Survivor: Samoa Final Roundtable Predictions Results – I Hate Being Right

There are some things in life I will never understand. Like, why are we here? What would have happened if John Lennon hadn’t been killed? Why do people think Dane Cook is funny? After seeing the finale of Survivor: Samoa, a new ponderous question comes to mind: What’s the point of playing the game?

It’s a question that really has to be asked after this result. I’ve known for a while, based on the editing, that Natalie was going to win. But I figured she would at least do something to earn it, like getting rid of Russell at the final five or four. I was hoping she’d show up and grow some stones at the moment of truth and make a necessary, marquis move to deserve her win. Instead, she simply rode coattails and was given the title and the check by arguably the most bitter, illogical jury ever. I actually looked it up. “Galu” is Samoan for “sour grapes.”

Yes, Russell’s game had flaws, particularly ignoring the social aspect to a large degree. And yes, Natalie was the antithesis in that regard, valuing the social game above all else. But here’s the thing. If RNO Editor David’s rules are to be believed (and there’s tons of empirical evidence over the years to suggest he’s developed the bible for this game), scheming and plotting is the most important rule. The social game, pretending to be nice, is the fifth most important, just above avoiding threat status. So while Russell mastered one rule and Natalie mastered another, he was the best in the more important facet of the game.

Also, consider the rules as individual grading points. When you compare Russell and Natalie (Mick doesn’t even enter the equation as far as I’m concerned), he wins on five of the six rules, and his jury arguments were among the most eloquent and succinct ever. Natalie wins one category. In what universe does someone outscore their opponent 6-1 and lose?

In Erik’s jury comments, he asked why Natalie’s game should be discounted and Russell’s promoted? Here’s why: Russell did the work.

Let’s use a real life example (since Jaison somehow thinks this game is supposed to be a microcosm of life). Say you work in an office, and have been put in charge of a major project for your company. You work really hard, apply yourself, and come up with a spectacular product that outshines everything your competition and your coworkers can do. So when it comes down to handing out kudos and bonuses, who do they give the bonus to? Should they give it to the guy who did all the work, or the pretty chick who brought him coffee? That’s what Natalie was in this game. She was little more than Russell’s friendly secretary while he actually did all the work. But apparently to Galu, coffee and a smile is more important.

I can empathize with Russell on this one, and completely understand how pissed off he was to lose. I’ve been in a situation where I’ve worked hard at something and lost out on opportunities and rewards because of some superficial reason. “Oh, she’s nice.” “He goes to church.” “I’m friends with her mother.” It’s demoralizing to the point that you actually have to wonder, what was the point of trying?

So, to summarize, Russell, I feel your pain. Natalie, you will go down as one of the least deserving winners of all time (I rank her third, just above Sandra and Amber, just below Aras and Vecepia). Galu, your bitterness sickens me, and even the Rotu Four think you were a bit harsh.

Okay, rant over. It’s time for one of us to win something (although there’s no actual prize – maybe I’ll send the winner a cookie). All season long we’ve been putting on our hindsight glasses and re-examining our lop-sided vote to see how smart we all are with the benefit of retrospect. Now that the season’s over, it’s time to crown a winner, and unlike the actual vote, the winner will be the one who actually won.

We’ll start with Jaison, the first one eliminated at the finale. His ouster became the death knell for many of the writers, as his pre-season profile made him seem like the ideal prototype of a Survivor player. Indeed, everyone saw something in him, as no one picked him to go out pre-jury. Out of the 12 of us, three actually get a point for him, as they picked Jaison for the jury. The first points go to Chris, Brian, and Mark.

Brian: “[When it comes to Jaison and Mick] this pair had terrific prospects coming into the games – both were smart, athletic, likeable – and both melted into the background and never emerged as real factors. Both made it to the endgame, but for reasons that no one could have expected from their bios.”

Yes, both were disappointments, especially for us. Nine writers, a full three quarters of the roundtable contributors, picked Jaison to go to the end. None of us picked him as our third. Five picked him to win, while four pegged him for second place. With his elimination, seven writers lost all three finalists.

Next we move on to Brett, who was the last “safe” pick of the cast, as no one put him in the finals. This is a good thing, as we saw about as much of him on the show as we did in his bio. The split on Brett was even with six writers taking the pre-jury hit (Jenn, Chris, Phil, Kari, Brian, and Mark). The rest of us correctly placed him in the jury.