Rob voted Tony cause he understood he was the mastermind of it all and everybody wanted to bring him down(including disadvantages from EoE) but no one could and Rob knew that's how you deserve to win.
Yeah, you're right, that is pretty much how Rob won his season, he was always in control and nobody could get him, which is why he voted for Tony, out of respect for his gameplay.
I figured if Rob and Tony really had a chance to go after each other, it would have been crazy. But I figured Rob would have respected Tony a lot if Rob made the jury.
Michelle should have been the 2nd placer in this game, she was an underdog, and to survive 15 out of 19 tribal councils is amazing! I love Natalie but she has an emotional bond with the jury, and that's the real advantage of EOE.
No she shouldn’t have. She did absolutely nothing for the whole game except win a couple of clutch individual immunities. She wasn’t responsible for orchestrating blindsides etc, she only went along with what she was told by others. She had no business being in final 3 and was only dragged there as she was seen as such a non-threat. Evident by her getting a deserving 0 votes for the win. Also if Nat had a true emotional bond with the jury she would have got more than 4 votes. She annoyed most of the jury members on EoE.
@@otpyg13 2 votes were from friends outside of game(jeremy, tyson) other 2 were from friends on edge. Ethan and parvati, they never met tony. Watching a lot of podcasts and reading interviews I agree that Natalie didn't help herself with her nasty attitude.
Michelle deserved better, I mean she was at the bottom for a long time and was able survive, she made to end by sliding through the cracks of the alliances and winning immunity.
Wendell, Adam and nick wanted to give Michelle votes to get her 2nd place but they did not want their votes to mean that tony lost the game and because of talk they heard from the old school players, they decided to vote for tony.
@@guidoalvarez4740rewatching this. There is no right answer. Michele is my fave. But I believe Tony deserved it more. And between Michele vs Natalie… Natalie is a beast tho. So is Michele.
Tony thought Michele should have gotten 2nd place and even admired Michele's ability to play as an underdog. I agree with what someone else wrote on reddit: "The point about leaving Michele out of votes because they were so scared of her blowing up their alliance is really interesting. I also love the boxing analogy of Michele 'dodging, weaving and dodging' when it comes to scraping her way to the next vote while constantly playing from the bottom. I get why many people don't like to see players make it to the end by simply evading vote-outs -- big, flashy strategists, challenge beasts, idol hunters are arguably more fun to watch and can control the game more -- but I find myself appreciating those scrappy players more and more."
I completely agree that Michele should've had 2nd place instead of Natalie. Especially Natalie being voted out first, she has to battle really hard on EOE and play perfectly once she's back in. I also really don't like how EOE works. The first people voted off get the most time in the edge which means they get the most chances for fire tokens and advantages. So players like Nick, Jeremy, Kim, and Sophie didn't get much chance to earn very much.
This season was so good, but i feel like it was a little bit unfair. Most people came in with pre made solid alliances, and I think that's why I respected Michelle and a part of me wanted to see her get some votes. Sis had no one and was a target in almost every tribale and still made it to the end.
Yup i liked her alot this season and feel like she deserved some votes. Maybe she couldve leaned on the fact that she shouldve been gone a long time ago but she was able to dig herself out the hole and win immunity in clutch times idk maybe that wouldve got some people to vote for her idk just something i was thinking
Wendell, Adam, and nick wanted to give votes to michelle to get her 2nd place but they were not sure how rob and the other old school players were going to vote so they decided to vote for tony.
@@MP-ef9yo we don’t shit talk her, she literally didn’t do any blindsides that she came up with herself, she’s only there cause she managed to build a fire to stay alive. Tony won because he went balls to the walls and out played, out witted, and out lasted everyone with the best strategy I’ve ever seen.
Natalie best physical game. Michelle best social game. Tony best overall player. He won immunity and was more social this game. He literally, changed his game because of his horrible performance on Game Changers. Nice job!
@@cristiano_9654 He had a long time friend in Sarah which helped him a lot. His alliance were right until the very end after they picked off the others. Tony had a better Social game in his previous games. I think Michelle had the better Social game base on her survival despite being on the bottom after the entire merge and the last remaining member of her alliance. Like Tony thought, Michelle won immunity when she needed to. But like I said, Tony was a well rounded winner.
Tony had a better social game than Michele which is shown in his 0 votes against. Tony had a better physical game than Natalie which is shown in his 4 immunity challenge wins. Tony played the best game of Survivor we have ever seen, and used every single day and vote to his advantage to help better his game and get him to Day 39, unfortunately, we cannot say the same about Natalie who isolated herself on the Edge, and Michele who was on the bottom for the majority of the game. Hence, Tony was the rightful winner who dominated all aspects of this game.
@@soshbehnia6848 Natalie didn't isolate herself in the Edge. She and others who were voted were sent there when they're voted off for a chance to get back in the game. So I don't know why the heck you would say that as if she chose to be on the Edge. She played the best Physical game as the edge is required great endurance and physical abilities to earn tokens and advantages. Michelle played a better Social game than Tony in my opinion since as mentioned, she did survived the game to the despite being in the bottom. Survivors who played a Perfect game were only JT and Cochran. Unfortunately Tony didn't get all the votes but he did play a great game and deserves his win. Sandra in her first season was the only one who was close to do this on Pearl Islands. She didn't received any votes against and got all the votes in the end except for one. Perfect Game = Didn't get any votes against and received all votes at the end. So only JT and Cochran are the only players who played a Perfect Game.
tony was the mastermind, michelle was the underdog n natalie was the underwood. that’s what i liked about the finale, everyone played in 3 separate ways to move toward the top. unique F3
I understand Natalie's just playing her game but she kinda pissed me off lol no way in hell she should have got back from the game with full of ammunition. Please CBS cancel the freakin EoE it's a flaw in the game
i disagree. a player like rick devens wouldn’t have made it to 4 without EoE. he was entertaining, smart, and a challenge beast in the latter part of his season. EoE might as well be the 2020 version of an immunity idol, which was disliked at first. the game evolves for a reason man.
@@iamjp1 Yea seeing Devens and Tyson come back was cool because they were both great players but the flaw with EoE is that you can get voted out socialize with all the other EoE players and get to know them very well while the players in the actual game have to fight to stay alive the only problem with EoE is that it should end right at the merge
If Natalie did fire she might had had a chance against Sarah, very disappointed. It would have been VERY CLOSE though. Tony deserves it. Michelle should have got at least 2-3 votes. She was such an underdog.
@@garyleroy91 how? kim literally conquered her season. you can argue the people playing with her were dumb, but i think she'd still be able to do what she did with a different cast, too. it's not like she relied on their stupidity.
Michelle did not sell her game very well. There were times where I couldnt believe she hadnt been voted off. Tony picked off so many people, but she flew under the radar, won her challenge, and made it to final.
I think Michele sold her game as best as she possibly could for being left out of a lot of votes. She explained herself very well, and gained the juries respect. However, she was up against someone who dominated the whole game and an EoE player who was able to make bonds on the jury. Poor Michele didn’t stand a chance even though she really deserved 2nd.
I dont know why Rob is talking about isolating people he dis the exact sake thing in Redemption island. He made sure he or nobody in his alliance talked to anyone outside of the alliance so what he saying is completely bull
yes that is true but edge of extinction and the actual survivor game are two completely different things. in edge of extinction there aren't tribal council where a person is going to be voted off and there aren't any "alliances" or "blindsides" "idols" etc.. that they have to worry about. it is true that rob isolated people during redemption island but that was part of his game play, for natalie, it was completely unnecessary as during the edge of extinction, they're all just people who were voted off, trying to survive. while her justification of isolating people to make sure that the advantages she had were more private and that she didn't want to share it w the whole world, she took it too far. natalie chose to isolate people while rob making sure that his alliance was isolated was to prevent people trying to blindside or sneak smth past him. i think it is completely fair what rob said and rob isolating people and natalie isolating people are two completely different things from two completely different contexts and places.
Why would you isolate yourself from the jury on purpose? Chris Underwood literally set the blueprint to win Survivor when EOE is in play. Natalie was stupid in not mingling with everyone and saying it's because she didn't want everyone to know about the advantages she was sending in the game is a stretch. Finding the advantage, thinking of who to send it to, and then receiving their tokens afterwards isn't a 24/7 thing. There is PLENTY of time to mingle with everyone.
People have double standards. If rob does it's okay but if another person does it , it's wrong. They must vote for somebody because of the game they played not because they spend days sitting together and chit chatting about back home.
Yeah and the jury on RI HATED Rob. He literally loses in a blowout to everyone but Phillip and Natalie, and loses to Phillip even if he has a good FTC (gawd). Natalie A atleast beats some people on Winners at War.
Ben says, "Winning immunity challenges is a very important part of the game..." ...Both Ben and Tony won individual immunity a total of 0 times each on their winning seasons. But Ben says it's very important and then tells you why by explaining how winning the challenges guarantee you to stay. I'm sorry Ben but damn this question just sucks.
M H are you trying to hate on Ben any way possible lmfao? That question is nothing but facts Immunity Challenges is the only way other than a idol/advantage which are rare that guarantees for you to stay.
yeah he was just trying to gas up Tony. People wanna get mad that Jeremy was "bitter" and "trying to help Natalie" but no one talks about this even more obvious gaslighting.
Its getting very personal. Natalie in the final is the biggest flaw in the game. How could someone who voted out first, can win survivor? The only chance is she is carrying dead wood in the end, but Tony is not a dead wood. Michelle is smart but she cannot beat Tony. Michelle should bring somebody else that was her age to beat. Natalie, Nick, or Wendell is much better option. Allying or going with favorite players or strong players like Tony won't work. That is her biggest flaw in the game. Tony won because he is outlasting all the best and better previous winners; Jeremy, Denise, Kim, Sarah.
Its unfair of rob to aspect natalie put her self on the block against tony after she won the challenge. rob or any player wouldn't put themselves on the block to do fire challenge.
I understand why you say that but every Survivor has to earn their win! Chris Underwood won from Edge of Extinction and gave up immunity to compete in fire making, making a stronger case for the jury!
Rob was bitter that he didn't have all the advantages Natalie had. I highly doubt if Rob did everything Natalie did , he would challenge Tony to a fire challenge.
Bruh hes voting for the player that played for the best game yeah Natalie played a good game but she was in the game for a total of 6 days do you think that's someone that deserves to win the game? Over someone that absolutely dominated the entire season.
I am not saying that Tony did not deserve to win. I am saying that I don’t think that he would of challenged Tony to fire if he was in Natalie’s place.
Nick's face when he realizes that Tony was extorted for 6 fire tokens and still managed to play such a great game is PRICELESS 🤣🤣🤣
when Tony got the jury laughing he won
Rob voted Tony cause he understood he was the mastermind of it all and everybody wanted to bring him down(including disadvantages from EoE) but no one could and Rob knew that's how you deserve to win.
Yeah, you're right, that is pretty much how Rob won his season, he was always in control and nobody could get him, which is why he voted for Tony, out of respect for his gameplay.
It's hard to vote out Tony because Sandra and Ben played like a dog to him.
@@geraldtzy2418 Ben I agree but don't you mean Sarah
I figured if Rob and Tony really had a chance to go after each other, it would have been crazy. But I figured Rob would have respected Tony a lot if Rob made the jury.
Also because Natalie didn’t take the chance to knock out Tony
Whenever the jury laughed at Tony both Michele and Natalie look super pissed off.
I was thinking the same thing 😂😂. Because it was genuinely funny and they don’t want to see him getting all the attention.
I think Michelle knew she wasnt beating Tony and just wanted to get out of the rain lol
its easy to make it look like that in editing. Esp since theyre trying to make the audience root for the person who they already know is the winner
When you have the jury laughing with you about your hilarious way of getting information from people you’re playing with house money at that point
They deserve to be piss off
Michelle should have been the 2nd placer in this game, she was an underdog, and to survive 15 out of 19 tribal councils is amazing! I love Natalie but she has an emotional bond with the jury, and that's the real advantage of EOE.
No she shouldn’t have. She did absolutely nothing for the whole game except win a couple of clutch individual immunities. She wasn’t responsible for orchestrating blindsides etc, she only went along with what she was told by others. She had no business being in final 3 and was only dragged there as she was seen as such a non-threat. Evident by her getting a deserving 0 votes for the win. Also if Nat had a true emotional bond with the jury she would have got more than 4 votes. She annoyed most of the jury members on EoE.
@@otpyg13 2 votes were from friends outside of game(jeremy, tyson) other 2 were from friends on edge. Ethan and parvati, they never met tony. Watching a lot of podcasts and reading interviews I agree that Natalie didn't help herself with her nasty attitude.
i agree. the fact she made it to the end in the first place while being on the bottom for so long is very admirable
@@otpyg13 she got Ethan out
@@otpyg13 she orchestrated Ethan's blindside and Yul's
Michelle didn’t get any votes, but at least the jury acknowledged her game
Jack Sonia She was partly a GOAT in all honesty
@@cameronholmes5590 I wouldn’t say a goat, but I kinda get what you mean. She did play a great game though and it should it go unnoticed
If by GOAT you mean greatest of all time you're right
@@shamus248 yep i wont believe otherwise
@@jacksonia7724 Yeah she did play good but the jury just didn't respect her game as much as Natalie and Tony
Michelle deserved better, I mean she was at the bottom for a long time and was able survive, she made to end by sliding through the cracks of the alliances and winning immunity.
trust me lol 3rd place this season is a shit load of money lol
@@iamjp1 out all that cast she is the only one who never got her torch smug...
Wendell, Adam and nick wanted to give Michelle votes to get her 2nd place but they did not want their votes to mean that tony lost the game and because of talk they heard from the old school players, they decided to vote for tony.
@@ricardosalmeron1946 out of all the cast she is also the only one to receive 0 votes at a final tribal council
@@guidoalvarez4740rewatching this. There is no right answer. Michele is my fave. But I believe Tony deserved it more. And between Michele vs Natalie… Natalie is a beast tho. So is Michele.
Anyone else upset we never really got to see Rob and Tony play together?
Yep. Same as we never got to see Cirie and Sandra together.
I did like seeing Rob and parvati interacting.
Absolutely. It was my one wish for this season.
no
ME!!!! And I would've LOVED to see how Jeremy and Tom Westman bond as fellow firefighters
Tony thought Michele should have gotten 2nd place and even admired Michele's ability to play as an underdog. I agree with what someone else wrote on reddit:
"The point about leaving Michele out of votes because they were so scared of her blowing up their alliance is really interesting. I also love the boxing analogy of Michele 'dodging, weaving and dodging' when it comes to scraping her way to the next vote while constantly playing from the bottom. I get why many people don't like to see players make it to the end by simply evading vote-outs -- big, flashy strategists, challenge beasts, idol hunters are arguably more fun to watch and can control the game more -- but I find myself appreciating those scrappy players more and more."
I completely agree that Michele should've had 2nd place instead of Natalie. Especially Natalie being voted out first, she has to battle really hard on EOE and play perfectly once she's back in.
I also really don't like how EOE works. The first people voted off get the most time in the edge which means they get the most chances for fire tokens and advantages. So players like Nick, Jeremy, Kim, and Sophie didn't get much chance to earn very much.
This season was so good, but i feel like it was a little bit unfair. Most people came in with pre made solid alliances, and I think that's why I respected Michelle and a part of me wanted to see her get some votes. Sis had no one and was a target in almost every tribale and still made it to the end.
I agree. I am really proud of Michelle and in my opinion, she played a great game. Definitely deserved some votes.
EXACTLY!! All these Tony and Sarah stans who keep wanting to talk shit about Michele make me sick!
Yup i liked her alot this season and feel like she deserved some votes. Maybe she couldve leaned on the fact that she shouldve been gone a long time ago but she was able to dig herself out the hole and win immunity in clutch times idk maybe that wouldve got some people to vote for her idk just something i was thinking
Wendell, Adam, and nick wanted to give votes to michelle to get her 2nd place but they were not sure how rob and the other old school players were going to vote so they decided to vote for tony.
@@MP-ef9yo we don’t shit talk her, she literally didn’t do any blindsides that she came up with herself, she’s only there cause she managed to build a fire to stay alive. Tony won because he went balls to the walls and out played, out witted, and out lasted everyone with the best strategy I’ve ever seen.
Natalie best physical game.
Michelle best social game.
Tony best overall player. He won immunity and was more social this game. He literally, changed his game because of his horrible performance on Game Changers. Nice job!
I think Tony had a better social game than Michelle
@@cristiano_9654 He had a long time friend in Sarah which helped him a lot. His alliance were right until the very end after they picked off the others. Tony had a better Social game in his previous games.
I think Michelle had the better Social game base on her survival despite being on the bottom after the entire merge and the last remaining member of her alliance. Like Tony thought, Michelle won immunity when she needed to.
But like I said, Tony was a well rounded winner.
Well said !
Tony had a better social game than Michele which is shown in his 0 votes against.
Tony had a better physical game than Natalie which is shown in his 4 immunity challenge wins.
Tony played the best game of Survivor we have ever seen, and used every single day and vote to his advantage to help better his game and get him to Day 39, unfortunately, we cannot say the same about Natalie who isolated herself on the Edge, and Michele who was on the bottom for the majority of the game. Hence, Tony was the rightful winner who dominated all aspects of this game.
@@soshbehnia6848 Natalie didn't isolate herself in the Edge. She and others who were voted were sent there when they're voted off for a chance to get back in the game. So I don't know why the heck you would say that as if she chose to be on the Edge. She played the best Physical game as the edge is required great endurance and physical abilities to earn tokens and advantages.
Michelle played a better Social game than Tony in my opinion since as mentioned, she did survived the game to the despite being in the bottom.
Survivors who played a Perfect game were only JT and Cochran. Unfortunately Tony didn't get all the votes but he did play a great game and deserves his win.
Sandra in her first season was the only one who was close to do this on Pearl Islands. She didn't received any votes against and got all the votes in the end except for one.
Perfect Game = Didn't get any votes against and received all votes at the end.
So only JT and Cochran are the only players who played a Perfect Game.
tony was the mastermind, michelle was the underdog n natalie was the underwood. that’s what i liked about the finale, everyone played in 3 separate ways to move toward the top.
unique F3
At last i saw Rob as jury 😊😊
Let him play until he wins, and give him a season that no matter what he end up on jury.
Aquafishsoup yeah he’s overrated
Aquafishsoup he’s played to much haha he’s ok but yeah he won bc he played so many times
@@questionablegames8288 Rupert Ozzy and Cirie also played 4 times and lost. At least I can give Cirie credit for her vote outs being bs
@@questionablegames8288 ??? So many people play so many times and they haven't won anything. Your analogy is wrong.
At least Michelle got acknowledged.
*Tony has great humor*
I understand Natalie's just playing her game but she kinda pissed me off lol no way in hell she should have got back from the game with full of ammunition. Please CBS cancel the freakin EoE it's a flaw in the game
i disagree. a player like rick devens wouldn’t have made it to 4 without EoE. he was entertaining, smart, and a challenge beast in the latter part of his season. EoE might as well be the 2020 version of an immunity idol, which was disliked at first. the game evolves for a reason man.
@@iamjp1 Yea seeing Devens and Tyson come back was cool because they were both great players but the flaw with EoE is that you can get voted out socialize with all the other EoE players and get to know them very well while the players in the actual game have to fight to stay alive the only problem with EoE is that it should end right at the merge
A season like Winners at War needs EoE, we want to feel like our favorites have a chance at returning to the game.
They probably had EOE so they can have the winners for as long as possible
But she won them fair and square. Everyone had every opportunity to get them .
Michelle had good game too !! Rob was right though during voting. Natalie should of challenged Tony in fire
Facts that’s how the other edge person won she should’ve known it was the only way for her to win
If Natalie did fire she might had had a chance against Sarah, very disappointed. It would have been VERY CLOSE though. Tony deserves it. Michelle should have got at least 2-3 votes. She was such an underdog.
Why don't they have a cover for the rain specially the jury. XD
They’re survivors, do you think rain is gonna affect them?
they live in wooden huts and spear fish for food lol are you serious?
The rain would feel good to me
So glad tony w0n again in his first season I was so annoyed at the jury for being so bitter it’s a game and he played it in his 1st season well
Nick looks different without beard
Fr
it's a flaw in the game...(it's a joke by the way, please don't attacc me)
Tony Kim Rob Parvati and Cirie are my top 5 best survivor players
The four Tony, Rob, Parvati, and Cirie are correct but Kim I can maybe see top 10
@@garyleroy91 how? kim literally conquered her season. you can argue the people playing with her were dumb, but i think she'd still be able to do what she did with a different cast, too. it's not like she relied on their stupidity.
I preferred yul's game in cook islands over kim's game in one world but ok
What about Sandra
@@ethan6483 No
michelle played a good game!
And by “good” you mean?
@@itacryanits been years… TIME TO MOVE ON!
@@jenlisane it’s hard to move on after these people will live on the Internet forever not to be rude
My favourite people to ever play are Mike Holloway, Tom west man, tony vlanchez, and robbbbbb they all had such good strategy and u can’t fault them
I love Mike, but he didn’t have good strategy lol
Mike's strategy was terrible, he was just able to win immunities
Michelle did not sell her game very well. There were times where I couldnt believe she hadnt been voted off. Tony picked off so many people, but she flew under the radar, won her challenge, and made it to final.
I think Michele sold her game as best as she possibly could for being left out of a lot of votes. She explained herself very well, and gained the juries respect. However, she was up against someone who dominated the whole game and an EoE player who was able to make bonds on the jury. Poor Michele didn’t stand a chance even though she really deserved 2nd.
Michele is the opposite of Amanda. She has great FTC. This wasn't as great as when she out debated Aubrey but it was still really good.
I dont know why Rob is talking about isolating people he dis the exact sake thing in Redemption island. He made sure he or nobody in his alliance talked to anyone outside of the alliance so what he saying is completely bull
yes that is true but edge of extinction and the actual survivor game are two completely different things. in edge of extinction there aren't tribal council where a person is going to be voted off and there aren't any "alliances" or "blindsides" "idols" etc.. that they have to worry about. it is true that rob isolated people during redemption island but that was part of his game play, for natalie, it was completely unnecessary as during the edge of extinction, they're all just people who were voted off, trying to survive. while her justification of isolating people to make sure that the advantages she had were more private and that she didn't want to share it w the whole world, she took it too far. natalie chose to isolate people while rob making sure that his alliance was isolated was to prevent people trying to blindside or sneak smth past him. i think it is completely fair what rob said and rob isolating people and natalie isolating people are two completely different things from two completely different contexts and places.
Why would you isolate yourself from the jury on purpose? Chris Underwood literally set the blueprint to win Survivor when EOE is in play. Natalie was stupid in not mingling with everyone and saying it's because she didn't want everyone to know about the advantages she was sending in the game is a stretch. Finding the advantage, thinking of who to send it to, and then receiving their tokens afterwards isn't a 24/7 thing. There is PLENTY of time to mingle with everyone.
People have double standards. If rob does it's okay but if another person does it , it's wrong. They must vote for somebody because of the game they played not because they spend days sitting together and chit chatting about back home.
Yeah and the jury on RI HATED Rob. He literally loses in a blowout to everyone but Phillip and Natalie, and loses to Phillip even if he has a good FTC (gawd). Natalie A atleast beats some people on Winners at War.
Ben says, "Winning immunity challenges is a very important part of the game..." ...Both Ben and Tony won individual immunity a total of 0 times each on their winning seasons. But Ben says it's very important and then tells you why by explaining how winning the challenges guarantee you to stay. I'm sorry Ben but damn this question just sucks.
M H are you trying to hate on Ben any way possible lmfao? That question is nothing but facts Immunity Challenges is the only way other than a idol/advantage which are rare that guarantees for you to stay.
yeah he was just trying to gas up Tony. People wanna get mad that Jeremy was "bitter" and "trying to help Natalie" but no one talks about this even more obvious gaslighting.
It is very impt but its not the only way you win in survivor got it???
He just wanted to make Tony look better because Nat ate up the question Wendell asked. Essentially he tried to downplay Natalie's awesome Edge game.
There's no doubt that late immunity challenges are crucial.
Tony is the best Survivor Player
Tony is a survivor god
No Sandra best
Its getting very personal.
Natalie in the final is the biggest flaw in the game. How could someone who voted out first, can win survivor? The only chance is she is carrying dead wood in the end, but Tony is not a dead wood.
Michelle is smart but she cannot beat Tony. Michelle should bring somebody else that was her age to beat. Natalie, Nick, or Wendell is much better option.
Allying or going with favorite players or strong players like Tony won't work. That is her biggest flaw in the game.
Tony won because he is outlasting all the best and better previous winners; Jeremy, Denise, Kim, Sarah.
Jeremy is the most sour player I've ever seen sitting down there staring at tony all the way
Good communication
The only act that Natalie did was in San Juan del sur
Its unfair of rob to aspect natalie put her self on the block against tony after she won the challenge. rob or any player wouldn't put themselves on the block to do fire challenge.
I understand why you say that but every Survivor has to earn their win! Chris Underwood won from Edge of Extinction and gave up immunity to compete in fire making, making a stronger case for the jury!
In Natalie’s situation, it was totally fair for him to expect that from her. She was the first boot therefore had much more to prove.
Rob was bitter that he didn't have all the advantages Natalie had. I highly doubt if Rob did everything Natalie did , he would challenge Tony to a fire challenge.
If you think that it would take Boston Rob 8 minutes to burn rope you are mistaken. He thought his daughter to do it in less
Not a Rob fan but I think he would fair against Tony. He showed he can start fires in island of the idols
Bruh hes voting for the player that played for the best game yeah Natalie played a good game but she was in the game for a total of 6 days do you think that's someone that deserves to win the game? Over someone that absolutely dominated the entire season.
I am not saying that Tony did not deserve to win. I am saying that I don’t think that he would of challenged Tony to fire if he was in Natalie’s place.
Making fires when 2 million dollars is not on the line is completely different.
Natalie Played Her Way Back In
Michelle Had Not A Great Game
I would argue Natalie had an even worse game lol