Board Thread:Season 27 - Alsace-Lorraine/@comment-26346571-20150728005450/@comment-6884918-20150728110148

Hi Jimmy!

I think that every game of Survivor (ORG) is different, and because of that every game should be looked at differently. That's why I will give you a few criteria of why someone would win, and how i think about it. Finally my own thoughts.

I'll start with saying that I don't believe anyone can sit at the FInal 3 and not deserve the win. You don't get to the final 3 without doing at least SOMETHING right.

Firstly, there's the thought that you should vote for the person you like the most. While not a bad criteria, I personally don't fully agree with this. We are after all playing an online version of Survivor, not the real thing. There's no real prize involved, except for the glory of the win. We can all act like grown-ups, so losing an online game over nothing shouldn't destroy friendships. Again, voting like this is absolutely not forbidden or something, but I think that in the end you'd only fool yourself. Of course voting for someone you just really don't like is a big no-no.

Secondly, there are people that vote for the person who "played the beste game". Of course this is a very broad statement and doesn't tell you anything, so I'll try and give my own interpretation. In my mind, someone who plays a good game was at least decent in all 3 'main categories': social skills, strategic capability and physical effort. I think this is a very valid criteria to judge your vote on. Even if the person only really shone in one of the aspects, it still means they did something very well.

Thirdly, you could vote for the person that had the least chance of winning. Underdog stories are always fun, and seeing an underdog come for far and taking the win is amazing to watch. Personally, I'm on the fence with this vote, because yes, I love an underdog story, but I also think that the vision of an underdog could quickly turn into a goat/dead fish. That's for the juror todecide imo.

As for myself, I think that I would vote for the person that could show me that they really understood the game they were playing. Someone that was on top of everything. Now I didn't play a perfect game and I'll be the first to admit that. But what I did do was always being on top of the game, and having a great adaptability. When Yannick was voted off I immediately started planning something new, and when that blew up in my face, I knew I had to stay low to survive. I played a great social game, held contacts with everyone on the jury. I was a great physical competitor, winning 2 of the most difficult immunities. So, I do believe you should vote for me, but as always I respect your decision. :)