Chuck Ross

We Wuz Robbed! Russell Hantz Was Not the Only One Blown Away that He Didn’t Win ‘Survivor:Samoa,’ and This Viewer Thinks The Producers are Playing with Fire

Dec 21, 2009

We wuz robbed, plain and simple.

If you’re not a fan of ‘Survivor,’ here’s what it’s like that Russell Hantz didn’t win the $1million on the latest edition of the show, which concluded Sunday night, Dec. 20th: It would be as if the great football linebacker, Lawrence Taylor, who was named the NFL’s Most Valuable Player in 1986 based on an incredible season he had, was denied the honor because certain of his peers on opposing teams thought he wasn’t nice enough, and that he played too intensely to win. That he was too enthusiastic when he clobbered an opposing player or broke up an offensive play.

If Taylor had not gotten the award because of that criteria, you’d say that was crazy. In fact, it was just the attributes that those on the opposing teams objected to, you’d say, that were exactly WHY Taylor was so great and why he did indeed deserve that Most Valuable Player Award in 1986.

It’s analagous to what happened to Russell on "Survivor." He was never nice, and it was never pretty, but he was absolutely brilliant and he deserved to win.

If you didn’t watch "Survivor:Samoa" this season, buy the DVD when it comes out. You may very well dislike him intensely, but it’s also clear that Russell is likely the most cunning strategist yet to have played the game.

But, alas, he didn’t win. Here’s what both he and winner Natalie White said to E! Online after the vote: " ‘It’s amazing to me how people play the game," Russell told us, still visibly shocked by his loss. ‘You want to be honest, have integrity, in the game? You ever play Monopoly, where you take people’s houses and kick ’em out in the street? That’s a game. But,’ he added ruefully, ‘it’s part of it, I guess.’ Natalie explained how that ‘part’ figured in her own strategy: ‘There’s different criteria to play the game. The majority of the people on the jury are not deceitful people, they just don’t play that way in real life or in a game. I made it my mission to get to know them and try to figure out what that voting criteria was going to be. I think because of the genuine relationships that I built, they wanted to give it to someone they truly know and will do well with the money.’

Actually, they probably gave it to her because they felt she was the lesser of the three evils, the three evils being Russell, Nick and Natalie.

The problem, however, is that she was the wrong choice.

"Survivor" also arranges through a sponsor to give $100,000 to the person viewers vote as the one they think is the best player on the show. Russell did win that.

Here’s my suggestion: CBS and Mark Burnett, the producer of the show, should switch who decides will win the $1 million and who wins the $100,000.

So when it comes down to the three finalists, America votes for the player who has best outwitted, outplayed and outlasted the field and who will win the $1 million first-place money. And the "jury" of nine players on the show can decide who wins $100,000 as their top choice.

Yes, one of the elements that has set "Survivor" apart from the "American Idol"-type of reality show is that viewers do NOT vote for the winner.

But there’s an argument to be made that given how upset I would guess the majority of this season’s viewers are with the results, "Survivor" is seriously in danger of losing a lot of loyal fans if this change isn’t made and we feel betrayed by the results again come spring after the next arc of the show.# 


  1. Sorry, gotta disagree. Part of the “game” is that the people who decide who wins are the ones voted off the show. If that consideration isn’t part of the players’ strategy then they’ve neglected a key component.

  2. i cant believe natalie was given the votes?
    that jury should be ashamed of being so jealous of russell’s money.
    – also the 3 person to vote for is flawed, should go back to 2 people.

  3. Russell was a victim of Survivor’s constant need to move the goalposts around. He thought he could pull off a Richard Hatch-like victory, but Richard Hatch won the very first Survivor, and that was a very different game.

  4. I agree with Don. If Russell lost the game, apparantly his strategy wasn’t all that perfect. He knew the jury would pick the winner from the very beginning. He chose to alienate them, and they chose not to pick him as the winner. Hence, not a good strategy. Stop whining.

  5. Russell was the most entertaining Survivor for viewers, but the players should have final say. What we see at home is a fraction of the 39 days of interactions. I was surprised the jury didn’t get past their personal issues and vote Russell the winner, but that speaks to how much they disliked him. It was a great final twist to an excellent season. Congrats to Burnett and Company on 19 seasons of well-produced TV!

  6. One personality trait that is usually necessary to win Survivor is “likeability” Russell was lacking that trait. Plain and simple. I’d have a hard time giving someone $1MM who I just didn’t like. Nothing to do with game play. If he spilled out precious water and burned my socks – to me that has to do with likeability, not his skill at playing the game of Survivor.

  7. We’ve been bamboozled!
    I thought Russell outwitted, outplayed and outlasted everyone. Natalie had no strategy other than to align herself with the person who had worked hardest at being a Survivor. True, he was unlikable in almost every way, but he did play the game the best of them all. I do think Russell’s arrogance shot him down at the end. Telling people, “I’m runnin’ the show” only hurt him. I also think there was a slight generational shift in thinking. Russell’s old school ethic of work hard and do your best isn’t respected by those younger players of the game. Maybe in future seasons Survivor’s contestants will meet together after their tribal merge, sit round the camp fire and share their stories about why they deserve to win above the others, then a soft Kumbaya will be sung as they sway together holding hands. There’s a politically correct values shift occurring in the game that will lose viewers. I thought Russell was the “best” player of Survivor we’ve seen in a long time. He even found the hidden immunity idols with no clues! That was amazing and never done before. He was certainly an unpleasant character, but he won the game fair and square. If these are the new rules maybe next time a fish or palm tree will win.

  8. All of the players that didn’t vote for Russell are babies, crying because Russell gave them a spanking. Awww. Poor babies. Cry and pout and give someone else the $million.

  9. I agree with Quinky. The game is changing possibly for the worse. Russell deserved it wholeheartedly. Finding 3 idols without clues, and strategically picking off Galau pretty much by his own choices. He told them what to do and they voted his way every single time. The game is changing because it seems to be getting worse and worse where Mark Burnett feels he has to get these young good looking people on the show to keep people interested. Problem is this younger generation is lazy. Majority of the younger contestants want to lay around all day and sunbath and chit chat. Alienating the older crowds to fetch water and gather food. Good thing the shows coming to an end soon. And with Russell getting bent over, it’s probably time to throw dirt on the show


  11. Wow, I totally agree, switching prize money awards…that is a perfect idea. There’s no point in leaving the award up to a jury that is seeking revenge for being outplayed. Spare me the “unethical, evil, snake tactics” BS. In this case, ignoring completely the skill of Russell. Natalie deluded herself into thinking she had a “strategy” and really didn’t have a clue…as didn’t 75% of the contestants. Without Russell the season would have been a yawn. Russell outlasted, outwitted, and outplayed everyone, every step of the way. They should take a hint from “The Amazing Race” and let the game progress til there’s one person standing…the winner!

  12. Russell chose to play the game one way, and dealing with the circumstances and characters of her competitors, Natalie chose to play the game another. She won, and that’s all there is to discuss. 🙂

  13. hears the faint sound of a shark being jumped…..

  14. Why would any logical person think that Russell would or should win with his “strategy”.
    He blatantly lied and pissed off all the people who were going to vote for the winner of a million bucks. It’s liking telling a cop who pulls you over he is an asshole and then wondering why he writes you up , when he may have just been ready to give you a warning.

  15. If Natalie is deluded ,I would like to be deluded too , you dummy!

  16. Absolutely agree. I’ve been a fan or Survivor for many seasons.

  17. It doesn’t matter if the viewers are “upset”. I did not want Russell to win – so anyone but him was fine by me (don’t know that Natalie deserved it but don’t care). If there is no jury the show is completely different. Your statement — “But there’s an argument to be made that given how upset I would guess the majority of this season’s viewers are with the results, “Survivor” is seriously in danger of losing a lot of loyal fans if this change isn’t made” — is wrong. The jury votes and most of the time they don’t want a jerk who outmaneuvered them to win – that’s what makes the game interesting. You have to outwit but you have to do so in a way that also builds relationships – he didnt do it – he was smart but lacked warmth – and that matters here. The fact he didn’t win makes Survivor more unpredictable – that will keep viewers coming back

  18. Russell got jobbed by a bunch of whiny losers who couldn’t stand the fact that he outsmarted every single one of them.
    Best. Player. Ever.
    Worst. Jury. Ever.

  19. Natalie may have won by default because she was the lesser of the evils, but the reason Russell lost was because the jury was sending a very powerful (and much deserved) message that how you play the game does matter and the ends do not justify all means. What ultimately took Russell down was not his gameplay but his arrogance, and I for one found that refreshing. That’s why everyone voted against him and why I cheered so hard when he lost and savored the look of shock on his face. His insufferable ego and sense of omnipotence were what cost him the title he wanted so badly and Russell has no one but himself to blame.

  20. I cannot believe Russell didn’t win! Completely unfair!!!!!!!!!!!!

  21. That is a genius idea. I really think America should pick the million dollar winner and let the bitter players choose who gets $100,000!

  22. I disagree wholeheartedly that Russell should have won. Part of the Survivor game is trying to vote people off without getting them angry at you…how do you make it to the end, and still get jury votes? Russell was strategic, but only to the extent that he made everyone hate him. Anyone could play Survivor that way. Big Bully style. But Natalie knew she needed to get on good terms with those who would get on the jury. She did outwit Russell. Russell needs to learn sportsmanship and acknowledge that this game was not as easy as he anticipated.

  23. I disagree that the viewers should vote for the winner. Realize that what we see has been chosen by the producers. They chose to make this season “The Russell Show.” We hardly saw anyone else…how could we make an informed decision? Don’t judge the jury unless you were in their shoes. I would not want to give a million dollars to a big mouthed egotist who sabotaged his teammates. Natalie won fair and square. The only thing I wonder is why they didn’t vote Russell off sooner! Russell also needs to learn good sportsmanship. Whining about losing just shows what a loser he really is.

  24. Move the vote from the final tribal council to the live show. By then, the tribal council has had time to reflect and see the season and may judge less emotionally and give it to the most deserving player.

  25. I say baloney! At what point was Russell unaware that winning depended on a vote by a jury of his peers? He was amazingly good at finding idols and manipulating everyone during the game but he was absolutely terrible at getting jury votes. The guy was arrogant, dismissive and managed to alienate his peers so much that they voted against him. So he lost.
    Contrast that to Survivor Thailand winner Slimy Brian. He quietly manipulated everyone as effectively as Russell but did it in such a way that they all blamed someone else and voted for Brian. Russell was more entertaining and likable but Brian was a better overall Survivor player.

  26. Right on. The vote ruined the entire season. That Natalie somehow “deserved” the money is a joke and that Russell, though deceitful, did not undeniably win it is yet another product of America’s current whiny sense of entitlement for losers and slackers. They certainly lost me as a fan. But your suggestion for the public choosing the winner is a good one.

  27. This was the first time I ever watched the show. I missed the first few episodes. The only reason I continued to watch the show was Russell. Russell should have won, I feel the jury vote is a flawed system. The idea of the game is to survive, NO VOTE. I agree with Joe let the game progress til there’s one person standing. I think I’ll skip next season.

  28. Your comparison is all wrong. In football there is NO social aspect to the game. Where with Survivor there is a social element to the game, it’s been there from the start. Previous season winners have won because they played the best social game. Survivor is more than winning comps or finding idols. The winner is the one that gages and plays the jury best. Russ had zero clue to how to read the jury as it was being filled. Silly man he forgot to play a major part of the game and then he goes off sulking and whining that a girl beat him and goes on to call her a whore and still peole defend him, that scares me.

  29. The person that deserves to win is the person that gets the votes. FLATOUT! You have to win the jury, that’s always been the key. Just because one person votes one way, that does not mean another person NEEDS to vote that way. I loved that Russell lost. He was disrespectful. He did a great job, but was not very liked by the jury. He assumed everyone would vote for him just because he played that game the way he thought it should have been played. Richard Hatch earned the respect of his jury more than the person next to him. Russell simply didn’t. Russell was “dumb” by sending home Jaison without even letting him know he was going home. Russell knows Jaison is an emotional player. One mistake he made. He’s not the best player. He got beat. Also note, I loved watching Russell on the show. He was good entertainment.

  30. Sometime’s it’s nice to know the bad person doesn’t win. Sometime’s it’s nice for a better person to beat out someone who is not a good person at heart, regardless of context. That is clearly what happened here.

  31. Natalie is obviously the winner. The jury sets the criteria and she met their criteria for the champion of this season. By virtue of making it to the jury, each member is entitled to vote by whatever criteria they deem makes the Survivor champion. If they want the nicest player, they are entitled to vote that way by virtue of making it to the jury. If they want the blondest player, the one able to grow most facial hair, the one who one the most immunities, etc., then they can vote that way. May seem stupid, silly, or unfair to those of us not living with them or going thru what they went thru, but they are entitled. Russell playing as he did, belittling others, lording his prowess over others, etc. turned the tide against him. Game is part social, part strategic. He nailed the strategic, but on a scale of 1 to 10, was a solid 0 (imho) on the social aspect. He played against the others in Samoa, not those of us watching in our homes. Congrats to both for making it to the final 3 (as well as Mick).

  32. Natalie won “The Chicago Way” – the jury probably got swayed by Mayor Daley, several aldermen, and Blago and was paid off by Donny Osmond (another undeserving winner of a reality/competition show) to vote for Natalie. Corruption is alive and well in reality shows!

  33. First of all, CBS stopped producing DVD’s of the seasons a couple years ago. (Only 1,2,7,8,9,10 are available). Secondly, it is crazy to suggest the audience should pick the overall winner when we at home only see 15 or so hours of 936 hours filmed. Editting would unfairly determine how America viewed each contestant. It still amazes me that so many people are selected/asked to be on Survivor who fail to understand the deception part of the game and then get up on their integrity soap boxes only when they themselves have been voted out.

  34. So let me get this straight – you think the viewers, who only get to see a carefully edited subset of what happens should decide the winners, but the players who have to live with each other 24/7 should award the lesser prize?
    If that’s your take on it, then why not just have the show’s editors award the $1M?
    After all they more than the players themselves affect who the viewers feel is nice, who they think is an a**, who they feel plays well and who they feel plays poorly.
    If the viewers had any idea how much the footage is manipulated to create a “story line” they’d stop watching any and all “reality” television.

  35. If anything, I think Russell should be incredibly proud that the jury voted for Natalie.
    Typically with survivor, you’re left with a) someone who won a bunch of challenges, b) someone who was the true, evil manipulator and c) the person who road the coattails of the manipulator.
    Inevitably, the coattail person tries to imply that they were a part of it all, which Jaison tried to do weeks ago and which Natalie also did to some extent. At that point, the jury usually shoots them down. This clearly happened with Natalie, who couldn’t really say one thing she did besides the Erik vote.
    The jury usually throws this person out. Then it comes down to the person who won the challenges or the manipulator. And time and time again, the jury does seem to prefer giving the award to the manipulator. In a weird way, it is a sign of respect. They don’t respect the person who just beat them in a challenge as much as they seem to respect the person who outsmarted them.
    In this case, there was only one choice. Russell dominated the game in a way that maybe no other player ever has. He ripped up his own tribe, he destroyed the other tribe, he always had his ass covered and he found THREE idols without any clues.
    For Natalie to win the vote just showed how bitter the jury was. Typically, when someone outplays you that well, you show them respect. In this case, not giving Russell the money was really the highest form of respect. He broke them so badly that they had no other way of getting back at him.
    In any case, this illustrates why the jury must keep the vote. Human emotion is a huge element in the game, it is the ultimate wild card. You can’t take that away from the players.

  36. I find it extremely disturbing that so many people want to celebrate and reward someone who lies and tries to hurt people (dumping out contestants’ water). Russell was arrogant, dishonest and just plain nasty, and the things he said about other contestants was far worse than what Ben said about Yasmin (and at least he said it to her face). HE got voted off for that and was castigated for being racist. I guess it’s OK to target and trash white, blond women. And this is in a country where we prosecute and jail big business leaders who behave like Russell did – CEOs who lie, cheat and rob their stockholders, all in the name of money.

  37. You all forgot, if it were not for Russell, Natalie would have been voted instead of Laura (remember the tie breaker vote!). Bottom line, Natalie was a coat-tail rider.
    1)She did not win any immunity challenges
    2)Followed everything Russell said
    This is synonymous of what is going on real life in America. Screw the hard working person and reward the lazy one.

  38. Premise: ‘what we see has been chosen by the producers’.
    Conclusion: informed decision cannot be made.
    Yet you continue your personal rant regarding Russell’s character?
    Most illogical.

  39. I hated Russell at first then changed my mind as it is a game. I was a bit happy he lost, he was so arrogant. But, he did deserve to win, hands down. Of All the Survivors I think this was THE BEST. When 4 merged with 8 & the 8 voted off one of their own, I said there it goes, the 8 deserved to go 1 by 1, stupid they were. The 1st Survivor jurors voted Hatch who all hated but the jurors voted honestly. Since they emotions mostly rule not game.

  40. I totally agree. Survivor has to change, as is becoming less interactive and more repetitive, otherwise will die like everything else that fails in media today. If you do not satisfy your average watcher, instead you annoy him by being ignorant and nonchalant with their intelligence and their choices, you might as well start writing your will, cuz is all over.

  41. He found ONE idol without any clues. The other two he was given clues to.
    1 by way of watching Yasmin look around trees because she did have a clue…
    2 the clue he got on a vid snippet.

    Please go get your meds and stay off the computer!
    Francios you are a total creep with a tiny, tiny dick! Your screaming fits isn’t going to help you get Russell’s cock on your mouth like you want.

    Please go get your meds and stay off the computer!
    Francios you are a total creep with a tiny, tiny dick! Your screaming fits isn’t going to help you get Russell’s cock on your mouth like you want.

  44. Premise: ‘what we see has been chosen by the producers’.
    THUS why it would be unfair that America chooses a winner! They weren’t living there with the prick for a month!
    Conclusion: informed decision cannot be made.
    THUS why you really need to check your facts because apparently he’s just the same asshole in real life as he was on Survivor.
    Yet you continue your personal rant regarding Russell’s character?
    SO why do you keep defending him? Do you think he loves you? Please get over it, you aren’t fooling anyone.
    Most illogical.
    Most illogical indeed!

  45. Can we just skip to the part where you kill yourself?

  46. First of all, Survivor isn’t a football game. So stop acting retarded.
    Second of all, if someone blatantly walks all over you and “spanks” you, then tough shit if the person who was abused got even.
    Thirdly Russell is a complete loser and would have been gon long ago if it weren’t for him riding coattails and trying to buy everyone (and we clearly saw all that before and after the game)
    Natalie kicked his ass!
    Russell writes checks with his aligator mouth that his hummingbird ass just couldn’t cash!
    And this whole “well he was entertaining, he should win” when your arguments about his strategy are debunked isn’t a good counter argument.
    He certaily wasn’t entertaining to me and I waited for him to be stopped! I relished in the victory of him losing!
    Anything Jeff says is bullshit because he had always hated women players (like Russell fans do) and he’s in love with Russell. He also didn’t have to live with Russell for 39 days.
    I’d like a total UNCUT showing of this season because I KNOW that he’s a FRAUD!
    “I’m going to show you all how easy it is to win Survivor!” Well he didn’t and somehow he nor his deluded fans are going to admit how WRONG they are and keep placing the blame on others! Total cop out losers to the end!
    Russell will end up in jail again. Then back into obscurity when you all are through with him and throw him in the trash!

  47. Who cares its only a tv show not world peace or such
    Gary I have no Knowledg Radnich

  48. Your analysis seems completely off. Everyone playing the game, including Russel, knew that in the end you needed the votes of the jury to win.
    Russel times and time again did some of the stupidest moves to ensure that he would loss at the end.
    Takeing Natalie and Mike to the final was one of them. Both Natalie and Mike were more liked by the jury in terms of personality. He should have taken Shambo, who was univeraly disliked by both tribes, and Jaison, who time and time again had outbursts that had rubbed people the wrong way. Instead he remained loyal to Natelie, because it was the easy play, and not nessessarily the smart play.
    Other dumb things he did was how he pissed people off when he was voting them out. When your counting on their vote to win, why would you do that?
    Nat on the other hand using Russel as the “leader” took time to cultivate friends, took time to know the people she was voting off. She made no promises to them to try and get their assistance, and left the dirty work to Russel. Also, without her Eric may not have been voted off. Who persuaded the women to vote him out? Could Russel, Mik, or Jaison accomplished what she did? I doubt it. And that was vital to ensureing that a split took place in purple.
    Russel was smart, he did some really great plays, and to be honest I think he was right up there amongst the best, but his errors were hugh, and while it made for great TV to watch the game, if the final vote was left to America, then a lot of great stratigy would be taken away.
    So that is a thumbs down from me to the idea that America should vote.

  49. Bad analogy. Football awards are judged purely on performance, but Survivor has a built-in control against obnoxious players. They know it and we know it. It may not seem fair, but the “don’t irritate the jury” rule is nothing new. Ask the prosecutors in the OJ trial.

  50. regarding yr TV Week Guide – I am looking at Jan 2-8 – I am thrilled at this (latest) new layout. Not only does it minimize the gripes & grizzles of Himself, but I actually think I can drive it. So, please – no more changes, this one’ll do fine.
    and a happy new year to you all. Pam Nelson

  51. Dude, It’s a TV show. No need to get so emotional. Now put down the remote and go outside. Don’t be afraid of the big glowing ball in the sky, it is called the Sun. Get A Life.

  52. The problem here is the criteria — or lack of it — the jury is supposed to use to vote for a winner. The argument on this page seems to be between whether the jury should vote for their favorite person or the best player. If it’s the best player, how do you define that? Is it the nicest person? The one who won the most challenges? The one who outwitted the most people (which almost by definition requires deception)?
    All I want is clear guidelines for how the jury should vote.
    I wonder how the process might differ if the jury voted to punish rather than reward? What if this were like a criminal jury and they had to sentence the remaining player who did the least to outwit, outplay and outlast to a year in prison? Would Russell enjoy freedom while Natalie sat behind bars?

  53. That isn’t a good analogy. Lawrence Taylor would tell you he didn’t care about the MVP if he could trade it for a Superbowl Victory. Russel lost the superbowl BECAUSE it’s chosen by his “peers”. He won fan favorite BECAUSE it’s the MVP and people who feel like you liked to watch him scheme. What I can’t understand is why you and many others don’t see the other side. A tiny cute girl who can’t compete in physical challenges, or scheme and lie at ease, had a strategy that got her to the finals where an arrogant player overlooked the fact that sometimes the jury will give it to the lesser of two evils. The fact that it was Erik that gave the speech she should have given, only shows how much they hated Russell and didn’t want him to have that money. They cast a wide range of people for Survivor and each of them has a few strategies that will work for their personalitiy and skillset. She did exactly the right strategy for who she was.
    Seeing Russell in tears trying to purchase a title was pathetic and he should consider it a wakeup call as to why he lost.

  54. Premise: ‘what we see has been chosen by the producers’.
    THUS why it would be unfair that America chooses a winner! They weren’t living there with the prick for a month!
    -I don’t recall making an argument either way.
    Conclusion: informed decision cannot be made.
    THUS why you really need to check your facts because apparently he’s just the same asshole in real life as he was on Survivor.
    -I don’t recall disputing the ‘facts’, just the logic of the previous post.
    Yet you continue your personal rant regarding Russell’s character?
    SO why do you keep defending him? Do you think he loves you? Please get over it, you aren’t fooling anyone.
    -I don’t recall defending him, one time, or more than one time (as the posting you were replying to was my first post), or trying to fool anyone.
    Most illogical.
    Most illogical indeed!
    -you should read some postings more carefully before you comment.

  55. So basically you have no argument but to say “Get A Life”?
    Seems to me that when you describe the sun as a big glowing thing, that you need to get outside more little boy and learn that when people actually have good points to make you should learn from them and climb down off your high horse!

  56. Kinda like Russhole’s sense of “entitlement” for playing a gawd-awful game and not even once realizing that he made it far because they were using him as a goat!
    Oh now watch you change your views about being “used”, huh! It’s only ok for you and your ilk to do it but not anyone else, huh?
    You are the scum of the earth!

  57. Russell: Worst. Loser. Ever.
    Jury: Best. Jury. Ever!

  58. Russell should not have won becuase he forgot the rules. The American Public does not vote, the people in the game vote, and he pissed them all off. Rule number 1, know your audience, and he forgot who votes.

  59. It has to be a hybrid vote. Have the jury vote, but let America vote and give us 3,6,9 votes so if the jury does something stupid we can counter-balance the vote.

  60. Chuck Ross is as big a sore loser as Russell!
    The people who were with that jerk 24/7 and who saw far more of his dirty deeds than what was shown (due to time constraints and storytelling needs) so i think they have a right to vote for who they want to win. Viewers still get a chance to vote for who thei THINK should win. So get over it!

  61. Im glad he didnt win..he was a poor loser and acted like a baby at the finale, offering money for the “title” of final survivor. Grow up Russel..you lost..so boo hoo…go cry in your oil field and use ur millions to wipe those tears.

  62. LOL this article is just silly…
    first of all it’s Mick, not Nick.
    America should NOT decide who gets the million. I think the fact that Shambo was in the top three says a lot about who votes in those polls lol.
    Basically America votes on who they like… just look at James from Micronesia and China. He won both times, but didn’t really play a great game either time. He was just a really likable guy. And Bob from Gabon played pretty badly, but won America’s survivor because people liked him.

  63. You missed the point and Russell miseed the point. Your analogy is wrong. It would be more like your Taylor tripping his own team members to make himself look good. Ruining their gear so they couldn’t perform properly and then being the caption that goes behind their back and gets the coach to sack them. He goes on about the game but he couldn’t carry it into real life. If you want the viewer to pick the winner all that will happen is the producers will manipulate the outcome!

  64. Come on man. Are you serious?
    Russell pulled off some amazing stunts this season. I thought for sure he was going to be voted out many times, but he controlled the ENTIRE competition. Now just think about how ridiculously impossible it would have been to not only do so well in the game, but also have a good attitude about it?
    Come on.
    Had he been nice and sociable he would have been crushed at one of the many chances the opposing tribe had. He steered his tribe to overcome 8-to-4 odds, buddy. Being nice and sociable would not have only wasted his time that could be spent forming strategies, but would have also caused him to be perceived as a weaker player.
    You’re such an idiot. It’s obvious that the jury made their decision because they were butt hurt.
    Natalie didn’t do ANYTHING. Russell was completely focused and involved with the game at hand. If the vote had been between Russell and Miss South Carolina, would they still vote for her just because she was nice?
    Oh… wait.

  65. What did Russell pay you for such a positive review?. The only thing Russell is good is his ability to bull s–t people like you.

  66. Russell’s mistake was being _too_ honest, he should have maintained his story about being a fireman who’s dog died in Katrina – he should have spun it into a much worse hard luck story and never told anyone that he had money (something like telling them that his wife is fighting cancer and he is bankrupt from the medical expenses), he possibly should have taken Shambo to the end too.
    Yeah he was robbed, but so was Matt, Rob, and Stephen. People are mistakenly thinking of the jury as a ‘fair’ and ‘just’ thing (tip: juries in real life court aren’t fair or just either), the jury is just another element of the game to game (manipulate).
    I would say the best ‘jury play’ goes to Brian Heidik winner of Survivor 5 Thailand – he knew the jury was a totally corrupt and biased thing, so he brought someone even more hated than himself to the end (Clay) and won against him. There was an interview with Probst about the cast of S20, and Probst said Brian is a good player and a villain but is so despised that they didn’t want to bring him back.

  67. I only watch survivor because of Russell Hantz. He is extremely entertaining. I thought he should have won survivor Samoa and I think that he should win this season. I was disappointed that Natalie won. She didn’t do anything. I think that Russell is brilliant!

  68. It would be a mistake to let America vote. It is the true survivor that can outwit, outlast and out play AND maintain a relationship with those on the jury so as to win their vote. America voting would come down to favoritism just as Idol has. ridiculous to change it.

  69. Nah. The loyal fans listen to the exit interviews and insider info and can see why Russel lost both seasons. After 20 season of watching this show its easy to see that Russel failed at the social aspect of the game. As to America voting for the million. BLAHH. We would be basing our vote on seeing .014% of the total game and that is edited by CBS. Our vote would be dependent on the edit and the edit could make Satan look like a saint if they really wanted to. Look at Rupert and his portrayal. See what I mean?????

  70. Survivor states who can outwit, outplay and outlast everyone and that is exactly what Russell did and he deserved to win. Without his hussling people and hussling to find the idols Natalie and Nick would not be upthere in the final three. It’s sad that the jury could not give it up to person who played the best game. It does not matter whether he had his own money or who needs the money more. He simple played the best game.

  71. I cannot believe no one sees how much Russell is like Charles Manson! Just think about how Manson manipulated people especially women and got them to do his work for him.

Your Comment

Email (will not be published)