Yuku free message boards

survivorisdabest wrote:

---

She beat amanda because she was dragged to the very end by amanda and got two bitter votes that had nothing to do with her. O_O
OK whatevs, By that logic BOB was the best player of Gabon so obviously it is flawed

He won didn't he? Sugar/Susie/Kenny/etc may have played more strategically or whatever..but Bob won so he was the best player..

my point...."The best player" doesn't get voted out..which is the ultimate goal of Survivor...fucking dumbass.

Shalomo wrote:

---

Whether you like a winner or not, they are all tied for the #1 best player because they all accomplished the same thing.

THIS.

I hate Earl with a passion and wish he never set foot on Survivor. I think he played horribly in challenges, was lackluster in strategy but had a good social game. That being said i can still admit he played the best game in Fiji, having won.

Fuck it, i'm double posting.

If someone sat on the sidelines for 39 days, did absolutely nothing but managed to not get voted out. That person makes it to F2/F3 to face the jury and gives a piss poor speech but still gets the votes to win (or gives an amazing speech and wins) they would be the best player of the season..even if the person sitting next to them engineered the entire season. Why you ask? because the bitch who engineers boot after boot still lost in the end, and the meek, UTR mute is a million dollars richer.

ugh..I used to like Amanda before this Jacksparrow cuntess.

Katy Carney wrote:

---

That's wholly dependent on whether or not your definition of "the best player" = "the player who wins", and for a lot of people it isn't. It isn't for me. "Best player" in any given season, if taken literally, is the one who won. I use it to describe someone who impressed me the most with their tactics in some way or overcame a huge deficit or something similar.

I hear you but have to still disagree. My favorite player almost never wins (and i'm fine with that because more often than not they still make it pretty far in the game). I would rather have seen Cirie win Panama over Aras (for example) because she played more aggresively, and made a lot of powerful moves. Again having said that I still feel like Aras was a better player because Cirie ended up in a situation she couldn't overcome at F4..whether plain bad luck or not.

I can understand someone calling Hatch a better winner than Bob if they base their perfered winner on strategy. I can understand people knocking Parv down on their winners rankings based on luck (whether I disagree or not) but once again it's my stance that the one who plays the best is the one who makes it all the way and gets the jury votes to win. They overcame all obsticals..whether directly (aggressively) or indirectly (passively).

Mikester wrote:

---

srvivrfreakevelrich wrote:

---

Mikester wrote:

---

The winner is almost never the best overall player.

Then explain Richard, Tina, Brian, Chris, Tom, Yul, and Todd to me.

The bold ones were not the best players of their season, imo.

Then I ask you to tell me who the best player those seasons were...and i'll gladly tell you why they lost (which therefore makes them not the best player that season).

ETA: I understand everyone likes players for different reasons and everyone is entitled to their opinion. The fact of the matter is that Survivor was set up so that your goal is to outlast all the other and win over the jury. Chris did this better than Twila, Todd did this better than Amanda, Hatch did this better than Kelly, etc, etc..All other "moves" made in the game are just icing on top..

Mikester wrote:

---

SurvivorNinja wrote:

---

Then I ask you to tell me who the best player those seasons were...and i'll gladly tell you why they lost (which therefore makes them not the best player that season).

ETA: I understand everyone likes players for different reasons and everyone is entitled to their opinion. The fact of the matter is that Survivor was set up so that your goal is to outlast all the other and win over the jury. Chris did this better than Twila, Todd did this better than Amanda, Hatch did this better than Kelly, etc, etc..All other "moves" made in the game are just icing on top..

I know why they lost I watched the show. I also know why the other ones won. Because jealousy is a disease.

Jealousy is a factor in the game several players couldn't overcome then apparently. Everything is a part of the game within that 39 day span as you know..the game doesn't stop. If Bob managed to win because Kota was jealous/pissed at Sugar/Susie..then Bob played better and overcame the last obstical of having a jury your favor. The reasoning doesn't really matter as long as you get there.

As I said before, I understand perfering other players over the winner (them having made bigger moves, being more likable and fun, stronger, etc, (whatever floats your boat)) but at the end of the day, the REAL best player is the one who made it to the ultimate goal.

ETA more of the same bullshit: I realize that there are better players strategically, better socially and better in challenges than winners (in some cases)..but somewhere down the line that or something else got them booted. JT was the best overall player in Tocantins, Bob in Gabon, Parv in FvF, Vee in Marquesas, Brian in Thailand, etc. They didn't get voted out..some were great socially, some were great in challenges, some were better strategically, some worked harder..(I could go on). The facts remain that they were not voted out, overcame everything whether they had to work at it or not and they got the majority of jury votes necessary to win.