There will eternally be a debate about whether it’s good to make it to the end without receiving any vote or if that signifies a lazy game. Well, the truth is—just like with everything in Survivor—it depends on the season and the circumstances.
Because these nine players actually got to the end with no votes and managed to secure enough jury votes to be named Sole Survivor. But if you mention a few of these winners to Survivor fans, they might talk your ear off about whether or not they deserved to win.
But what do you think? Did zero votes in-game lead to a proper win for these players? We share our thoughts below.
Tina Wesson - Survivor: The Australian Outback
During The Australian Outback, Tina was known for her friendly, motherly demeanor and made some solid relationships with her social game. She also had a hand on the lead strategy for most of the season. And at the end, when she was sitting next to Colby Donaldson—who brought her based on a Final Two pact they had made—the jury felt Tina had played the better overall game, part of which included getting Colby (the physical threat of the season) to take her to the end despite the fact that she was the most likely player to win and he might have had a better chance up against the lesser liked third place finisher, Keith Famie.
Ethan Zohn - Survivor: Africa
Kind of the opposite of the Colby situation, Ethan made it to the end as a dominant challenge player who played “honorably” throughout the season, but he’d also made great relationships along the way. In the end, when he was up against Kim Johnson, an underdog, his social and strategic game were what helped the jury to vote for him in a 5-2 finale vote.
Brian Heidik - Survivor: Thailand
Also learning from Colby’s mistake, Brian played a great strategic game, masterminding the majority alliance throughout most of the season. And when it came to the Final Two, he chose to take Clay Jordan, a player that was widely disliked by his tribe mates at nearly every point of the season. In addition to having the right relationships, Brian beat Clay due to a great Final Tribal Council performance which only highlighted the reasons people disliked Clay.
Sandra Diaz-Twine - Survivor: Pearl Islands
While Sandra utilized a strong key strategy of “anyone but me” which helped to pad her resume as a good social manipulator, she ultimately won in a 6-1 vote because runner-up Lillian Morris was heavily penalized by the jury for being voted out and then winning back a place during the “Outcasts” twist. The jury felt she hadn’t actually played the game on top of being untrustworthy and taking a less threatening player to the end with her rather than Jonny Fairplay. So in the end, it seems the jury felt prepared to vote for “anyone but” Lillian.
Tom Westman - Survivor: Palau
Oddly enough, the third place finisher of Survivor: Palau, Ian Rosenberger, is a huge part of why Tom won this season. Though I believe Tom played the best overall game and would have won either way, when Ian decided to step down from the longest final immunity challenge in Survivor history, he made Tom promise to take Katie Gallagher to the end. Tom honored Ian’s request and sat next to Katie at Final Tribal Council where the jury harshly judged her for not earning her spot there. In addition to an overall better jury, challenge, strategic, and social performance by Tom, it was no surprise when he won 6-1.
J.T. Thomas - Survivor: Tocantins
J.T. was actually the first person in Survivor history to not get any votes against him during his season and then go on and get all of the jury votes at Final Tribal Council. He beat Stephen Fishbach 7-0 and though the jury praised Stephen for his strategy, they could not deny the charm J.T. exuded throughout the season, playing a flawless social game in the eyes of the jury and being the overall “hero” of the season.
Nick Wilson - Survivor: David vs. Goliath
The only “David” to make it to the end, Nick’s ability to make deep one-on-one relationships with everyone in his season helped score him the win in a 7-3-0 vote next to Mike White and Angelina Keeley. While both the runners-up displayed great strategic thinking throughout the game, the jury ultimately felt that Nick was the most adaptable and best executed the theme of the season.
Tony Vlachos - Survivor: Winners at War
Despite Natalie Anderson being voted out first and then winning a spot back in the game and earning a place at Final Tribal Council, the jury felt Tony’s dominant strategic and social game was the true makings of a winner in the ultimate winners showdown. He took home the title of Sole Sole Survivor in a 12-4-0 vote next to Natalie and Michele Fitzgerald. In the end, his strategy to keep the “lions” (big threats) in the game over the “hyenas” (shadow players) kept a shield around him so he could, ironically, sneak his way to the end while everyone was aiming their arrows at other players’ targets.
Mike Gabler - Survivor 43
One of the most controversial winners in Survivor history, Gabler took home the win in a 7-1-0 vote next to Cassidy Clark and Owen Knight. He claimed his strategy was to fly under the radar in order to get himself a seat at the Final Tribal Council and the jury all stepped forward and said they respected that game. However, fans at home felt it definitely looked more like Gabler didn’t do anything all season and found himself sitting next to two players who had a key role in eliminating every jury member who felt they deserved to be at the end. His win felt more like retaliation than a reward for good gameplay, but if the jury felt he had an incredible social game worthy of nearly all votes, who am I to argue?
Add us as a preferred source on Google