Xyston wrote:
When you win it doesn't mean you were the strategic mastermind or played a better social game than your opponent. All it means is that you had more people wanting to vote for you in the jury. Tina still rode coattails and she benefited off of Colby's decision to take her to the end instead of Keith. It's like how Bob stumbled into victory based off Sugar's moronic decisions.
That completely would undermine the concept(If a non winner is a better player then the winner). You're undermining Tina's social game. She was more respected then Colby because she made all of the decisions. Only two people on the jury voted for Colby because they truly considered him the better player(Amber voted somewhat out of spite).
And off topic, the Onions on the Gabon jury had a legitimate beef with Sugar for her poor social game. It makes no difference how influential she was, EVERYONE was trying to use her as a goat for the final 3.
