Board Thread:News and Announcements/@comment-25550958-20171031012315/@comment-34892810-20180305050253

IAmNothing712 wrote: HinderJinder wrote: Q. Can you be considered the greatest player ever if you don’t win? Hmmm. It’s a tough question for me. On one hand, it’s a no-brainer, absolutely not. Survivor is a social game and to win you have to vote people out in a way that compels them to return and vote for you to win the game. It’s extremely complicated and Russell did not achieve it, therefore he cannot be considered the greatest player to ever play. On the other hand, I can’t think of anybody who has ever played a game like Russell played. It was so dominating that I am still shaking my head that he didn’t win. The only guy I could even see having the talent and guts to do something equally dominating would be Boston Rob. So I am on the fence on this one. But this much I am certain of – Russell is without any question ONE of the greats. No doubt about it. -Jeff Probst-

Russell is definitely one of the greats as Survivor Host Jeff Probst says, now sit down kids and learn from the master Russell Hantz The game is not about who had the highest casualty count. The jury votes for the person they feel comfortable losing. Unfortunately for Russell, he ignored the human side of the game. Heck, he even admitted he barely talked to half of the Galus, how's that playing the game? smh It was honestly a salty jury who he outplayed/ was better than. 3x they were salty because they couldn't stand the fact someone better than them would win. Other than that I agree with you.