9 of the Worst ‘Survivor’ Winners of All Time
Survivor is one of the most renowned reality television series of all time, for good reason. This show encourages players to push their physical, mental and spiritual limits as they compete for fame, money, and pride. The strategies, the backstabbing and the outright lying make for intense TV viewing, as we watch players plead, hustle and persuade to stay in the game and try to win the million-dollar check.
While some of the winners deserve to be in the hall of fame for their strategic brilliance, exceptional endurance and perseverance, others have won for far less desirable reasons. Here are 9 of the Worst ‘Survivor’ Winners ever:
- Sandra Diaz-Twine – ‘Survivor: Pearl Islands’ and ‘Survivor: Heroes vs. Villains’
Sandra Diaz-Twine is one of the most controversial winners of Survivor. She is the only contestant to win the show twice (in Pearl Islands and Heroes vs. Villains), and many feel she didn’t merit either of them. Sandra has been called ‘invisible’ in both seasons she won, letting others take the heat for making the big moves and then sneaking into the finals on their coattails. Her strategy of doing nothing but ride the tails of stronger players earned her the title of “The Queen of Doing Nothing.”
- Kim Spradlin – ‘Survivor: One World’
Kim Spradlin was a dominant player in her season, but since then has been seen as one of the least worthy, undeserving winners. Kim was lucky to have a strong alliance, who set her up with clear objectives during each tribal council and she merely followed them. In the end, she was deemed too safe a pick, and her suggestion of a Final Three was the only reason she won.
- Natalie White – ‘Survivor: Samoa’
Natalie White was a member of the Villains Alliance composed of Russell, Parvati and Danielle. She had formed close relationships with them, but as the final tribal council approached, Russel put on a show of force, collecting firewood and dropping his pants. In the end, she was voted for the reason to give him the 2nd spot.
- Danni Boatwright – ‘Survivor: Guatemala’
Danni Boatwright’s reign as the sole Survivor began in Guatemala, but many people feel she was undeserving of the title as she survived off luck. She was lucky enough that she had made an alliance of 6 people in the game, but they were all eliminated one by one. In the end, she was the only one left in the alliance and was deemed the winner.
- Amber Mariano – ‘Survivor: All-Stars’
Amber Mariano made it to the All-Star season and became the only person to make it to the finals 3 times. But even then, she only won because she was married to Boston Rob, and the jury was heavily biased towards her. She also had her husband’s strategic prowess to back her up, making her win far from impressive.
- Aras Baskauskas – ‘Survivor: Panama’
Aras Baskauskas had a humble beginning in the game, but his outstanding performance on the Challenges brought him to the center stage where he gathered many fans and followers. He was lucky enough not to face any voting until the Final Four, and though his abilities to entertain and charm people were undeniable, he was without a doubt an undeserving winner.
- Earl Cole – ‘Survivor: Fiji’
Earl Cole had a spoiler in his season of Fiji, as he managed to find the hidden Immunity Idols with both clues. He also won four out of five Individual Immunity Challenges, leading him to be the only one that appeared at the Final Three session. Many people felt he had an unfair advantage over his competitors through lack of competition.
- Jenna Morasca – ‘Survivor: Amazon’
Jenna Morasca was well-known for her alliance with Rob Cesternino, but in the end, it was her connection to the jury that made her win. She agreed to pose nude in Playboy and promised the jury members to send them a copy. Consequently, the jury voted for her in an 8-1 decision, a clear indication that her win depended on external factors than in-game strategy.
- Vecepia Towery – ‘Survivor: Marquesas’
Vecepia Towery was the first African American contestant to win Survivor, but he was not well received by fans due to his lack of a strategic plan. He won the game on a 4-3 vote, but his fellow players were quick to point out that he avoided voting, making strategic and senior decisions and failed to be a leader.
The winners of Survivor have all gone to prove one thing: there is no one size fits all strategy in the game, and that it doesn’t always take an aggressive, high risk and fast-paced approach to win. But some players have been labelled as the worst, undeserving winners because of their lack of drive, strategic play and ambition to advance, which enabled them to coast to success. To have a shot at glory, players need to come up with daring strategies, build their social networks and display innovative ideas, for only then will they be recognized as worthy winners.
