Greatest Survivor Players Of All Time?

List your best players ever.

1. Boston Rob Mariano

- Literal no brainer. Would have been 3 time winner if it weren’t for bitter jury who gave it to his future wife in All Stars, and Tyson not been an idiot

2. Russell Hantz

- Just got finished watching HvV and completely controlled the game. I’m ready to go to battle on this one as well

3. Sandra Diaz-Twine

- two time winner and her best season of was the time she didn’t win

4. Parvati Shallow

- Unique strategy that only she can play. She played 3 seasons and played 3 completely different games

5. Tony Vlachos

- A nicer version of Russell and that’s why he probably won

6. Yul Kwon

- most underrated and under appreciated Survivor ever. Dominated the game start to finish.

7. Richard Hatch

- The OG. Basically the founder of the game. Before him they focused so much on the survival aspect and he turned it into the game we know and love.

8. Cirie Fields

- Should have won Micronesia had production not decided to go to a final 2 out of no where.

9. Ozzy Lusth

- My favorite survivor ever so this may be a little high

10. John Cochran

- Nerdiest dude ever but played a flawless game

11. Rob Cesternino

- I really don’t know how he never won.

12. Tyson Apostol

- would be higher had he not been a bonehead on HvV.

I really just want to debate Russell vs Parvati.

Russell was absolutely the most fun to watch, and maybe the best known. He was the first to really make searching for Idols a big part of the game. And, aside from Richard Hatch, he's the one guy people know, even if you aren't a survivor fan. I'll always like him for blindsiding Rupert (the most annoying and overrated Survivor ever)in Hero's vs Villains. He's the guy that really made me stick with Survivor and become a bigger fan. Still, his brutal social game kept him from winning (or maybe it's better to say bitter jury members), and I have a hard time placing him in the top 2, especially ahead of Sandra and Parvarti.

Solid list. I need to go back and re watch some of these seasons.

Russell was absolutely the most fun to watch, and maybe the best known. He was the first to really make searching for Idols a big part of the game. And, aside from Richard Hatch, he's the one guy people know, even if you aren't a survivor fan. I'll always like him for blindsiding Rupert (the most annoying and overrated Survivor ever)in Hero's vs Villains. He's the guy that really made me stick with Survivor and become a bigger fan. Still, his brutal social game kept him from winning (or maybe it's better to say bitter jury members), and I have a hard time placing him in the top 2, especially ahead of Sandra and Parvarti.

 

Solid list. I need to go back and re watch some of these seasons.

I just watched Cook Islands, Micronesia, and Heroes vs Villains in the past 2 weeks. I have a really difficult time believing Parvati should be ahead of Russell. In Micronesia they went to a final 2 instead of 3 because 2 people left with injuries and 1 quit. They had to fill up day 38. If that doesn’t happen, Cirie wins Micronesia. Then I still can’t get over how bitter that jury was in HvV. It’s really sad to be honest. Russell controlled the entire game and the only reason Parvati made it that far in the game was because of Russell. He saved her and their alliance 2 times with idols and got Danielle, Parvati’s biggest ally, voted off which made Parvati forced to stick with Russell. Jury management is so overrated and it has hands down cost some of the greatest players ever from winning the game. It would be like Tom Brady not winning the Super Bowl because the teams he beat in the playoffs still being butt hurt about losing.

The social game and bitter jury are part of the game. You've got to get rid of people, but you have to do it in a way that they will still be willing to reward you for it. There's a reason why Russell was the first booted the 3rd time he played.

I just watched Cook Islands, Micronesia, and Heroes vs Villains in the past 2 weeks. I have a really difficult time believing Parvati should be ahead of Russell. In Micronesia they went to a final 2 instead of 3 because 2 people left with injuries and 1 quit. They had to fill up day 38. If that doesn’t happen, Cirie wins Micronesia. Then I still can’t get over how bitter that jury was in HvV. It’s really sad to be honest. Russell controlled the entire game and the only reason Parvati made it that far in the game was because of Russell. He saved her and their alliance 2 times with idols and got Danielle, Parvati’s biggest ally, voted off which made Parvati forced to stick with Russell. Jury management is so overrated and it has hands down cost some of the greatest players ever from winning the game. It would be like Tom Brady not winning the Super Bowl because the teams he beat in the playoffs still being butt hurt about losing.

Those teams don't vote on the winner. Part of your strategy has to be who's on the jury. It's an integral part of the game and part of the reason I like Survivor so much.

For your analogy to be valid there would be no jury, just a series of challenges until there is a last person standing. That's not the game as it was devised, the social aspect and the ability to make people who have just lost a chance at a million dollars reward you with the money.

I just watched Cook Islands, Micronesia, and Heroes vs Villains in the past 2 weeks. I have a really difficult time believing Parvati should be ahead of Russell. In Micronesia they went to a final 2 instead of 3 because 2 people left with injuries and 1 quit. They had to fill up day 38. If that doesn’t happen, Cirie wins Micronesia. Then I still can’t get over how bitter that jury was in HvV. It’s really sad to be honest. Russell controlled the entire game and the only reason Parvati made it that far in the game was because of Russell. He saved her and their alliance 2 times with idols and got Danielle, Parvati’s biggest ally, voted off which made Parvati forced to stick with Russell. Jury management is so overrated and it has hands down cost some of the greatest players ever from winning the game. It would be like Tom Brady not winning the Super Bowl because the teams he beat in the playoffs still being butt hurt about losing.

@formerkywrestler

Jury management is so overrated and it has hands down cost some of the greatest players ever from winning the game.

I completely disagree with this statement. I couldn't tell you when it started, but at some point jury management became everything. Hardly anyone has trouble surviving the elements anymore. Just because you can get to the Final 3 doesn't mean squat. Jury Management is everything and what makes the game so beautiful.

You can't be considered the best if you've never won.

Those teams don't vote on the winner. Part of your strategy has to be who's on the jury. It's an integral part of the game and part of the reason I like Survivor so much.

 

For your analogy to be valid there would be no jury, just a series of challenges until there is a last person standing. That's not the game as it was devised, the social aspect and the ability to make people who have just lost a chance at a million dollars reward you with the money.

Nailed it! It's why I love the game so much as well.

Manipulating people to get you to the end is one thing. Manipulating people to get you to the end while at the same time manipulating the jury, a whole different ball game.

That's why Sandra & Boston Rob are head and shoulders over Russell Hantz in my eyes. He did change the game the way that he found idols and embraced the villian role. But changing the game and being the best at it, two different things. I'll give you most memorable though.

People often forget that when Russell played in HvV the rest of the cast hadn’t seen him play as his initial season hadn’t aired before they started. It’s only conjecture but I seriously doubt he would have made it as far the second time had they seen his season before heading out. I clearly remember the 3rd time he played there was some discussion among his tribe mates about keeping him because he would have helped in challanges. They decided that his other traits warranted getting rid of him. In fact as I recall didn’t they throw the challenge to get rid of him? I would suspect that if he ever played again he would be gone early. Russell may be the greatest villain ever, he may be one of the best challenge player ever but because of his inept social game he is not the GOAT.

but because of his inept social game he is not the GOAT.

You can't completely suck in one of, if not the main, facet of the game and be considered the greatest.

If the teams Tom Brady beat were on the jury, he would be a unanimous winner. He plays the game the right way.

Those teams don't vote on the winner. Part of your strategy has to be who's on the jury. It's an integral part of the game and part of the reason I like Survivor so much.

 

For your analogy to be valid there would be no jury, just a series of challenges until there is a last person standing. That's not the game as it was devised, the social aspect and the ability to make people who have just lost a chance at a million dollars reward you with the money.

The name of the game is Outwit, outplay, outlast. In no part of that does it imply that it’s a popularity contest.

I completely disagree with this statement. I couldn't tell you when it started, but at some point jury management became everything. Hardly anyone has trouble surviving the elements anymore. Just because you can get to the Final 3 doesn't mean squat. Jury Management is everything and what makes the game so beautiful.

 

You can't be considered the best if you've never won.

IMO The jury was just butthurt about Russell outplaying them.