This to a 100% that’s why I most of the time don’t believe in bitter juries. Also one rule in the survivor rule book is don’t talk the well talkers at tribal council to the end if you want to win
I love your use of comprehension here. People throw around social game as a proxy for being nice but it’s so much more than that. A good social game is understanding your jury on a personal level and appealing to their values. It explains why Kenzie’s answer to Q’s jury question was so good while Ben’s wasn’t (at least from what we saw), even though he also could have benefited a lot from the million.
Being viewed as a hypocrite and/or in some way having a perception of the way you played that is very different from the way others viewed it has been jury poison from Wigs all the way to Mike Turner with plenty of other examples in between (and arguably some examples since, Mike is just the most explicit).
Gabler kind of did, but he tempered it by acknowledging that he realised that being adaptable meant that sometimes you had to break that honor. There's a big difference between "I played this game with respect and honor the whole time" (an obvious lie), and "I tried to play with respect and honor whenever that option was available"
People won’t vote for you to win $1 million if they don’t like you.
Edit: I didn’t say “the most likable person always wins.” I said people won’t vote for you if they don’t like you. Except in circumstances where a jury member didn’t like any of the finalists, I can’t think of a time when someone voted for a finalist they actively disliked
I've heard jurors say this and I fully believe it. A million dollars is a lot to give someone just for playing a game well or being a better liar.
The one season where this logic puzzles me is how Ben won S35. It seemed like Chrissy and Ryan were better liked and also seen as better players. What did I miss? Admittedly I was checked out that season.
Another one that confuses me is S42. Seemed like Maryanne was annoying to live with and people loved Mike. Did he just lose because of a bad FTC?
I’m not so sure that people actively disliked Maryanne, though. I think it was more just like…she’s annoying younger sibling lol.
Not sure about Ben though. He might be the exception 😆
Ben is something of a self-fulfilling prophecy issue.
From the final what, 7? Everyone in the game was selling to the jury that Ben needs to go, Ben will win, Ben is the biggest threat in the game. If you shout the same thing enough times, people will start to believe it and if the players in the game DID truly believe it, that's 4 more jurors there who are certain that Ben is the winner before FTC even starts.
>Seemed like Maryanne was annoying to live with
She only truly annoyed one or two people (Jonathan indeed didn't vote for Maryanne), and seemed to course-correct her social game after the merge. The first juror is a fan of Maryanne, which might have some sway. Even before FTC, people were starting to warm up to Maryanne's game in Ponderosa even if they were still leaning towards Mike. Mike also burnt and pissed off a lot of people **before** FTC (Hai, maybe Chanelle).
All that, plus Maryanne killing it at FTC and Mike flopping at FTC. You could tell the jurors were HAPPY to vote for Maryanne and excited that she won.
The edit showed a ton of Ben's flaws to make his win less obvious but even with him being a dramatic asshole sometimes, people still respected and liked him as a person for the most part, so much so that they overlooked his terrible FTC where people were begging him to stop giving up just because they went in wanting to vote for him. Meanwhile Chrissy was fairly shrewd and didn't connect with many of the jurors on a deeper level like Ben did. She knew things about them, but it was all very surface level. Desi in particular despised her, and the first juror tends to set a tone too since they're there for longer.
i just watched koah rōng for the first time and i’m still a little confused how aubry didn’t win over michelle. i guess whoever made that point about michelle’s game getting stronger and aubry’s getting weaker made sense, but i really thought aubry was better liked the whole time.
I agree! I loved Aubry, but I think this might have been one of those cases of an underdog edit making her more of a hero to the viewers. That doesn't necessarily mean her fellow players loved her that much. They probably respected her growth but "liked" Michele more.
Aubry was the figurehead of the opposing alliance that Tai flipped to. That means Jason and Scot were always going to vote for Michele from those three. Julia was always going to vote Michele. Debbie was more betrayed by Aubry in her blindside than Michele, who made no promises to Debbie. Cydney could have gone either way as she was on good terms with both, but tbh Michele only needed 4 votes.
Michele's win is a both/and of Michele's great game and Aubry's unluckiness - two allies medevaced, one with an idol in his pocket and then removed from the jury
And it's season 46 and again, being well liked trumps being strategic. If you can be strategic and likeable at the same time, that's a golden ticket to win, but if you're strategic and people hate you... I can't think of a single case where someone like that won the game. At the very least they hated/disliked their opponent more than they hated the winner (see Brian or Rob).
Idk I don't think the people with the strongest social game tend to win anymore. Maybe mediocre social game. The people with the strongest social game are quickly pointed out as threats and voted off. It's more about people who manage to just not put a big target on their back and bounce around to stay on the right side of voting out the threats while managing not to be perceived as a threat themselves. Don't be the person friends with everyone. Don't win too many immunities. Don't make too many big moves. In new era people are quick to just boot anyone seen as good at any of those whether they're in an alliance or not.
Although this can apply to people who are super likable, I feel like what you’re saying is more applicable to strategic and physical games. A strong social game doesn’t need to be flashy like physical games certainly are and strategic games can be. I find that the targeted threats are the people playing those other kinds of games and the social threats are able to fly under the radar. Then they hit the end and the jury likes them a lot so they win.
Yeah im not really saying that social games are flashy, quite the opposite i dont think that at all its by far the most subtle way to play the game. People can just easily tell whose the most sociable though. That's why if we look at the latest season for example, you have people saying very early on like "I really like tevin but I know he's a threat" "everyone likes Ben, he's a threat" "soda is just as sociable as me so she's gotta go", etc. It definitely makes you a threat to people.
I don't think it was Kenzie's social game that got her to the end. It was laying low. She was actually way more social on her Tribes beach and was immediately targeted and pretty much everyone but Tiff called her a threat or that they didn't trust her. Once they merged came though she kind of dropped to the background like I was saying which is what let her make it to the end. She did get the jury votes from social game though.
People liked Chris and didn't respect Gavin. Sure, he did flashy things at the end and kind of validated the eoe journey for the jury, but still it boils down to pretty much the same thing: they bonded with him, he was a positive presence in a hole of miserable gloom and they liked him.
Those who begin by giving people orders get voted off first. You have to quietly build that shelter, get water, look for wood rather than try to get other people to do it.
Each cast dictates the acceptable rules of gameplay. Accordingly, the style that one season respects and plays by could be considered aggressive or passive by another season's cast.
A good example is: S46 cast couldn't stand Venus because she was more "aggressive" and transparent with her gameplay. You can tell by the historic amount of unplayed idols that this was a cast of players who were playing very very afraid the entire time. No one wanted to play their cards. The style this season (aside from the crazy outliers like Q) was being extra cautious and cagey.
Good point. Regarding the thoughts on 46, I actually thought that the historic amount of unplayed idols showed how overconfident (rather than afraid) the players were.
To me, the fact that so many of them knew they were targets but didn't play them read to me as "afraid", because if they play an idol, it's basically telling everyone that they don't trust them and paints a bigger target on their back. But that's just my reading of it.
Yeah. Like if Caleb had survived due to making an idol play rather than a shot in the dark, then he would still just be voted out the next tribal anyway.
Once you're the target, you're done, when the name of the game is 'anybody but me'. Nobody needs to update their target list.
I wanted to add this as well. I've not watched all the Survivor seasons, but most of them and I don't feel like it's ever been really beneficial for someone to say they've got the idol. Maybe it will save you for the next vote or two if you spin the narrative right, but you are immediately the first target for a blindside later on now.
I think of all the comments this is pretty much the only one I’ve seen unanimously be true across all seasons. For example, Mike White was destined to never win due to his status, same as all the other famous people before him.
I think the only time I can recall this not being true is from HvV when Sandra won, despite Russell having never won. She was undoubtedly “richer” in the Jury’s eyes, but they still gave it to her (and Parvati).
But your comment didn’t say it guarantees you a win, so you got it right 100%.
Russell owned an oil company, he wasn’t exactly poor either.
And Sandra is known for still being pretty humble with her savings. She still cuts coupons, etc.
So it’s not so much having money I think, but how much your daily life reflects your spending habits. Kenzie wasn’t exactly *poor* (owning a salon means you’ve had some level of success), but her motivations and the way she explained them made her seem more genuine rather than superficial.
Exactly, I dont think there is a blanket statement "this will win you the votes" answer. But I cant think of a time being poor hurt or being rich helped. And just to comment, Russell did/does own oil companies so he isnt hurting for money
I wonder if they knew about Russell’s company though, because IIRC his season hadn’t aired while they were filming HvV. Though maybe if they had internet they could’ve researched it?
Don't stick out until you absolutely have to. If you're on a laying around all day tribe, you lay around all day. If you're on a tribe of Christians, you praise Jesus. Sticking out sometimes, when it's important, can be good, but you can't do it in such a way that you stop meshing.
I've been taking notes rewatching every season and the 2 things I've seen from most winners is really simple:
1) They are likeable
2) They are strategic (not emotional) players
theres some one offs but this is the basic strategy
Always consistent rules:
-Don't be an asshole to anyone on the jury.
-Choose alliances carefully.
-Take someone to the end that you can beat.
-Don't be so awful in challenges that your tribe votes you out due to being dead weight, pre-merge.
-Don't be so good in challenges that your tribe vibes you out due to "being a threat", post-merge.
-Win the final immunity challlenge.
In more recent times:
-Make at least one "big move" to impress the jury.
-Learn to make fire quickly.
Helps, but doesn't guarantee anything/ if played incorrectly, will just put a big target on your back:
-Find idols or advantages.
-Win individual immunity and reward challenges.
-Show that you know how to play the game, but not so much that you're perceived as a threat.
To sum up, choose the right friends, be good at the game, but not too overtly good at the game, and be competitive in challenges but not dominating. Middle of the road, a little under the radar but not passive, and be a people person who others enjoy having around (but not too much, or you'll get the boot).
I’m sorry but I think you must have misread the question or something. Most of these are not consistent rules…
Eg.
1. Being an asshole to a jury member can absolutely be a good play if the rest of the jury also does not like this player. This can make you look better and win more votes than just them.
2. In theory, yes, don’t be so bad in challenges that your team votes you out because of it but it’s not always true. Sandra is an example of absolute deadweight on her tribes in challenges that never got voted out because she was likable, and it then played in her favor and lowered her threat level post-merge. She even used that as a point to keep her around in both of her winning seasons.
3. Avoiding being “too good” at challenges has not always been a consistent rule. Tom and Mike H both won their seasons in part due to this.
4. “Win final immunity” - okay? Why not just say “win every immunity and get more votes in the end”
5. Big moves are not necessary to win, we’ve seen this consistently over the past few seasons. Many small moves and a good social game has been more likely to earn you the title recently.
Statistically speaking, stealing food for some reason doesn't *always* effect your game in either a good or bad way.
Oddly enough if a player is wearing toe-shoes they're more likely to make the merge.
In the beginning u got to be calm and cool working around camp don’t start no trouble and dknt try to make big moves then during beginning of the merge make connections then mid to end of merge start knocking threats out and then own your game at the end or give the jurors what they want
When there was a final 2, if you played loudly you get voted out at the final 3. When they changed this to a Final 3, if you played loudly you get voted out at Final 4. Now they introduce Final 4 fire making, if you play loudly, you get voted out at Final 5.
No matter what they do to adjust finals to give the “big moves” player the win, they never can. Make big moves, but don’t play it loudly. You’ll get bit.
You can have the best strategic mind in the world and propose the most incredible, genius plans, but none of that matters if people don't like or trust you enough to go along with it
Being able to detect whether someone is telling you the truth or lying to your face...in conjunction with having enough connections in the game to get good info.
Playing great means making final 5. Winning means making final 3.
Who-the-hell-knows circumstantial social dynamics and luck means winning the million.
Every now and then you see a player like Russell who is so focused on making it to the end that they completely forget that they also need people to vote for them. I like that to win, you can't focus just on getting to the end, or just on how you can win votes. You have to balance the two.
The jury's will always vote for the people they like more, and like it or not, if you get the most votes, you deserved to win
You only need to accomplish 2 parts of the game : not getting voted out and reached the final tribal council & convince the juries that you deserve to win than the people next to you
Doesn't matter how you play the game, if you accomplish these 2 things, you deserve to win
There isn't a person who lost at FTC that gave a better performance than the person who won. Lot of folks who complain about undeserved wins fail to see how badly the person who played the better game has impressed upon the jury during FTC, that includes Charlie.
Don't be the most hated.
Own the hell up to when you were a dick or voted someone out.
When you do the above keep the line simple. You were a threat and I respected you. Don't suck up too much.
Admit if there is a lack on the "resume" and played with what was available.
If you tried moves and tried to use/rope in jury members, leverage it, even if the play didn't happen or they went a different way.
This is just my personal theory, but I think if you manage to get the majority of the jury votes at final tribal then you have a good chance of winning the game. Obviously this is limited by sample size, but from what I've seen it seems to be a solid strategy.
Well, other than bullshit answers like “get the most votes at FTC” it’s the most important strategy.
The Losers’ Lounge is *full* of players who had good social games and that’s it.
Don't get me wrong. Being in control of who gets voted out can be a helpful factor, I just think that there's too many seasons where the person with the most control either lost at FTC or just before for me to use that as a truth.
Honestly I think saying "having some control but not too much" might be a better indicator of winning
Jury comprehension and threat level management
This to a 100% that’s why I most of the time don’t believe in bitter juries. Also one rule in the survivor rule book is don’t talk the well talkers at tribal council to the end if you want to win
I love your use of comprehension here. People throw around social game as a proxy for being nice but it’s so much more than that. A good social game is understanding your jury on a personal level and appealing to their values. It explains why Kenzie’s answer to Q’s jury question was so good while Ben’s wasn’t (at least from what we saw), even though he also could have benefited a lot from the million.
Being viewed as a hypocrite and/or in some way having a perception of the way you played that is very different from the way others viewed it has been jury poison from Wigs all the way to Mike Turner with plenty of other examples in between (and arguably some examples since, Mike is just the most explicit).
No one ever respects a contestant who says they played with “respect” and “honor” but once in a while someone tries to pull it off
Gabler kind of did, but he tempered it by acknowledging that he realised that being adaptable meant that sometimes you had to break that honor. There's a big difference between "I played this game with respect and honor the whole time" (an obvious lie), and "I tried to play with respect and honor whenever that option was available"
Yeah this is a big one
It feels like the one exception to "the person most liked will win."
What do you mean by “jury poison” and “Wigs”?
By jury poison I mean it poisons the jury against you / the jury haaaaaaates it. Wigs = Kelly Wiglesworth, runner-up of the first season of Survivor.
Ah ok, your comment was dying for some punctuation
Idk, I think it was pretty easy to understand?
Took me a minute too
I had to reread it like 3 times. I thought I was having a stroke for a second
Keep information to yourself
This is the big one.
People won’t vote for you to win $1 million if they don’t like you. Edit: I didn’t say “the most likable person always wins.” I said people won’t vote for you if they don’t like you. Except in circumstances where a jury member didn’t like any of the finalists, I can’t think of a time when someone voted for a finalist they actively disliked
I've heard jurors say this and I fully believe it. A million dollars is a lot to give someone just for playing a game well or being a better liar. The one season where this logic puzzles me is how Ben won S35. It seemed like Chrissy and Ryan were better liked and also seen as better players. What did I miss? Admittedly I was checked out that season. Another one that confuses me is S42. Seemed like Maryanne was annoying to live with and people loved Mike. Did he just lose because of a bad FTC?
I’m not so sure that people actively disliked Maryanne, though. I think it was more just like…she’s annoying younger sibling lol. Not sure about Ben though. He might be the exception 😆
Everyone in the aftershow was saying bad tribal. He didn't own his game.
Ben is something of a self-fulfilling prophecy issue. From the final what, 7? Everyone in the game was selling to the jury that Ben needs to go, Ben will win, Ben is the biggest threat in the game. If you shout the same thing enough times, people will start to believe it and if the players in the game DID truly believe it, that's 4 more jurors there who are certain that Ben is the winner before FTC even starts.
>Seemed like Maryanne was annoying to live with She only truly annoyed one or two people (Jonathan indeed didn't vote for Maryanne), and seemed to course-correct her social game after the merge. The first juror is a fan of Maryanne, which might have some sway. Even before FTC, people were starting to warm up to Maryanne's game in Ponderosa even if they were still leaning towards Mike. Mike also burnt and pissed off a lot of people **before** FTC (Hai, maybe Chanelle). All that, plus Maryanne killing it at FTC and Mike flopping at FTC. You could tell the jurors were HAPPY to vote for Maryanne and excited that she won.
The edit showed a ton of Ben's flaws to make his win less obvious but even with him being a dramatic asshole sometimes, people still respected and liked him as a person for the most part, so much so that they overlooked his terrible FTC where people were begging him to stop giving up just because they went in wanting to vote for him. Meanwhile Chrissy was fairly shrewd and didn't connect with many of the jurors on a deeper level like Ben did. She knew things about them, but it was all very surface level. Desi in particular despised her, and the first juror tends to set a tone too since they're there for longer.
Desi actively disliked Chrissy and having the first juror be against you is tough.
i just watched koah rōng for the first time and i’m still a little confused how aubry didn’t win over michelle. i guess whoever made that point about michelle’s game getting stronger and aubry’s getting weaker made sense, but i really thought aubry was better liked the whole time.
I agree! I loved Aubry, but I think this might have been one of those cases of an underdog edit making her more of a hero to the viewers. That doesn't necessarily mean her fellow players loved her that much. They probably respected her growth but "liked" Michele more.
Aubry was the figurehead of the opposing alliance that Tai flipped to. That means Jason and Scot were always going to vote for Michele from those three. Julia was always going to vote Michele. Debbie was more betrayed by Aubry in her blindside than Michele, who made no promises to Debbie. Cydney could have gone either way as she was on good terms with both, but tbh Michele only needed 4 votes. Michele's win is a both/and of Michele's great game and Aubry's unluckiness - two allies medevaced, one with an idol in his pocket and then removed from the jury
And it's season 46 and again, being well liked trumps being strategic. If you can be strategic and likeable at the same time, that's a golden ticket to win, but if you're strategic and people hate you... I can't think of a single case where someone like that won the game. At the very least they hated/disliked their opponent more than they hated the winner (see Brian or Rob).
Depends on the jury. Also sometimes people don't really like any of the people left at the end lol.
not true
Social game matters the most.
Rule #1: Be likable. Rule #2: Don't be not likable.
Idk I don't think the people with the strongest social game tend to win anymore. Maybe mediocre social game. The people with the strongest social game are quickly pointed out as threats and voted off. It's more about people who manage to just not put a big target on their back and bounce around to stay on the right side of voting out the threats while managing not to be perceived as a threat themselves. Don't be the person friends with everyone. Don't win too many immunities. Don't make too many big moves. In new era people are quick to just boot anyone seen as good at any of those whether they're in an alliance or not.
Although this can apply to people who are super likable, I feel like what you’re saying is more applicable to strategic and physical games. A strong social game doesn’t need to be flashy like physical games certainly are and strategic games can be. I find that the targeted threats are the people playing those other kinds of games and the social threats are able to fly under the radar. Then they hit the end and the jury likes them a lot so they win.
Yeah im not really saying that social games are flashy, quite the opposite i dont think that at all its by far the most subtle way to play the game. People can just easily tell whose the most sociable though. That's why if we look at the latest season for example, you have people saying very early on like "I really like tevin but I know he's a threat" "everyone likes Ben, he's a threat" "soda is just as sociable as me so she's gotta go", etc. It definitely makes you a threat to people.
Kenzie just won this season because of her social game. The person with the best social game doesn’t always win, but it happens a lot.
I don't think it was Kenzie's social game that got her to the end. It was laying low. She was actually way more social on her Tribes beach and was immediately targeted and pretty much everyone but Tiff called her a threat or that they didn't trust her. Once they merged came though she kind of dropped to the background like I was saying which is what let her make it to the end. She did get the jury votes from social game though.
Erika did this and even explained it in FTC. She wasn't super social to everyone.
Don’t be a dick.
Don't appear to be a dick is maybe a little more accurate.
I feel like this addon was solely meant for Brian and Chris D.
Be less of a dick than the person sitting next to you
How'd Chris Underwood win?
People liked Chris and didn't respect Gavin. Sure, he did flashy things at the end and kind of validated the eoe journey for the jury, but still it boils down to pretty much the same thing: they bonded with him, he was a positive presence in a hole of miserable gloom and they liked him.
oh i was just making a penis joke.
Oh. Lol :))
Thank you for the genuine response though!
A Dick won the first season
Because he was charismatic dick who actually made friends
The joke is that Dick is a common nickname for Richard (I.e. Richard Hatch). They're not saying Richard Hatch was a dick.
Those who begin by giving people orders get voted off first. You have to quietly build that shelter, get water, look for wood rather than try to get other people to do it.
Don’t isolate yourself or alienate people at the outset of the game. If you do, you’re an easy first boot from your tribe
Each cast dictates the acceptable rules of gameplay. Accordingly, the style that one season respects and plays by could be considered aggressive or passive by another season's cast. A good example is: S46 cast couldn't stand Venus because she was more "aggressive" and transparent with her gameplay. You can tell by the historic amount of unplayed idols that this was a cast of players who were playing very very afraid the entire time. No one wanted to play their cards. The style this season (aside from the crazy outliers like Q) was being extra cautious and cagey.
Good point. Regarding the thoughts on 46, I actually thought that the historic amount of unplayed idols showed how overconfident (rather than afraid) the players were.
To me, the fact that so many of them knew they were targets but didn't play them read to me as "afraid", because if they play an idol, it's basically telling everyone that they don't trust them and paints a bigger target on their back. But that's just my reading of it.
Good point!
That and if you idol someone out you're the next target.
Yeah. Like if Caleb had survived due to making an idol play rather than a shot in the dark, then he would still just be voted out the next tribal anyway. Once you're the target, you're done, when the name of the game is 'anybody but me'. Nobody needs to update their target list.
Getting the most votes at final tribal. Every winner has done that.
Don’t tempt Jeff…
I'm actually surprised they haven't tried a lose your jury vote beware advantage yet. Force you to sit there and. Not have input.
Well, they've come pretty close. There was a "kick someone off the jury" advantage.
What season was this. I don't remember it.
Kaôh Rōng
I am absolutely convinced that’s how the winner won.
If Neal stays on the jury Michele just wins 5-3
I recall he had many not nice words for Michelle when he got ejected.
Yes. Michele beat Aubry 5-2. If Neal is on the jury he votes for Aubry and it changes nothing. Michele still wins.
For some reason I thought it was 4-3. Ah well I guess that’s done
When you find and or have an idol FOR THE LOVE OF GOD KEEP THAT INFORMATION TO YOURSELF.
I wanted to add this as well. I've not watched all the Survivor seasons, but most of them and I don't feel like it's ever been really beneficial for someone to say they've got the idol. Maybe it will save you for the next vote or two if you spin the narrative right, but you are immediately the first target for a blindside later on now.
Needing money helps, having money hurts
Love this answer. People hated 46 for this reason as if it's a new thing.
I think of all the comments this is pretty much the only one I’ve seen unanimously be true across all seasons. For example, Mike White was destined to never win due to his status, same as all the other famous people before him. I think the only time I can recall this not being true is from HvV when Sandra won, despite Russell having never won. She was undoubtedly “richer” in the Jury’s eyes, but they still gave it to her (and Parvati). But your comment didn’t say it guarantees you a win, so you got it right 100%.
Russell owned an oil company, he wasn’t exactly poor either. And Sandra is known for still being pretty humble with her savings. She still cuts coupons, etc. So it’s not so much having money I think, but how much your daily life reflects your spending habits. Kenzie wasn’t exactly *poor* (owning a salon means you’ve had some level of success), but her motivations and the way she explained them made her seem more genuine rather than superficial.
Exactly, I dont think there is a blanket statement "this will win you the votes" answer. But I cant think of a time being poor hurt or being rich helped. And just to comment, Russell did/does own oil companies so he isnt hurting for money
I wonder if they knew about Russell’s company though, because IIRC his season hadn’t aired while they were filming HvV. Though maybe if they had internet they could’ve researched it?
Yeah idk, I would imagine they knew or atleast got "rich dick pretending to be poor" vibes. Cant imagine Russell being able to act/hide it that well.
PEOPLE LIKING YOU is literally the only answer here.. from season 1 to season 46 when all else fails they just go with who they like more
Richard won season 1 because Sue liked him more than Kelly.. Kenzie won season 46 because Maria liked her more than Charlie
Be likeable, or at least more likeable than whoever you sit next to in the end.
Richard hatch has something to say
Don't stick out until you absolutely have to. If you're on a laying around all day tribe, you lay around all day. If you're on a tribe of Christians, you praise Jesus. Sticking out sometimes, when it's important, can be good, but you can't do it in such a way that you stop meshing.
The winner is the least objectionable finalist in the eyes of the jury. Everything else is set dressing the TV show added to try and sell a story.
Making it to the final tribal council.
Eliminate your rivals like a Richard, without treating them like a dick
If the jury doesn’t like you on a personal level (at least more than your competition) you will lose
One word: Adapt.
Staying Under The Radar, Managing Your Threat Level, & Having A Great Social Game
I've been taking notes rewatching every season and the 2 things I've seen from most winners is really simple: 1) They are likeable 2) They are strategic (not emotional) players theres some one offs but this is the basic strategy
You need to be VERY lucky.
Always consistent rules: -Don't be an asshole to anyone on the jury. -Choose alliances carefully. -Take someone to the end that you can beat. -Don't be so awful in challenges that your tribe votes you out due to being dead weight, pre-merge. -Don't be so good in challenges that your tribe vibes you out due to "being a threat", post-merge. -Win the final immunity challlenge. In more recent times: -Make at least one "big move" to impress the jury. -Learn to make fire quickly. Helps, but doesn't guarantee anything/ if played incorrectly, will just put a big target on your back: -Find idols or advantages. -Win individual immunity and reward challenges. -Show that you know how to play the game, but not so much that you're perceived as a threat. To sum up, choose the right friends, be good at the game, but not too overtly good at the game, and be competitive in challenges but not dominating. Middle of the road, a little under the radar but not passive, and be a people person who others enjoy having around (but not too much, or you'll get the boot).
I’m sorry but I think you must have misread the question or something. Most of these are not consistent rules… Eg. 1. Being an asshole to a jury member can absolutely be a good play if the rest of the jury also does not like this player. This can make you look better and win more votes than just them. 2. In theory, yes, don’t be so bad in challenges that your team votes you out because of it but it’s not always true. Sandra is an example of absolute deadweight on her tribes in challenges that never got voted out because she was likable, and it then played in her favor and lowered her threat level post-merge. She even used that as a point to keep her around in both of her winning seasons. 3. Avoiding being “too good” at challenges has not always been a consistent rule. Tom and Mike H both won their seasons in part due to this. 4. “Win final immunity” - okay? Why not just say “win every immunity and get more votes in the end” 5. Big moves are not necessary to win, we’ve seen this consistently over the past few seasons. Many small moves and a good social game has been more likely to earn you the title recently.
You don't do well with generalities, do you? No rule is ever absolute and there are always exceptions.
Statistically speaking, stealing food for some reason doesn't *always* effect your game in either a good or bad way. Oddly enough if a player is wearing toe-shoes they're more likely to make the merge.
In the beginning u got to be calm and cool working around camp don’t start no trouble and dknt try to make big moves then during beginning of the merge make connections then mid to end of merge start knocking threats out and then own your game at the end or give the jurors what they want
Being in control of your story not the game.
When there was a final 2, if you played loudly you get voted out at the final 3. When they changed this to a Final 3, if you played loudly you get voted out at Final 4. Now they introduce Final 4 fire making, if you play loudly, you get voted out at Final 5. No matter what they do to adjust finals to give the “big moves” player the win, they never can. Make big moves, but don’t play it loudly. You’ll get bit.
Don’t just talk about it, actually play the idol lol
Make it to the end and get the most jury votes.
Applying to be on the show
Not necessarily, Survivir: Fiji had one applicant
You have to play it in stages beginning of the premerge mid merge and end of the pre merge beginning of the merge mid merge late merge
You can have the best strategic mind in the world and propose the most incredible, genius plans, but none of that matters if people don't like or trust you enough to go along with it
Being able to detect whether someone is telling you the truth or lying to your face...in conjunction with having enough connections in the game to get good info.
Stay under the radar
Playing great means making final 5. Winning means making final 3. Who-the-hell-knows circumstantial social dynamics and luck means winning the million.
That your gameplay doesn’t mean jack squat unless it appeases the jury
be the most popular/likable person compared to who you sit next to at the end (:
Didn't exactly work for Rupert, but he did win America's vote for the $1 million prize
Every now and then you see a player like Russell who is so focused on making it to the end that they completely forget that they also need people to vote for them. I like that to win, you can't focus just on getting to the end, or just on how you can win votes. You have to balance the two.
Don't act like you're smarter/better than everyone/brag about masterminding shit .
Get the most jury votes
Getting more votes than the other finalist(s)
The jury's will always vote for the people they like more, and like it or not, if you get the most votes, you deserved to win You only need to accomplish 2 parts of the game : not getting voted out and reached the final tribal council & convince the juries that you deserve to win than the people next to you Doesn't matter how you play the game, if you accomplish these 2 things, you deserve to win
There isn't a person who lost at FTC that gave a better performance than the person who won. Lot of folks who complain about undeserved wins fail to see how badly the person who played the better game has impressed upon the jury during FTC, that includes Charlie.
Being nice to people generally works out
Don't be the most hated. Own the hell up to when you were a dick or voted someone out. When you do the above keep the line simple. You were a threat and I respected you. Don't suck up too much. Admit if there is a lack on the "resume" and played with what was available. If you tried moves and tried to use/rope in jury members, leverage it, even if the play didn't happen or they went a different way.
Know how to make fire.
Jury won't respect you, if you won't respect the jury
It’s still a social game. You need allies first and foremost to stay alive
This is just my personal theory, but I think if you manage to get the majority of the jury votes at final tribal then you have a good chance of winning the game. Obviously this is limited by sample size, but from what I've seen it seems to be a solid strategy.
Got to be the best at lying cheating and deceiving. If you’re not you will lose
Know how to play an idol or make a fake one
get to the end of the game and get the jury to vote for you. thats how you win survivor.
If they put an idol into the game that can be played after the votes are read you will win if you’re the player who gets it.
Your best bet is for the jury to like you.
Being in control of who gets voted out.
I don't think that has been consistent at all. Plenty of winners didn't have as much control as people sitting next to them
Well, other than bullshit answers like “get the most votes at FTC” it’s the most important strategy. The Losers’ Lounge is *full* of players who had good social games and that’s it.
Don't get me wrong. Being in control of who gets voted out can be a helpful factor, I just think that there's too many seasons where the person with the most control either lost at FTC or just before for me to use that as a truth. Honestly I think saying "having some control but not too much" might be a better indicator of winning
You NEED to make it to the end of the game to win. Nobody has ever won the game who got sent home before the last day.
I guess Chris Underwood is a nobody.
Yeah I don't know her