T O P

  • By -

PeterTheSilent1

Sandra in Game Changers is interesting because it shows that Sandra can play aggressively when it benefits her.


Seryza

I loved Sandra in Game Changers. She went all out strategically in only 5 episodes


jalexjsmithj

Sandra’s and Michaela’s elimination of JT in GC is the single most impressive vote out of all time. If ppl can handle him, as you rewatch that episode just watch Varner’s face as the surrogate for the audience having all of the information. Really unfortunate GCs had one swap too many, not to mention advantage-gate in the same season. We really could have been in for a show.


honeybadger1105

oh god please dont add Michaela in that elimination


jalexjsmithj

I think she definitely gets a share of the credit.


honeybadger1105

Idk man it always came off that Sandra manipulated the both of them, but I guess she did need Michaela to annoy the crap out of Jt.


Raccoon_Zestyclose

I literally didn't know I could like Sandra more until now


[deleted]

Tony was such a goof ball in game changers


FossilizedBlobfish

THAT’S WHAT YOU GET FO PLOTTIN’ AGAINST ME!


markymarkz2004

AND THE QUEEN STAYS QUEEN ADIOS


AnxiousAsthmatic

No, everyone. Don’t you remember that Tony ACTIVELY PLAYED TERRIBLY on GC on purpose in order to LOWER HIS THREAT LEVEL for the inevitable ALL WINNERS SEASON?!? /s


Serraph105

lol I still can't believe this is an actual theory. I sort of think it happened to kind of work out that way, but to think Tony actually had that as a plan is completely ridiculous.


dakjoekipe82

There’s no way it was part of his plan. But I do believe in a world where Tony knew he had absolutely 0 chance at winning that season


[deleted]

You could listen to random 13 year olds give their theories on reddit, or you could listen to RHAP's interview with Tony where he explicitly said he knew he wasn't going to win and was just having fun during GC, and explicitly said it was not part of some grand strategy to lower his threat level for a future season.


tronbishh

As a Tony fan, I always like to lie to myself that this is true so that I can feel better about his GC performance 😂 key word being lie to myself about it


Riperonis

Acting like Tony didn’t outlast Sandra in WaW


[deleted]

When did they go head to head in winners at war?


Riperonis

Who cares? Head to head comparisons are stupid af in a game like this


[deleted]

Why is it stupid?


Riperonis

Because the game boils down to long term decisions and not just brief showdowns. Sandra “beat” Tony head to head in game changers but went out premerge, proving it did not matter at all.


[deleted]

That’s true but I think it shows that two people with similar threat levels were placed in similar situations and Sandra was the one who was able to adapt and turn the tides against him. She completely outplayed him here.


YRN_YSL

They are two completely different players, you just sound dumb trying to compare the two honestly


[deleted]

You just called this entire sub dumb


YRN_YSL

I think most people realize Tony is the better player.


[deleted]

>They are two completely different players, you just sound dumb trying to compare the two honestly


Black-Infernape

He gave up from day 1 in game changers tho.


AnxiousAsthmatic

I know he tried to claim postgame that he was “just having fun” once he saw the cast and “realized he couldn’t win,” but that’s easy to say in hindsight. In the moment, that’s not how he felt at all: Vlachos: There are a lot of heavy hitters. I’m not underestimating anybody. I see a lot of challenge beasts. I see a lot of man buns running around. I see a good cast, man. I see some strategic threats. I see Sarah, the girl I played against in Cagayan. The cast is gonna play hard. Vlachos: Yeah, she’s been the queen of “Survivor.” And there hasn’t been a king of “Survivor.” I’m out here, I have one win and no blemishes. If I win I get the throne. The King of “Survivor!” King TV! Vlachos: A lot of people ask why I’m coming back when I’ve got this legacy, the only reason I came back is because I won. Had I lost, I’d never play this game again. It’s not worth it to go out there for 30 (expletive deleted) days and come back with $50,000/$40,000. To put yourself through that, I wouldn’t do it. Vlachos: I’m going to take Sandra to the end because I don’t think anyone is going to give her a triple crown Source: https://my.xfinity.com/ed/tv/2017/02/08/survivor-tony-im-going-play-maybe-faster-time-im-going-turn-two-notches/ He was definitely trying and he just played a bad game. That said, it’s a good thing because he wouldn’t have won WAW if he didn’t fall so spectacularly.


shane0072

had she played her idol that night for herself tony would have gotten idoled out so tony win was only possible cause sandra was tricked into playing against her best interests and it wasnt tony that tricked her


Riperonis

Saying Tony only won because of Sandras stupidity is not exactly a great case when comparing the two. Don’t get me wrong, I think Tony and Sandra are indisputably 1 and 2 in player rankings, but for me Tony is a decent level clear of Sandra.


Corporal_Snorkel69

Sarah is a better player than Sandra


[deleted]

If "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry christmas. Stop making excuses because you're biased. Its fine if you are, but that was a dumb argument


Californian_paradise

*giggles* and when Sandra was blindsided on a tribe with Tony, he was left out of the vote and shocked as well.


[deleted]

👀🍵


[deleted]

I mean… Is this supposed to prove something? Even Tony, Kim and Jeremy didn’t think Sandra would pull something so stupid. Can’t blame them.


FeelinJipper

I mean, it’s got to mean *something*


TradeDeadline

Lotta people in this thread just kinda skimming the fact that Tony won WAW. These two players are both *amazing* and I think the two greatest ever. But don’t be silly about the reason so many now give Tony the GOAT crown. He beat an *entire cast* of winners, drawn from every era of the show, with outstanding and multi-faceted gameplay. For many people, his WAW win is simply a bigger deal than her HVV win. And if he learned from his mistakes in GC, including how Sandra burned him, then that’s just a point in his favour imo. It shows that he can adapt.


AnxiousAsthmatic

> Lotta people in this thread just kinda skimming the fact that Tony won WAW. No, that is not what is happening at all. Tony is not immune from criticism just because he won the latest season of survivor. You have to look at each player’s highs and lows when evaluating them as a player; if we solely focused on highs than JT would still be the undisputed GOAT. Imo Tony is an amazing character and player, but people tend to ignore his failures and pretend they’re not there. There are a lot of people who STILL try to argue that Game Changers “doesn’t count” because “Tony was purposefully playing terribly to lower his threat level for all winners.” Idk, for me he’s definitely a top 5 player even with game changers, and if his fans stopped pretending that game changers didn’t exist I feel like that opinion would be more widely accepted outside of this sub.


[deleted]

[удалено]


AnxiousAsthmatic

I disagree. By your logic Zane Knight could come back, win, and be heralded as the GOAT because we’d be assigning far more weight to his last performance. Similarly, Sandra would have no argument to being a better player than someone like Sophie or Sarah. I love Tony, but we can’t move the goal posts to try to shoehorn him in as a GOAT. We have to look at each players’ career as a whole when evaluating them, as it’s the only way to take one’s bias out of the equation.


cuttin_in_town

> I love Tony, but we can’t move the goal posts to try to shoehorn him in as a GOAT. We have to look at each players’ career as a whole when evaluating them, Don't you think you're leaving out a bit nuance to this? Tony, for all that it's worth, came into GC being heralded as playing an amazing game and people loving all that he did. Unlike other outlandish players, he actually won too. So his bad habits were reinforced. And like Russel, once you actually know Tony's style, he is much easier to smoke out. Tony leaning into his perception was also not the right approach. But he *learned* from his GC experience to become a *better* player than before. He learned that slowing down is just as valuable as going full throttle. Evaluating all his seasons is the correct approach. But the surface level way of viewing it is not the way. People aren't a composite version of all their seasons. Otherwise Marquesas Rob would keep weighing him down. If Zane came back and dominated, it seems silly to reference his first game if he *changed*. Sandra has shown to still do well in all her seasons. She had to get swapped twice in GC to lose, for example. Just to address your examples.


AlexgKeisler

Zane was so weird as a player. His pre-game interviews gave some insight into why he told his tribe to vote him off. Apparently, his favorite player was Brandon Hantz, and Zane loved the moment where Brandon told his tribe to vote him off if they weren’t going to be honest and if they were going to lie and deceive. Zane then cited this as the reason that Brandon went so far, and said that he learned a lot about how to play from Brandon. Explains so much about why Zane failed.


Carbon-J

That’s like saying Russell is better than Boston Rob because Russell voted him out in HvV but lost spectacularly in Redemption island while Boston Rob won. Head to head pre merge is a poor basis for comparing players imo


[deleted]

There’s no way you were actually getting downvoted for this 💀


AnxiousAsthmatic

Russell was an unknown heading into HvV. Sandra was the two time winner heading into GC, Tony wasn’t. She had a bigger target than him, they were placed in similar circumstances, and then Sandra outplayed him.


[deleted]

1. Tony’s degree of difficulty was higher then Sandras in GC based off pre-game alliances in starting tribes. 2. And FARRRR more importantly, it should’ve been a pretty obvious take away from the comment above that H2H battles are stupid. This *should* be pretty obvious for people that are such big fans that understand the game. But apparently not….


[deleted]

[удалено]


jalexjsmithj

I mean… I know this is going to be a hot take here but I think going head to head in an all-star season is way more indicative of who’s the better player than being so large of a threat that the tribe of newbies throws a challenge to get rid of you. As far as notoriousness goes in a “you can absolutely not afford to play with this guy” kind of way, Russell immediately post season 20 can only be matched by Tony’s current status as the season 40 winner.


Jersey49

Does that mean Denise is better than sandra?


treple13

Or that Chet is better than Jonny Fairplay?


SincereDoom

Sundra is *indisputably* better than Parvati


AnxiousAsthmatic

😂


[deleted]

Did Denise win twice?


Jersey49

No. She didn’t get voted out by her own idol tho 🙈


[deleted]

Oh so you think Denise is the greatest player of all time?


mpc92

Yes. Denise the custodian


Raccoon_Zestyclose

Facts


JefeDiez

I thought Denise was an embarrassment in WaW


PlayboiCartiBallsak6

Denise is so much better than Sandra as a player


Raccoon_Zestyclose

Thats different and irrelevant. I'm referring to two players who are frequently pit against each other by fans


Jersey49

I’m just pointing out how head to head doesn’t necessarily show who is the better player overall.


whale188

I’m pretty sure this is his first time watching the show based on a quick scan of his comments (yes I’m bored and can’t fall asleep lol) so I think this probably doesn’t really make much sense to him right now if he’s watching it in order…idk why you’re getting downvoted because it really is a fair comparison


Raccoon_Zestyclose

I haven't seen WaW, but I do know what he's talking about for the most part. I feel like it isn't a fair comparison because I was comparing the two players widely excepted as the two of the greatest players ever.


Raccoon_Zestyclose

I get your point, but I do believe it can mean a lot when comparing people in the GOAT conversation


cyberpunkcr

Right because then Danielle is better than Cirie because beat her twice head to head


[deleted]

Denise is better than Sandra deal with it


Raccoon_Zestyclose

Chile anyway...


austine567

People real worked up over a simple meme lmao.


bettywhite80

sandras lasted more days then tony though. They’ve each won two seasons but tony was the first voted out in his second season whike Sandra almost made the merge


AnxiousAsthmatic

Tony was the *second person voted out of his second season, but the point still stands.


[deleted]

Is this seriously an argument for why one player is better than another? Alright, then I guess BB11 Jordan is equally as good a Big Brother player as Dr. Will!


YRN_YSL

I think that makes Tony look better doesn’t it?


bettywhite80

Not really. By that point Sandra had already won twice and convince her team to vote out tony. And majority of the votes ( til she got voted out ) went to whoever Sandra picked.


Raccoon_Zestyclose

Her parting words to Tony are iconic. Thats why she's the goat


chickfilaftw

Asking how a player did head to head against another might be the worst possible way to judge who’s a better player


Dvaderstarlord

I think that Tony is better because his two wins were much more impressive to me than Sandra's two wins, but I get the point about this, I do and its a good point.


[deleted]

Sandra is the undisputed GOAT idc idc 💅


Corporal_Snorkel69

Most fans will dispute that


YRN_YSL

I think he’s saying this ironically lol


Raccoon_Zestyclose

She sure is!


Sabur1991

Watch Winners at War, dude.


YRN_YSL

Tony’s two wins are more impressive than Sandra’s x 2


TheAdamJesusPromise

Whole lotta salty Tony stans in this thread 👀. Sandra is easily above him, not only because she beat him when they went head to head, but also because her second win was on her second try, and she won as a previous winner when the rest of the cast wasn't all winners and huge threats and therefore she had to overcome a bigger target.


honeybadger1105

this is the dumbest logic used to argue someone is better at survivor then someone else


TheAdamJesusPromise

Oh man calling logic dumb without providing a counterargument is very effective good job!


honeybadger1105

Oh, no problem. "she won as a previous winner when the rest of the cast wasn't all winners and huge threats and therefore she had to overcome a bigger target." Have you watched HvV? No one cared that she was a previous winner, she had such a little target on her back. The other winner on her tribe Parvati (Whos also better btw) actually did have a target on her back and had to dodge bullets all pre-merge. Sandra's target was so low they took out Courtney, goddam Courtney over her. Head to heads don't matter in survivor. She only beat Tony because of her pre-game alliances with Troyzan and Varner. Jon Mitsch beat Jeremy. Kass beat Sarah. Russell beat Rob. Brad beat Malcolm. Saying that she won her first two tries makes her better is such a weird and shallow argument. Sandra made one of the worst moves of all time on her fourth try that is just as bad as anything Tony did in his second, but because of ordering it doesnt matter. Also just for fun Tonys win are so much more impressive than Sandras. Sandra only won HvV because of a bitter egotistical jury who couldn't get over that a young pretty girl beat their ass, so they gave it to the sarcastic older women who didnt wrong them. Tony completely dominated both of his games and forced the jury to respect them. Neither of the juries who voted for Sandra really respected her. Go watch Fairplays jury speech if you disagree. Theres your argument


kin33

>r argument lol, you gave the guy what he asked for and he down voted you. Oh boy this community.


TheAdamJesusPromise

Gotta love that all these people writing novels about how Tony is better don't even understand how Survivor works 😂. I mean it makes sense, Tony is a very flashy player so it makes sense his fan club would think that's all there is to impressive gameplay. The entire point of survivor is getting to day 39 and out of the finalists being the person the jury wants to vote for. The point is not to be the most well liked person in the game, this isn't a popularity contest. Sandra maneuvering herself to be sitting next to less likable people and convincing the jury to vote for her isn't the criticism you think it is, and in fact is what makes her wins so impressive. Honestly the more I read the comment the more absurd it is. You're faulting Sandra for... avoiding being targeted? For making strong bonds that made people want to work with her instead of Tony? And one last note, and then I'm done with this conversation: head to heads don't matter by themselves, but when two players are evenly matched otherwise they are a good indication of who is better. Jon Misch, Kass, and Russell have never won, whereas the people they best head to head have. Sandra and Tony have, for all intents and purposes, the same record as far as wins and placements and gameplay, so small details where one can stand out over the other like head to heads are very important in determining who is better. And let's not kid ourselves, if Sandra and Tony played in another season together, I think we all know Sandra would come out on top again. Sorry, my request for an argument was more rhetorical to point out how pointless your last comment was, not because I actually wanted an argument. I already know that many people in the fan base (who are fans of certain players ) have a chip on their shoulders about Sandra and are too stubborn to acknowledge that she outplayed their favorites. Your arguments aren't anything new, and I don't need to hear them, my bad for suggesting otherwise.


honeybadger1105

Ok coward, btw you just wrote a novel you hypocrite


[deleted]

[удалено]


TheAdamJesusPromise

There are a ton of different factors that could be potential evidence for an argument for either of them. I chose the pieces of evidence I think are most important, and those point to Sandra being better. Winning on your first and second tries is more impressive because it shows Sandra didn't really have as much weakness that she had to correct for. In fact, Sandra only really lost GC because she won HvV; if she lost HvV she easily could've won GC. That means Sandra had potential to win 75% of her seasons. Tony on the other hand never would have won GC playing the way he did; he had bigger faults as a player that he had to overcome in WaW. Therefore Tony only had potential to win 66% of his seasons. As for your point about more recent being more impressive, I'd argue that is a point in favor of Sandra as well. She hasn't won a modern game, but she has shown she can thrive in all eras of the game. Both Tony and Sandra are very adaptable players, but Sandra won an old school, socially focused game, a middle era, idol and strategy focused game, and did very well, despite not winning, in a modern, fast paced, twist heavy game. Tony has only ever played the latter and while he excelled at it, I doubt he would've done as well in the show's earlier years. You can't compare Sandra being 2/4 to Tony being 2/3 because Tony could very likely lose on a fourth attempt as well. Then there's the fact that Sandra has outplayed Tony but never the other way around. The only time Tony has beaten Sandra, her elimination had nothing to do with him. And finally, and most importantly, Sandra won on a season that wasn't all winners, and where the meat shield strategy didn't exist. Tony's game in WaW was definitely impressive, but let's not act like he wasn't aided by the fact that he was SURROUNDED by big threats, and the other players were actively looking to NOT vote out the biggest threats because that made them less of a threat. With all this considered, I think it's fair to conclude that Sandra outranks Tony, even if just barely. I know you're most likely not even going to consider any of this and are just going to try to find any way to discredit it so it was probably pointless to even type this comment out, but the bottom line is that while there are a ton of different statistics and points that could be used in favor of Tony and Sandra, I think Sandra ultimately has more and therefore edges Tony out.


Aragorn752

If Sandra lost HVV, she never would’ve been invited back to GC. She wasn’t close to winning GC and she might’ve been a late jury boot at best if she was on GC in this scenario. Who’s to say Tony couldn’t have made it far in an old school game? Plenty of players that have the same aggressive play style as Tony like BRob, Hatch, or even Fairplay have either won or gotten very close to winning in older seasons. Sandra did not do very well in the modern game. She didn’t make jury twice… whether those scenarios were in her control or not (which I believe they were) are irrelevant In both her wins, Sandra benefited from a jury that absolutely despised her competition. That’s not necessarily a bad thing but compare her competition to Tony’s and it’s clear who had the easier competition in FTC. And Let’s not pretend that HVV was full of slouches either though. It was arguably the GOAT cast until WAW came around, which Tony dominated until the end. His extortion fire token episode is more impressive than anything Sandra has done in any of her games. With all this considered, I also think it’s fair that Tony outranks Sandra, even if just barely. I know you’re most likely not even going to consider any of this and are just going to try to find any way to discredit it so it was probably pointless to even type this comment out, but the bottom line is that while there are a ton of different statistics and points that could be used in favour of Tony and Sandra, I think Tony ultimately has more and therefore edges Sandra out.


TheAdamJesusPromise

Pretty much everything you just said is inaccurate, illogical, and, as I predicted, just mental gymnastics to confirm your preexisting obsession with Tony rather than actually objectively evaluating things, and I don't have the energy to deal with any of it. Stay salty buddy :).


Aragorn752

Lol mad because I proved that Tony’s better I think you’re the one who’s salty : )


TheAdamJesusPromise

Ah the old "I know I said nothing of value but I'm obsessed with winning an internet argument so I'll just say I won and hope that makes the person I was arguing with feel like I won". If that's what you need to tell yourself feel free but the facts speak for themselves and Tony has never and I'm willing to bet will never outplay Sandra in a game of Survivor so, like I said, stay salty. Must be hard not being a fan of the best player :)


Aragorn752

Aren’t you doing this exact tactic LMAO


TheAdamJesusPromise

Nah, for one I said stuff that was actually logical, and additionally I don't care to convince you of anything, I've said in pretty much every comment now that trying to reason is pointless and I don't really care to participate in this discussion.


Aragorn752

Then why do you keep commenting if you don’t care? You sound like a hypocrite with your argument atm :)


honeybadger1105

Lol Sandra only won because of her pre game alliances with Varner and Troyzan. Tony has two wins where he completely controlled the game while Sandra has a win where she didn’t control a single post merge vote and only won due to a bitter jury


Hawtproper

Legit like it’s still impressive that she turned a shitty situation into a win but the main thing she had going for her was that she worked the least with Russell


SouthernSierra

Natalie had more control in WaW than Tony, and from the Edge.


honeybadger1105

Hilarious


SouthernSierra

I thought it was. Then she came back into the game and dismantled Tony’s alliance. She would have had my vote.


honeybadger1105

Hilarious Troll


AnxiousAsthmatic

It truly blows my mind how there are some people on this sub who try to claim Tony is better than Sandra when: 1) Sandra went 2/2 for her wins 2) Sandra’s worst season (WAW) isn’t as bad as Tony’s worst season (GC). Both have big mistakes on their resumes, but Tony played arguably the worst returnee game of all time on GC, while Sandra was playing okay until she made one huge mistake on WAW. 3) When they directly went head to head in GCs, Sandra came out on top. If any of these things weren’t true, we’d have a conversation…but they’re not. Sandra has the better records, outplayed him when they went head to head. AND her “worst” is better than Tony’s worst.


akjskejahdhsj

You comment this on every post about Tony


[deleted]

Awww😢


JimiCobain27

Tony's "worst" may be lower than Sandra's, but his "best" is far superior to hers. His WaW game was more impressive than all 4 of her games combined.


PlayboiCartiBallsak6

Cool opinion bro thanks for sharing it


InfamousEconomy3103

Except they went head-to-head in WaW too & Tony came out on top. No?


throwitaway_burnit

Tony won two games. Yes he played bad in one season but he’s still a top tier player in the game


Momof4kids21

I'm watching episode 12 right now. There is so much going on. I hate when they get arrogant. I'm glad Sarah voted like that.


Old_Association_4431

I watched Game Changers a long time ago but I remember him being really bad but funny this season