get through the muck to the finale.



This also proves the point that the votes were not decided at the time.

no it doesn't.

Reality TV World: Okay, so the answers they gave to your question didn't have any impact on your vote. You were already going to vote for Natalie?

Jaison: Yeah, 100%

He said there were a couple on the fence. The main Galu alliance chose Natalie before tribal. You can't convince me otherwise.

haha... he said that SOME people were undecided... not EVERY player. OBVIOUSLY Jaison, Erik, and Shambo were totally set and EVERYONE knew that.