There's been a lot of talk about jury management, playing a game that other players respect, and so on during the last few Tribal Councils in Survivor 48. Well, thankfully, Survivor 47 winner Rachel LaMont entered the chat and shared her thoughts about some of the lack of jury management so far in the new season.
It all started during the merge when players started to consider, officially, who the first member of the jury would be (Cedrek McFadden). Then, it evolved into an argument between David Kinne and Chrissy Sarnowsky, which Kamilla Karthigesu also entered into to remind David that he's not doing a good job with jury management. Then, it ended with Kamilla basically sharing that she thinks the majority alliance picking off players one-by-one is not a good strategy and one she wouldn't support if she ends up on the jury.
Enter Rachel on the On Fire with Jeff Probst podcast.
Rachel was asked about Kamilla's strategy to remind everyone that she's not going to vote for that gameplay at the end. Here's what she said:
“Yeah, I mean, if Kamilla's the vote tonight, I don't think most people are changing their plans based on this from her. But maybe, they'll think twice tomorrow if they're still planning to take her out. You know, Kamilla is doing what we talked about Chrissy doing last week. She's trying to change the narrative of what makes this season's ethos, like what makes good gameplay, what is going to be respected. And I think if people outside of this core alliance continue to do this, the players in the game have to adapt to it. Ignoring your tribemates and acting like their opinions don't matter because you have the majority is a straight ticket to being a losing finalist."
We've been listening to Rachel all season, and that's about as scorching of a strategy as she's done this season. We've seen so many players in Survivor history make it to the end only to realize that they completely mismanaged the jury. Rachel is basically advising against that for future players.
Then, she finished with this:
"Like a potential juror is telling you what they want and don't want in a winner. If you're not listening, you're playing Survivor poorly.”
I wish I could start a slow clap after this answer because it's everything I believe about Survivor. Your fellow players are giving you the answer to the test, so you might as well listen to them.
Ultimately, Rachel is making a great point. Survivor isn't like other reality shows. The players pick the winner, so at least a good portion of the game is how you make other people, the people who will eventually give you $1 million, feel about the game, about themselves, about your game, etc. Telling the other players that this is the way we're playing this season and you can take your ball and go home, basically, is not a good strategy. We've seen seasons of Survivor where this has happened. Full alliances have wiped out the other tribes before duking it out as a Final Four or Final Five, but often, Survivor seasons do not play out that way.
Further, and this is the real point that Rachel was making about David and all of the other Survivor players on this season, we've had players open up about the type of gameplay they want to see on this season. Chrissy and Kamilla revealed important information at Tribal Council, and instead of taking that information into account and changing strategies, further arguing continued. Rachel is basically saying that you have jurors all over telling you about the type of gameplay they want to reward at the end of the game, and it's not how the game is being played so far. That's huge information. Getting to the end is only part of the battle to win Survivor. Two players, Chrissy and Kamilla, if she was on the jury, would make up 25% of the jury. That's a significant portion.
Survivor is an incredibly difficult game, and the goal posts are constantly moving. The set of criteria for a winning game is going to change depending on which players make up the jury and which make up the Final Three.
Maybe, just maybe, we should listen to the winner of Survivor 47 about this and consider how a strong majority alliance playing in a very exclusive way makes the other players feel.